џWPC# ћџ2 џџBJџџZ џџњCourier#|eљЪлxў6X@ЩќCX@ўўўўўўўџўџџџўџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџNEC Silentwriter LC-890NESILC89.PRSлx Œ @Щ‡Яhhhh№<UTX@#|eћџ2ч Z<v–p k|NEC Silentwriter LC-890NESILC89.PRSлxў6X@ЩќChhhh№<UTX@a8DocumentgСDocument Style StyleК ŠТXТТX` ` ТЦа ` Ц a4DocumentgDocument Style StyleиЊжССУ УУУ.ФФ Ф Фa6DocumentgСDocument Style Style НГG†ТXТЦа Ц ћџ2kЅ„v)tŸa5DocumentgСDocument Style Style }Б­ТXТЦ(#Ц a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<ёo Ч д ‰?Ш дУ УиA.и УУзззз Ф ФФФa7DocumentgСDocument Style Styley§†ТXТТX` ` ТЦ(#` Ц BibliogrphyСBibliographyЌ‹†:ТXТС€АА СЦ(#Ц ћџ2еšE Ѓп Ї‚ Ќ)a1Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`šSС@  СиI.и ƒС€АА СТXТЦ(#Ц a2Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C§і ССС@ј` СиA.и ƒС€СТА` ` ТЦ(#` Ц a3DocumentgDocument Style Style BН Кb д ‰?Ш дССУ Уи‚1.и зззз Ф Фa3Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Lу!З ССС` ` СС@P И Си1.и ƒС€` ` СТИ И ТЦ(#И Ц ћџ2 Е ПМШ{ аC a4Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers U—…jССС` ` ССИ И СС@Ј Сиa.и ƒС€И И СТ` ТЦ(#Ц a5Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _oуССС` ` ССИ И СССС@ˆhСи(1)и ƒС€СТИ hh#ТЦ(#hЦ a6Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbershЮССС` ` ССИ И ССССhh#СС@рР$Си(a)и ƒС€hh#СТРР(ТЦ(#РЦ a7Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJССС` ` ССИ И ССССhh#ССРР(СС@А*Сиi)и ƒС€РР(СТh-ТЦ(#Ц ћџ2йE Ь +ъ a8Right ParСRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!ССС` ` ССИ И ССССhh#ССРР(СС-СС@p/Сиa)и ƒС€-СТРpp2ТЦ(#pЦ a1DocumentgDocument Style StyleXqq йй д сlШ дСр^ь)СУУУ Уззи€I.и ййййззƒ ФФФ ФDoc InitInitialize Document StyleџХ“з  зд0*0*Ад вŒ I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgŒвййTech InitInitialize Technical StyleЈ. kвŒ I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 ўTechnicalŒвййћџ2Њ‡G‡ЮЎUЇa5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WйDОССУ Уи„(1)и . Ф Фa6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)—рDТССУ Уи…(a)и . Ф Фa2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6ѓшэ д ‰?Ш дУ УиA.и УУззззФФ ССФ Фa3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9WЂg д –2Ш дУ Уи‚1.и зззз ССФ Фћџ2PІмТ‚†D†Ъa4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bvЂ{д –2 дУ Уиƒa.и зззз ССФ Фa1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleFВш!< д ‰?Ш дУУУ Уззи€I.и ййййзз ФФССФ Фa7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@DЦССУ Уи†i)и . Ф Фa8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(рDЫССУ Уи‡a)и . Ф Фћџ2I‚!…IІZяPleadingHeader for numbered pleading paperЋP@nЙаШаа АА ш ае‹Ш$]аШаа ААXА аааXА` И hРpШ xа (#€%и'0*ˆ,р.813ш5@8˜:№0*0*0*ААд represents the interests of participants and encourages and supports sharing of expertise Changes in a successful, long-running program like the Depository Library Program should not be done in haste. Change should take place only after thoughtful input from the public, government agencies, and librarians. д D”X дд D”X д ССThe CHAIRMAN. The second panel today will provide the committee the views of the unions and their members. We have Bill Boarman of the Communications Workers of America, and George Lord of the Joint Bargaining Council for the Government Printing Office. ССGentlemen, we are delighted to see you this morning. Mr. Boarman, if you want to proceed, we look forward to your testimony. TESTIMONY OF A PANEL CONSISTING OF WILLIAM J. BOARMAN, PRESIDENT, ССPRINTING, PUBLISHING AND MEDIA WORKERS SECTOR, COMMUNICATIONS ССWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO; AND GEORGE E. LORD, CHAIRMAN, ССJOINT BARGAINING COUNCIL, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, ССWASHINGTON, DC ССMr. BOARMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As always, it is a pleasure for me to be here with my colleague, George Lord, who represents the workers down at the Government Printing Office. ССMr. Chairman, let me start out by saying how happy I am to be here and that you are holding this hearing. This is the first time -- and I think this issue was raised in the previous panel by Senator Stevens about whether they had input to the NPR, and I can say for the record that we did not, and I do not think that private printing industry did either. Coupled with that, the House of Representatives held no hearings on this issue when they passed their version of H.R. 3400. So, really, this is the first opportunity that the public has had a chance to tell anyone in the Government how they feel about this enormous proposed change to the Federal printing program and information management. So we deeply appreciate the time that you and Senator Stevens have put into this and the time that you put into previous projects regarding GPO and the Joint Committee on Printing. ССLet me further say that I appreciate the fine professional staff that support this committee in putting together this hearing, especially your staff director, Jim King, your general counsel, and the minority staff who have all been very helpful with us in getting us information and accommodating our schedules so we could be here. ССMr. Chairman, the proposals to eliminate the GPO and scale back its charter or turn its operation over to the executive branch are seriously flawed. No matter how well-intentioned in some quarters, by and large these proposals would have the effect of crippling or destroying the GPO and the services and value it provides to the Congress and the American people. At best, we areдh)?0*0*0*ААд looking at the products of naivete by well-meaning staffers. ССThe recommendations before you would devastate the GPO workforce and the commercial printing industry as well. The public's access to Government information would be blocked, and the executive branch would be pitted against the legislative branch. ССCritics of GPO would have the American people believe that the GPO is a technological dinosaur with a monopolistic and overpriced lock on whatever printed words flow from Government to the people. The truth, of course, is that some 3,000 private printers all across the country participate in the GPO program, bidding on the overwhelming majority of the 1,300 jobs that come before GPO daily. Fully 75 percent of GPO's work, in fact, is performed by private vendors. ССGPO is no more a monopoly than is private industry. GPO procures in an open market for the vast majority of its work. There may be no better, more appropriate example of the dangers of turning GPO printing functions over to individual offices than the example contained in printing of the Vice President's very own "Reinventing Government" report -- the report of the National Performance Review. ССBecause the Vice President's staff intervened and made its own production decisions on paper stock, use of color and the like, the American consumer had to pay $15 for a printed copy of the report. Had normal GPO procedures been used, and the counsel and recommendations of GPO's professional printers been accepted, the report would have been available to consumers for only about $5 per copy. ССTurning for a moment, if I may, to the Joint Committee on Reorganization report, I would like to take this opportunity to urge the retention of the Joint Committee on Printing, perhaps a Joint Committee on Printing and Information Management, which is what the House has recommended in its report. ССAs a labor representative, I have nothing to gain by these recommendations; but as a citizen, however, I have seen that this joint authority Congress bestows on the committee works well on overseeing the Federal Government's printing program. Its ability to standardize where appropriate results in a tremendous savings to the American people. ССImagine there was no Joint Committee on Printing. It is a frightening vision of babble in type sizes, publication sizes and what-not: picture your office shelves and files after everybody has run amuck doing their own thing. Think about the Special Orders that they have in the House of Representatives now, where members talk to an empty chamber for 5 hours to educate the folks back home. Then what? Perhaps a full-color, folio-sized document with charts and embossed covers. That vision alone justifies the joint committee's continued existence. Without it, there is no one toдh)@0*0*0*ААд force Congress and the agencies to cut to the bone on their printing expenses. The Public Printer would not be able to force Congress and the executive branch agencies to do the right thing. ССLet me note here that Section 332(b)(3) of the Reorganization Report, which provides for reauthorization of GPO every 8 years, is a proposal that gravely concerns us. The climate in Congress today is often controlled by individual members' interests that can have nothing to do with the matter at hand. To expose GPO to such a regular life-and-death review is to build into the system a guarantee of disruption and trauma. GPO has functioned for more than a century; setting a schedule for potential elimination every 8 years makes no sense. ССAnother point on the Reorganization of Congress draft bill: Section 372 provides for the appointment of three Deputy Public Printers. On its face, the provision would appear to have merit, dealing as it attempts to in the separation of powers issue. But I believe that, in fact, what it does is add an unnecessarily heavy salary burden, making the agency more top-heavy than it already is. There are other ways of giving the executive branch an agent within GPO without adding this burdensome expense. ССReturning to H.R. 3400 issues, if I may, it appears that little consideration has been given to the ramifications of a decentralized printing process for Government. Picture, if you will, hundreds, perhaps thousands, of offices producing their own documents without a central clearing house. Picture the absence of a central repository of data through which topics can be researched. ССEverybody in Government knows that public documents already are lost in the system. Decentralization would be a nightmare. ССThe House of Representatives has examined the potential impact on GPO of the Reinventing Government proposal and has taken action to address some of the more destructive elements. The House has approved a measure that would keep the operation of the Government Printing Office within the legislative branch. While that is good, it is unfortunate that the House action, in effect, cuts the GPO in two by moving the responsibility for distribution of information to the Library of Congress. ССThe idea might have made sense if GPO were to be moved to the executive branch in total. In fact, I believe that is why the House acted as it did, because it did not want to give the executive branch information distribution responsibility in the event of major changes in GPO's position in the Government. But if GPO is to stay within the control of the legislative branch -- and I think it should -- it makes absolutely no sense to bifurcate the agency, to cut the production and procurement side away from the information distribution side. As things stand, the workers in production who receive the electronic impulses -- the information -- will be the same people massaging the information and providing it to theдh)A0*0*0*ААд distribution side of GPO. ССTo separate the functions is to decrease efficiency and raise costs. ССMr. Chairman and committee members, the GPO has served this Congress and Nation well since the time of Abraham Lincoln. It operates efficiently, effectively, and economically, providing a service that is fundamental to both the Government and those who make the decisions on who shall form that Government. I urge you to keep the institution intact and working for all of us. ССMr. Chairman, there is one technical point that we came upon after we submitted our testimony that I would like to include in the record, and it has to do with Section 14005 of H.R. 3400, and we believe that it must be clear on policy standards with regards to maximizing competitive procurement from the private sector. Subsection (a) appears to direct the Public Printer with respect to the executive branch and the judicial branch, but Subsection (b), Policy Standards, is vague on its intent and coverage. The policy standards on both subsections (a) and (b) should conform. ССFinally, Mr. Chairman, if I may, there were two stories that were published in The Washington Post: one on October 1, 1993, entitled "The Gore Report's Printing Bill Sends Its Own Message," which I refer to in my testimony; and the other was more recent, December 27, 1993, in The Washington Post, and it is titled "Cost-Cutting Effort Leaves Many With A Bad Impression." ССI think both of these stories shed a lot of light on the NPR report, and if it would be appropriate, Mr. Chairman, I would ask that they might be included in the record. And I have copies here. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the articles will be included in the record. СС[The submitted material is maintained in the committee's files.] ССSenator STEVENS. What was the date of those? ССMr. BOARMAN. December 27, 1993, and October 1, 1993. ССWith that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to be here. СС[The prepared statement of Mr. Boarman follows:] STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. BOARMAN, PRESIDENT, PRINTING, PUBLISHING ССAND MEDIA WORKERS SECTOR, COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA, ССAFLЉCIO, WASHINGTON, DC ССMr. Chairman, distinguished members of the Rules and Administration Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appearдh)B0*0*0*ААд before you today to discuss matters relating to the Government Printing office. Specifically, Title XIV of H.R. 3400; the National Performance Review Report, and the Report of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress. ССBecause I feel very strongly about the GPO, please allow me to tell you right up front what I have told members of the House, the Clinton Administration, the Joint Committee on Printing and leaders of private sector printing and information industry interest groups. What I have told them has been that proposals to eliminate the GPO, to radically scale back its charter or turn its operation over to the Executive Branch, are seriously flawed. They are based on poor information, misinformation and disinformation. All too frequently they reflect a dangerous lack of knowledge of the area being addressed. ССNo matter how wellЉintentioned in some quarters ЉЉ and there certainly are some good intentions out there ЉЉ by and large these proposals would have the effect of crippling or destroying the GPO and the services and value it provides to Congress and the American people. At best we are looking at the products of naivete by wellЊmeaning staffers. At worst we look to the hidden agenda of some segments of the private sector who place their private gain far, far ahead of the public good. ССMr. Chairman, distinguished members, recommendations before you would devastate the GPO workforce and the commercial printing industry as well. The public's access to government information would be blocked and the executive branch would be pitted against the legislative branch. ССThere is so much flawed reasoning in Title XIV of this Report that it is difficult to find a takeoff point. Let me try a quick look at what seems to be that rather nebulous but pervasive favorite, "government inefficiency." ССThe critics of GPO would have the American people believe that the GPO is a technological dinosaur with a monopolistic and overpriced lock on whatever printed words flow from government to the people. The truth, of course, is that some 3,000 private printers all across the country participate in the GPO program, bidding on the overwhelming majority of the 1,300 jobs that come through GPO daily. Fully 75 percent of GPO's work, in fact, is performed by private vendors. ССGPO is no more a monopoly than is private industry. GPO procures in an open market for the vast majority of its work. It is vital to understand that GPO's role in this circumstance is to set standards for quality printing and help achieve costЉeffective service. GPO is not a producing monopoly, but a conduit and service bureau set up to assist government clients who lack the time and skills to purchase printing on their own. ССFrom the "monopoly" concern flows the "cost" argument, inдh)C0*0*0*ААд which it is suggested that printing can be more economically obtained outside the GPO. The inference is that new technologies will allow printing to be done anywhere, at any time, by any agency, at a savings. This is nonsense, and it is offered against a background of several mistaken assumptions: that GPO is behind the curve technologically; that "desktop" publishing is a casual skill with no pricetag attached; that photocopying carries an insignificant cost; that there is somehow a "savings" incurred by the purchase of tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of individual publishing workstations throughout government; that individual bureaus and agencies can somehow negotiate better supply prices ЉЉ paper and ink, to cite a couple of basics ЉЉ than the massЊpurchasing GPO. ССUntil recent years, it must be underscored, the Government Printing Office operated at a profit, turning money back to the Treasury. This was, of course, before GPO was mismanaged by 12 years of administrations determined to obliterate as much of government as possible. The reality is that the Government Printing Office saves money for the taxpayers, savings that have been thoroughly documented by the Joint Committee on Printing. Procurement and production costs are controlled by their centralized nature. ССThere may be no better and more appropriate example of the dangers of turning GPO printing functions over to individual offices than the example contained in the printing of the Vice President's very own Reinventing Government report, the report of the National Performance Review. ССBecause the vice president's staff intervened and made its own production decisions on paper stock, use of color and the like, the American consumer had to pay $15 for a printed copy of the report. Had normal GPO procedures been used, and the counsel and recommendations of GPO's professional printers been accepted, the report would have been available to consumers for only about $5 per copy.УУФФ Two printings that GPO could have provided for $54,091 ended up costing more than three times that amount, $168,915. Hardly small change. ССOn the subject of change, please permit me a brief aside. This committee is also looking at the entire reorganization concept, and I would like to take this opportunity to urge retention of the Joint Committee on Printing, perhaps a Joint Committee on Printing and Information Management, which is what the House has recommended in its report. As a labor representative, I have nothing to gain by that decision; as a citizen, however, I have seen that this joint authority Congress bestows on the committee works well on overseeing the federal government's printing program. It's ability to standardize, where appropriate, results in a tremendous saving to the American people. ССImagine there was no Joint Committee on Printing. It's a frightening vision of babble in type sizes, publication sizes andдh)D0*0*0*ААд whatnot: picture your office shelves and files after everybody's run amuck doing their own thing. Think about Special Orders in the House, where members talk to an empty chamber for five hours to educate the folks back home. Then what: perhaps a full color, folioЉsized document with charts and embossed covers. That vision alone justifies the Joint Committee's continued existence. Without it, there is no one to force Congress and the agencies to cut to the bone on their printing expenses. The Public Printer would not be able to force Congress and executive branch agencies to do the right thing. ССWith the seemingly speedЉofЉlight changes being wrought in the way private sector information is delivered to the American people, and the potential for similar advances in the dissemination of government information ЉЉ both internally and externally ЉЉ it is all the more reason that the Joint Committee maintain its vigorous oversight and involvement. As I have said, the Joint Committee's charter should appropriately be expanded to include not simply printing, but information management as well. ССLet me note here that Section 332(b)(3), which provides for reauthorization of the GPO every eight years, is a proposal that gravely concerns us. The climate in Congress today is often controlled by individual members' interests that can have nothing to do with the matter at hand. To expose GPO to such regular lifeЊandЉdeath review is to build into the system a guarantee of disruption and trauma. GPO has functioned for more than a century; setting a schedule for potential elimination every eight years makes no sense. ССOne final point on the Reorganization of Congress draft bill. Section 372 provides for the appointment of three deputy public printers. On its face, the provision would appear to have merit, dealing as it attempts to in the separation of powers issue. But I believe that in fact, what it does, is add an unnecessarily heavy salary burden, making the agency more topЉheavy than it already is. There are other ways of giving the executive branch an agent within GPO, without adding this burdensome expense. And to give the judicial branch its own deputy public printer makes little sense: the judiciary does very little GPO work. ССBack to the issue at hand, though, allow me to address another critical issue that arises in discussion of the GPO's future, especially as the American people speed toward the on ramp of the Information Highway. ССFrom the day it was created, the GPO has been the focal point of government information distribution in the United States. It's mission is direct and pure: providing the people with information by and about their government, at a reasonable cost. ССIt appears that little consideration has been given to the ramifications of a decentralized printing process for government, as the National Performance Review suggests. Picture, if you will,дh)E0*0*0*ААд hundreds, perhaps thousands of offices producing their own documents without a central clearing house. Picture the absence of a central repository of data through which topics can be researched. Picture the potential waste of duplicated effort, not just in plant and equipment, but data ЉЉ information ЉЉ itself. ССEverybody in government knows that public documents already are lost in the system: decentralization would be a nightmare. Where would the public go for information? Would it be available? There would be no mechanism to guarantee that documents are placed in a repository system. ССWithdrawing GPO from the process of information dissemination would mean not only that important materials fail to reach the true public domain, but other materials are published ЉЉ at taxpayer expense ЉЉ that may not deserve to see the light of day. ССIn commenting on H.R. 3400, the Deputy Librarian of Congress noted that the legislation effectively relocates the production of federal documents from GPO to the various executive branch agencies. СС"Without a centralized collection point," the deputy librarian cautioned, "the Library would be forced to gather the publications needed for the program from the individual originating agencies." On the matter of cataloging and indexing federal documents, and I quote the deputy librarian, "the library's current cataloging operations could not perform this additional work without adding staff, and the library's current personnel and financial systems could not easily accommodate the increased workload." Additionally, the Depository Library Program ЉЉ the program that puts government documents and publications within reach of the people, in their communities ЉЉ would be endangered. I quote, "the efficient link between documents production and distribution currently in place within GPO would be lost. With decentralization, there would be no single point of access to publications....citizens would have to search through many federal agencies to find publications of interest to them." ССMr. Chairman, committee members, there are so many reasons to oppose these proposals to dismantle the GPO. Perhaps the best argument of all that could convince you of the senselessness of such an act would be to remind you of a day in the life of this very committee, last October 28. ССOn that day I testified before you during your deliberations on the nomination of Mike DiMario as Public Printer. I was on a panel with a representative of the Printing Industry of America ЉЉ the trade group for the multiЉbillionЉdollar private sector printing industry ЉЉ and a representative of the American Library Association, umbrella group of librarians in this country who have a keen interest in the Depository Library Program. Between us we represented labor, business and the consuming public. To a person, we agreed that the "reinventing government" proposal to change GPOдh)F0*0*0*ААд was a mistake. I ask you that if these three such diverse groups can be in agreement on the issue, then where is the clamor for change coming from? ССI ask Congress to look closely at the people who are most feverishly pushing the destruction of the GPO, those who stand to gain the most while the public sacrifices, and perhaps you'll find the answer to why this is occurring. ССCertainly, there are those who see value in these proposals, at least in the theory behind them. I have no doubt that Vice President Gore, whose name is most closely associated with the reinventing government project, means to accomplish what is best for the nation. But so much of what has been put before him has come from staff people functioning without a clue. ССThe House of Representatives has examined the potential impact on GPO of the reinventing government proposals and has taken action to address some of the more destructive elements. The House has approved a measure that would keep the operation of the Government Printing Office within the legislative branch. While that is good, it is unfortunate that the House action in effect cuts the GPO in two, by moving the responsibility for distribution of information to the Library of Congress. ССThe idea might have made sense if GPO were to be moved to the executive branch in total. In fact, that is why the House acted as it did, because it did not want to give the executive branch information distribution responsibility in the event of major changes in GPO's position in government. But if GPO is to stay within the control of the legislative branch, it makes absolutely no sense to bifurcate the agency, to cut the production and procurement side away from the information distribution side. As things stand, the workers who receive the electronic impulses ЉЉ the information ЉЉ will be the same people massaging the information and providing it to the distribution side of GPO. ССTo separate the functions is to decrease efficiency and raises costs. Quite the opposite effect of the changes being sought, I would say. ССMr. Chairman, committee members, the GPO has served this Congress and Nation well since the time of Abraham Lincoln. It operates efficiently, effectively and economically, providing a service that is fundamental to both the government and those who make the decisions on who shall form that government. I urge you to keep this institution intact and working for us all. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Boarman. ССMr. Lord? СрdьСTESTIMONY OF GEORGE LORD, JOINT BARGAINING COUNCIL, GOVERNMENTƒ Срl ь"С PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON, DCƒдh)G0*0*0*ААдŒ™ССMr. LORD. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and also good morning to you, Senator Stevens. I am here today to present our reasons for opposing the National Performance Review Title XIV recommendation that Congress ends GPO's historic role at the Nation's printer and scatter those responsibilities throughout Government. The National Performance Review promises that Government can save billions of dollars and that agencies will run more efficiently if Congress frees those agencies which the report mistakenly assumes that GPO's only customers, from GPO's supposed monopoly to produce in-house whatever printing, duplicating, and other information dissemination services they require themselves, or buy it in the competitive market. NPR's authors do not know the fact. ССNPR's first mistake is its erroneous assumption that GPO is a monopoly. Along with that label comes the word "inefficient," and that is simply not the case. ССRecently Arthur Andersen did an internal audit of GPO's operations, and one of their findings were that GPO's success rate in meeting the deadline demands from their customers is 95 percent. Out of the total printing work that was done, either procured or in-house printing, only 1.2 percent of all the jobs had found quality problems. ССI say to you, Mr. Chairman, that any American corporation would be very proud to have those same statistics. ССSecondly, as a results, GPO procures -- and it fluctuates in the course of the fiscal year -- 72 to 76 percent of all Government printing from private firms. These firms vigorously compete for the business and usually charge below-market prices because the Government, acting through GPO, is a very large, steady customer. One point was already pointed out in the Joint Committee on Printing hearing of last summer regarding the defense printing services and how much they could have saved had they sent their work through GPO. ССOne study that one may not know is that a joint study effort with the EPA and then Deputy Public Printer William Hohns of its in-house printing operation sampled 2,147 jobs of EPA's at a cost to the American taxpayer of little over $909,000. Had they sent it to the Government Printing Office so it could have procured through the private sector, it would have cost the American taxpayer $505,746. This would have been a savings to the taxpayer of 44.5 percent. ССThese recent examples are only the tip of the iceberg. The fact is that at one time Government agencies did procure their own printing. NPR's proposal to repeat the experience is not based on the sober study and analysis of Government printing, something NPR lacked the time, resources, and focus to conduct, but on an unexamined, ideologically driven assumption that the Government can replicate the private sector and that if it does vast economies will be realized. That assumption is highly dubious.дh)H0*0*0*ААдŒ™ССAlso, without external restraints, managers often choose fancy print jobs that drive up costs to feed the vanity of high-level Government officials whose names appear on the Government publications. The point that illustrates that, as Brother Boarman already testified to, is the report itself of the NPR, "Reinventing Government." It cost the American taxpayers four times the amount than it would have if they had followed the Government standard for reports. ССWe yield to no one in our enthusiasm for the new technology. Indeed, GPO is participating directly in the technological revolution. But the key question in every instance is at what stage, if any, in the process of creating and disseminating information is it more efficient to take advantage of GPO's skills and competence. The report overlooks the impact that technology has on GPO's ability to increase the efficiency with which it can meet the Government's printing needs. Now it is possible to transmit data to GPO over telephone lines, fiber optic cable, and on disk, and thereby make an even more effective use of GPO's in-house printing capacity or its highly efficient procurement operation. Yet the report is silent on the steps that can and should be taken within the Government. ССThe report overlooks two other absolutely critical considerations. Its sweeping proposals will increase the cost of congressional printing and reduce public access to Government information. ССNPR's narrow focus further led it to ignore completely GPO's most important customer, the American citizen. In fact, GPO has two sets of customers: the Government and the public. GPO's control of Government printing enables it to fulfill its historic mission of seeing to it that the Government information is disseminated at no or very low cost to scholars, journalists, writers, and ordinary citizens. Experience shows time and again that when agencies do their own printing, they routinely fail to send copies of the material to GPO through this system. That erects important barriers to the dissemination of Government information, restricting it to the affluent and well connected who can pay private publishers hefty fees for the material or can themselves afford to monitor particular agencies in order to keep track of their documents. The rest of the public would be left out in such a system. And GPO's central role in Government printing stems from this concern; namely, the concern that all Americans, not just those who are well off or well connected, can access Government information. If NPR's proposals are adopted, ordinary citizens will lose. ССAlso, Mr. Chairman, I would like to address certain specific proposals in the NPR, and that is for the first 2 years, each agency will have the authorization to procure its own printing for print orders under $2,500. As Mr. DiMario testified last week, 86 percent of all GPO's printing orders that they receive from agencies were $2,500 or less. In fact, 71 percent of all of the printing orders are under $1,000.дh)I0*0*0*ААдŒ™ ССThe NPR is silent on what procurement system that they could use, but assume for the moment they will use the Federal Acquisition Regulations under GSA's care. Under that system, jobs that cost under $25,000 do not have to go out on an open bid. Eighty-six percent of all printing orders are $2,500 or less. GSA's system is that if printing orders cost under $25,000, they do not even have to go out on open bid. That has serious impact on the printers throughout this Nation. Printers from Alaska can bid on jobs coming out of a North Carolina military base under the current system through GPO. ССThere were over 1,191 printing orders through contracts awarded to printers in Alaska. Ninety-six percent of those print orders were under $2,500. ССTo you, Mr. Chairman, the State of Kentucky, there are 3,204 printers in your home State that do business with GPO -- I am sorry. There was 3,204 print orders awarded in contracts from Kentucky printers. ССThe CHAIRMAN. If we had that many printers in my State, that is more than the population. СС[Laughter.] ССMr. LORD. And 93 percent of those print orders were under $2,500. So you can see the seriousness of the impact of NPR's recommendations. ССFinally, Mr. Chairman, we have been dealing with the issues of the Government Printing Office in the centralized printing program since about 1989, since I have been involved and testified before various committees and multiple times before the Joint Committee on Printing. But there is a 17 percent drop in the procurement activity in the Government Printing Office over the last 12 months. DOD in a report testified to the fact that they have spent $213 million on in-house printing. The growth of in-house printing, or as some call it, fugitive documents, has had a serious impact on the Government Printing Office's revenue. ССIn these frugal times -- and I understand, because, after all, we all are taxpayers and our demands that we express to you of getting more for less. But isn't it a waste of Government funds to duplicate the efforts of printing and procurement thereof and dissemination of information if all 400 Government agencies are doing their own thing? ССAnd what would be the assurance, without the oversight of the joint committee or some other joint committee, what would be the assurances that the American people would have access to that information? ССThe impact that we have suffered over the last 12 months --дh)J0*0*0*ААд and it is increasing year by year -- is GPO's ability to secure safety for its workers. We have seen the police force at GPO cut in half over the last 10 years, and our people coming to work, their automobiles being victimized, and, unfortunately, assaults to their persons as well. And those numbers are growing year after year. ССAlso, we saw an instance where GPO did not have enough funds to take care of the parking lots and the sidewalks around the building because of the ice storms of recent times. But yet there were 13 accidents of pedestrians of GPO employees. Eight of those 13 are currently out on workers' compensation. So we can see the impact day to day on the employees and GPO's ability not only to perform its mission but also to protect and provide the safe environment that GPO employees definitely deserve and should be required to have. ССI thank you, Mr. Chairman. СС[The prepared statement of Mr. Lord follows:] СрАьСSTATEMENT OF GEORGE E. LORD, CHAIRMAN, JOINT COUNCIL OF GPO UNIONS,ƒ СрЄь+СWASHINGTON, DCƒ ССMy name is George Lord and I am Chairman of the Joint Council of GPO Unions, the labor organization that represents 4,000 GPO employees. I am here today to present our reasons for opposing the National Performance Review's Title XIV ("NPR") recommendation that Congress end GPO's historic role as the Nation's Printer and scatter responsibility for publishing government documents and disseminating government information among the almost four hundred agencies that make up the United States Government. The National Performance Review promises that the Government can save billions of dollars and that agencies will run much more efficiently if Congress frees those agencies, which the Report mistakenly assumes are GPO's only "customers", from GPO's supposed "monopoly" to produce inЉhouse whatever printing, duplicating, and other information dissemination services they require themselves, or buy it in the "competitive" market. This change, the Report argues, is desirable because desktop publishing has replaced "traditional cutting and pasting" printing techniques. NPR's authors don't know the facts. ССNPR's first mistake is its erroneous assumption that GPO is a monopoly. That is simply not the case. GPO procures printing that it cannot produce inЉhouse at or below market rates. As a result, GPO procures 72 to 76 percent of the Government's printing from private firms. These firms vigorously compete for the business and usually charge below market prices because the Government, acting through GPO is a very large, steady customer. Even when GPO determines to produce needed printing inЉhouse in order to level its peaks and valleys, GPO "charges" the agencies commercial rates, plus a 6 percent surcharge. NPR bemoans this "charge", completely overlooking the reality that what GPO "charges" an agency costs taxpayers nothing. GPO "charges" are nothing but transfers ofдh)K0*0*0*ААд spending authority within the Government, not expenditures that the Government actually makes. Thus, no matter how much less NPR imagines an agency could buy printing commercially for, it is cheaper for the Government when an agency prints at GPO. ССSecond, NPR's glib assumption that if agencies produce their own printing they will do so at less cost to the Government is simply that: an assumption. Experience ЉЉ recent and historical ЉЉ demonstrates precisely the opposite. Despite the statutory prohibition, one agency, the Department of Defense, has produced printing for itself and other agencies that by law should have been sent to GPO. A recent study performed by GPO and approved by the Inspector General and the GAO, of 259 printing and duplicating jobs demonstrated that had the Department complied with the law and sent the work to GPO, it would have charged DOD 38 percent of the amount DOD charged its constituent units. Furthermore, we understand that NPR itself paid four times as much to print its study as it would have had the work followed the Government's own standards for that type of document. ССThese recent examples are only the tip of an iceberg. The fact is that at one time government agencies did procure their own printing. That led to competition all right, competition between government agencies for printing services. It also led to exorbitant prices charged to agencies whose employees did not know enough about printing to procure it cheaply and to fraud, corruption, and abuse. That history, and not "traditional cutting and pasting" technology (which GPO rarely, if ever uses), is the principal reason Congress long ago determined to centralize government printing in one officer and one agency. NPR's proposal to repeat the experience is not based on a sober study and analysis of government printing, something NPR lacked the time, resources, and focus to conduct, but on an unexamined, ideologically driven assumption that the Government can replicate the private sector and that if it does vast economies will be realized. ССThat assumption is highly dubious. It assumes that Government managers can be held "accountable" the way private sector managers presumably are. But NPR does not explain who will manage printing in the various agencies, to whom they will be "accountable", and what mechanism will be used to monitor their performance. How, after all, will Assistant Secretaries and office directors find the time, let alone the expertise, to determine whether a subordinate who handles an agency's printing procured or produced it at cost lower than GPO's especially if GPO is no longer in the business! ССSimilarly, the Report overlooks the natural enthusiasm of middle managers to spend other people's money for expensive equipment and staff, whether or not the purchases and the employees will end up costing the government more money or save it. Since an employee's job classification determines his/her salary, and the former depends upon how many subordinates he has, middle managers will naturally opt to print inЉhouse. And, without external restraints, "managers" often choose fancy print jobs that drive upдh)L0*0*0*ААд cost to feed the vanity of high level government officials whose names appear on government publications. You can be sure, moreover, that if authority to contact for printing and to purchase expensive "inЉhouse" desktop publishing equipment is distributed liberally around the Government, a horde of well trained and equipped salespeople will descend upon agency managers untrained in printing touting the wonders of their products and preparing elaborate presentations to persuade the managers of the great savings and efficiency they can achieve by signing on the dotted line. To "compete" in that environment, GPO will have to train and recruit sales personnel, give them expense accounts, and advertise widely as private sector vendors do. It's not likely Congress will appropriate funds for that purpose or, if it does, that taxpayers will benefit. ССWe yield to no one in our enthusiasm for the new printing technology. Indeed, GPO is participating directly in the technological revolution. But the key question in every instance is at what stage, if any, in the process of creating and disseminating information is it more efficient to take advantage of GPO's skills and competence. Officials well versed in printing technology, the market and GPO's capability and whose sole focus is economy and efficiency make that judgment best. Those officials are at GPO. Furthermore, the Report overlooks the impact that technology has on GPO's ability to increase the efficiency with which it can meet the Government's printing needs. Now it is possible to transmit data to GPO over telephone lines, fiber optic cable, and on disk, and thereby make even more effective use of GPO's inЉhouse printing capacity or its highly efficient procurement operation. Yet the Report is silent on the steps that can and should be taken within the Government to take full advantage of these possibilities, no doubt because that would require getting down to the nitty gritty world where sweeping ideological pronouncements are beside the point and where investment, not talk, is the key. But it is precisely in that arena that the rubber meets the road. ССThe Report overlooks two other absolutely critical considerations. Its sweeping proposals will increase the cost of Congressional printing and reduce public access to government information. ССThe requirement that the Public Printer produce or procure most government printing enables him to keep GPO's equipment running with orders from elsewhere in the government when Congressional printing, which necessarily has peaks and valleys, slackens. Congressional printing requires highly sophisticated equipment and well trained, dedicated employees to meet the tight deadlines that the legislative process requires. To allow that manpower and equipment go unused when Congressional demand abates would be an enormous waste of Government resources and drive up the cost of Congressional printing. The Report ignores this effect because its ideological bias narrows its focus to individual agencies within the Executive Branch. дh)M0*0*0*ААдŒССNPR's narrow focus further led it to ignore completely GPO's most important customer, the American citizen. In fact GPO has two sets of customers, the Government and the Public. GPO's control of government printing enables it to fulfil its historic mission of seeing to it that government information is disseminated at no or very low cost to scholars, journalists, writers, and ordinary citizens. It does this by sending selected materials that it prints for the Congress and the agencies in electronic or printed format to Depository Libraries around the United States which make these documents available to the public ar large. And it does this by printing and distributing copies of documents that seem likely to be in demand through its public catalog system. Experience shows ЉЉ time and again ЉЉ that when agencies do their own printing they routinely fail to send copies of the material to GPO through this system. That erects important barriers to the dissemination of government information, restricting it to the affluent and well connected who can pay private publishers hefty fees for the material or can themselves afford to monitor particular agencies in order to keep track of their documents. The rest of the public would be left out in such a system. And GPO's central role in Government printing stems directly from this concern: namely the concern that all Americans, not just those who are well off or well connected, can access government information. If NPR's proposals are adopted, ordinary citizens will lose. ССOf course, GPO is less than perfect. For more than a decade it has been run by Public Printers who had no use for the agency and made no real effort to improve its operations and obtain the equipment and replacement employees it badly needed. They preferred instead to bloat GPO's middle management, hire public relations experts and unnecessary support personnel, and complain about GPO's costs. Then, too, measures enacted in response to the budget crisis have prevented GPO from purchasing much needed equipment and replacing retired production employees, thus forcing an aging force to put in considerable, costly overtime, driving up the cost of production. The Report ignores these facts, which if confronted might have led to simpler, far less revolutionary steps to improve GPO performance. The Council believes that the current Public Printer will move quickly to rectify GPO's most urgent problems and tackle some of the long ranges changes that everyone in the building knows must be faced if GPO is to continue to deliver top flight service to the agencies, the Congress, and most of all the American people. We urge you not to be sidetracked by facile slogans but to join with us in doing everything possible to support those measures. The need is urgent. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Lord. We appreciate your testimony. ССMr. Boarman, I will ask you a couple quick questions. You indicated in your testimony that the appointment of three Deputy Public Printers might not be the best way to achieve executive branch representation in the GPO. Do you or your organization have a recommendation, or what would your recommendation be?дh)N0*0*0*ААдŒ™ССMr. BOARMAN. Yes. My recommendation, Mr. Chairman, for the consideration of the committee would be this: You already have a Director of Procurement at the Government Printing Office at a salary level quite a bit below what a Deputy Public Printer would be paid. The primary function for that job is to deal with the executive branch agencies for the procurement of their work. I think it would be appropriate that that person could be a Presidential appointee for the purpose of overseeing executive branch printing, and then there would be a liaison, direct liaison responsible to the executive branch for their printing. I do not think you need a Deputy Public Printer for the judiciary branch. There is very little judiciary printing that goes through the GPO. And I do not think you need a Deputy Public Printer for the legislative branch because the Public Printer really serves that responsibility. ССSo I think you can take care of that separation-of-powers problem without stacking the deck in terms of high salaries at the top. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Mr. Boarman, I think that is a good suggestion, and I made note of it. ССLet me ask you this question: Do you think reauthorization of GPO on a periodic basis will affect the congressional printing bill? ССMr. BOARMAN. Well, I do not know about that, Mr. Chairman, but I certainly am concerned about that reauthorization. I have seen what goes on in Congress in recent times, and unfortunately, there are members here who come here with a specific purpose in mind, an accomplishment, and they hold agencies like the GPO hostage in order to get what it is they want to achieve. I would hate to see that happen every 8 years, someone deciding that GPO will not be reauthorized until they get what they want. So I have a very great concern about that. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lord, how does the GPO take advantage of so-called desktop publishing and high-speed duplicating technologies in filling the publishing orders of Congress? ССMr. LORD. We currently are involved in that technology. We have an electronic photocomposition unit. We have an electronic job room. We have typo and design that does the graphic designs electronically through Macintosh and its software. So we currently have a system already in place, and it has been so for numerous years. ССWe do not believe that technology contracts GPO's role. We believe that it expands GPO's role, and certainly as already expressed by Senator Stevens, the public demand for ink on paper is still there, and primarily for economic reasons, and also a lot of people prefer it. So we believe it expands GPO's role, and new technology can emulate if the investment -- if people are willingдh)O0*0*0*ААд to make the investment, the system is already in place. We are just dealing in a different media today, and it is increasing. ССThe CHAIRMAN. I would like both of you to respond to this question, if I may. What steps are your organizations taking to ensure that the GPO is competitive? And as you know, we have received some criticism for being too expensive, and I have not found that yet, but, Mr. Boarman, could you relate to that? ССMr. BOARMAN. I think we are competitive. We get criticized often about, for instance, Mr. Chairman, the wages of the workers at the GPO. First of all, they are unionized, and the wages are negotiated. But they are in line with contracts that I have with the private sector. ССFor instance, the printer who works at The Washington Post here in Washington, D.C., makes more per hour than a printer that works at the Government Printing Office. A printer who works at The New York Times in New York City makes probably $3 or $4 more an hour than a printer at the Government Printing Office. ССSo I think when you compare apples to apples, you know, certainly a small, non-union printing company somewhere is going to be paying wages significantly lower than the GPO. But I think when you compare it to what the GPO operation is, it is a quasi-publisher of newspapers, two daily newspapers: the Congressional Record and the Federal Register, which has been mentioned by Senator Stevens. And I think when you roll those together, when Congress is in session you are talking about the type that would consume seven major daily newspapers coming off the presses daily. And so I think you need highly skilled people in the art of printing in order to do that. And I think GPO is competitive in its wages. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lord, what steps is your organization taking to ensure GPO's competitiveness? ССMr. LORD. I think in general terms the union leadership within the Government Printing Office has encouraged its members, as the modern slogan is, to do more for less. GPO's record stands for itself. We have lost 43 percent of the workforce over the last 15 years. Productivity has gone up every year except fiscal year 1985. I think the workers demonstrate through their hard work that they are certainly doing all they can. ССIn fact, in my trade, imposition of negatives, when I first came into the Government Printing Office the average was about 200 negatives per 8 hours. You will probably find that it is close to 400 negatives per workday now. And technology has not affected my craft that much. So it is all on personal effort. ССAs Mr. Boarman was speaking of in comparison of the hourly rates, I know when we enter bargaining over wages, we do it through comparison and our counterparts in the private sector, andдh)P0*0*0*ААд sometimes we have to bite the bullet because, for one reason or another, our contract provisions have moved us ahead of private-sector printers in a unionized shop. So, I mean, we do make the effort, and the employees' record in production stands for itself. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, gentlemen. I do not have any other questions. Senator Stevens does not. ССSenator STEVENS. I thank you. I have got to go to another meeting, but I generally agree with your testimony. I am pleased to hear it. ССMr. BOARMAN. Thank you very much. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Thank you. ССThe CHAIRMAN. The next panel this morning, our last panel, will speak to the issues from the private printers and small business perspective. We have William Gindlesperger, President of ABC Advisors; and Ben Cooper, Vice President of Governmental Affairs for the Printing Industries of America; and Norman Horne, Vice President of Harrington Business Forms of Rocky Mount, North Carolina. ССGentlemen, if you will come forward, why, we will move right along. We will start from your right, and we will move across. You may proceed, sir. TESTIMONY OF A PANEL CONSISTING OF WILLIAM A. GINDLESPERGER, ССPRESIDENT, ABC ADVISORS, INC., CHAMBERSBURG, PA; NORMAN HORNE, ССVICE PRESIDENT, HARRINGTON BUSINESS FORMS, ROCKY MOUNT, ССNC; AND BENJAMIN Y. COOPER, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENTAL ССAFFAIRS, PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA, ALEXANDRIA, VA ССMr. GINDLESPERGER. Good morning. My name is William A. Gindlesperger. In 1975 I formed ABC Advisors, Inc., a consulting firm whose specialty is providing GPO bid opportunities, background information on GPO contracts, and advice and assistance to printing and graphic arts firms throughout the United States. ССMr. Chairman, I have prepared and presented a statement and exhibits. I request that they be made part of the record. ССThe CHAIRMAN. Without objection, they will be included in the record in full, and you may highlight your statement. I appreciate that. ССMr. GINDLESPERGER. Thank you. ССThat statement and my testimony is based on my experience with thousands of printers, our firm's dealing with the GPO and its printer vendors, and data contained in our extensive GPO data base. дh)Q0*0*0*ААдŒССI was pleased when I first heard that the National Performance Review wanted to increase competition in the procurement of goods and services by the Federal Government and make bid opportunities readily available to private-sector vendors in order to enhance open competition. Despite good intentions, something seems to have gone awry in the process. ССThe NPR staff recommended replacing the GPO with a decentralized print procurement system under which the agencies would meet their own printing needs for all jobs under $2,500. ССThere are two ways for agencies to meet their own printing needs: One, to produce printing in agency printing plants; or, two, to procure the printing directly, outside of GPO, from the private sector. ССThe first option -- agency in-house production -- does not accomplish the NPR's goals to make the system more competitive and less expensive. Agency plants do not compete with anyone for work. So much for competition. As for saving money, GAO and DPS/GPO studies' show that agency printing plants charge twice the commercial printing price for printing and still post huge losses. ССTo produce jobs in-house, agencies need expensive equipment. There is no justification for expending taxpayer funds to duplicate equipment and to duplicate capacity available in the private sector. The other alternative, direct agency purchasing from the private sector, would require each agency to establish print procurement departments to replace the GPO. Why? And I think this is very important. Because printing is the manufacturing of a custom product. It is not the line manufacturing of widgets. Even a small printer produces thousands of different products, each product different from each other product. No two products are exactly alike. Therefore, print procurement specialists, technical experts and paper ink recycled in environmentally responsible products, spec writers, print quality control technicians, all would be required at each and every agency. This tremendous duplication of expertise, staff, and facilities will cost the Government hundreds of millions of dollars. ССThe consistent trend in the private sector has been not to decentralize but, rather, to consolidate facilities to develop economy of scale, purchasing power, and centralized expertise which is necessary to conduct a cost-effective and efficient print procurement or production operation. Worse yet, the actual cost of procured printing will rise significantly under a system of direct agency print procurement due to the absence of open competition. Why? Over 88 percent of all agency print jobs are under $2,500, the threshold which the NPR proposed for direct agency print procurement. The Federal Acquisition Regulations, FAR, which govern agency procurement do not require posting or any competition for those 88 percent of jobs under $2,500. ССThis causes two problems: One, small printing businesses,дh)R0*0*0*ААд which are the likely performers on jobs under $2,500, will be denied access to virtually all bid opportunities previously available through GPO; and, two, fairness and integrity will constantly be questioned because no one, other than the favored vendors chosen by the agency, will have access to printing jobs. ССThe Joint Committee on the Operation of Congress suggested that that threshold be reduced to $1,500. This would still exclude 81.5 percent of all executive branch print purchases from open, competitive bidding. ССThe problem in all of this is that the lack of competition in a closed access procurement system is not just a question of philosophy. It translates into lost dollars. To see how much, my company conducted a study to determine how much Government printing costs would increase if jobs were not publicly posted and maximum competition was not sought. A summary of that study, Mr. Chairman, is included with my prepared statement. The bottom line is that agency prices on the same jobs now procured by GPO will increase by a minimum of 31 percent and as much as 494 percent. ССThis price increase on agency-procured print jobs will be, on average, 74 percent higher than GPO's current cost for the same work procured through its open, competitive bidding system, which, incidentally, includes 10,000 private-sector printing companies. ССHow does the current GPO system compare? Although the GPO had 4,845 employees, nearly 5,000 employees, in 1992, the Printing Procurement Division consisted of only 454 employees nationwide. These 450 GPO employees at 21 offices procured 275,400 individual jobs, with a total value of $629.3 million for Federal agencies from other 3,500 printers. ССIn fiscal year 1992, the GPO procured from private-sector printers through open, competitive bidding 75.6 percent of its total printing and binding. By adopting private-sector competitive procurement for the vast majority of agency printing needs, GPO solved the monopoly problem a long time ago. ССThis 75.6 percent of GPO volume is purchased through the most open and competitive procurement system of which I am aware. It should be the model for the Federal Government of what a small business program should be -- a program that achieves the lowest prices possible while providing the private sector with needed volume and economic stimulus and, I might add, without excessive red tape. And to top it off, the GPO printing procurement program saves taxpayer dollars. ССWe should be here today not in defense of the GPO but, rather, to figure out how to apply the principles of the GPO procurement system to the rest of the Federal Government. ССAll specifications and invitations for bid on jobs processed through GPO's Procurement Division are publicly posted and madeдh)S0*0*0*ААд available to any printer desiring to bid the work through the issuing GPO office or through commercial bid services. This allows printers to choose the jobs they wish to bid based on their need to fill open time and/or convert paper inventory to cash. ССPublic display of bid opportunities or posting results in a fair system, where no qualified vendor is denied access. It also results in a lot of bidding. There are five or more bidders on most GPO print procurements, sometimes as many as 50. That competition keeps pricing extremely low. ССCompetition also enhances performance. For example, 95 percent of all jobs in 1992 were delivered on time, and only 1.2 percent of all jobs in 1992 had quality problems. Mr. Chairman, I have completed numerous studies of printing operations both for Government and the private sector, including State and local governments, universities, associations, private firms, and large multinational companies. But I have never seen a plant with better statistics than those of the GPO Printing Procurement Division. Although the GPO does produce printed products in its own plant, it is no longer the giant printer its opponents believe it is. ССThe total dollar volume of GPO production in fiscal year 1992 was $203 million. $90 million was for congressional printing, $26 million was for the Federal Register. The balance of approximately $87 million represented agency print jobs produced by the GPO in its own plants. Remember that GPO bought $629 million in executive agency print orders on competitive bids from the private sector in the same year. In fact, GPO internal printing for agencies is only a small portion of the $1.4 billion the Government spends on printing, according to the OMB. ССWho is doing all of this printing, then? Well, for example, Defense Printing Services produces $213 million in-house, $10 million more than the GPO's total production. Yet GAO and DPS/GPO studies show that printing procured from the private sector costs 50 percent to 60 percent less than printing produced by agency in-plant operations. ССCongress has established a system of print procurement under which jobs of any value are openly and competitively procured. Why trade even a portion of that for a closed, non-competitive system that will dramatically increase the likelihood of questionable procurement practices, so-called sweetheart deals, and still cost more money? ССHow would a closed non-competitive agency procurement system affect the printing industry? Well, printing is one of the largest industries in America. There are approximately 42,000 printing firms which employe 808,600 workers. One-quarter of these companies are registered to produce work for the GPO. Of those registered, 3,031 bid on term contracts and 4,891 bid on one-time purchases. That was in fiscal year 1993. дh)T0*0*0*ААдŒССMany printing firms are operating at extremely low margins, and even minor decreases in volume can be disastrous. Open access to all bid opportunities allows printers to win the last bit of incremental volume that makes the difference between profit and loss, or, more importantly, jobs or no jobs for many of the plants' employees. This is especially true for the small shops that employ the majority of print workers. Small to medium shops do not have the sales force to market to hundreds of agency line managers if print procurement is closed under NPR's proposed legislation. Reduction of the amount of work small printing companies have access to will result in layoffs, plant closings, and major bankruptcies in one of America's major industries. ССWhat is the extent of private-sector reliance on GPO contracts? Without access to Government printing contracts through GPO, 1,700 printer companies whose volume consists of 25 to 100 percent GPO contracts would close, causing the loss of 20,000 to 30,000 jobs. What may be less obvious is that another 1,800 printing companies who produce 25 percent or less of their volume for the GPO will likewise be laying off employees and/or filing Chapter 11 bankruptcy. That is a total of 3,500 printing companies. ССThe fact is that most GPO vendors accept GPO contracts with demanding quality requirements, difficult time schedules, and the lowest prices in the printing industry in order to keep their equipment and employees busy, thus keeping their plant doors open. ССOne fact has remained constant throughout all of my years of experience. If printers could obtain more profitable commercial work to replace the GPO volume, they would do so instantly. Printers can accept the loss of work due to Government cutbacks and budgetary restrictions, but they cannot and should not accept loss of contracts to more costly agency-owned plants and/or a closed agency procurement system. ССMr. Chairman, the NPR has a number of praiseworthy goals to effect savings, to cut the Federal payroll, to operate a fair, open procurement system, and to stimulate growth in the private sector. Here is my idea on how to achieve those goals. ССFirst, Congress should retain the current GPO procurement system and restrictions on direct agency print purchases. ССSecondly, agencies should dramatically scale back or close costly and inefficient in-house printing facilities. However, agencies should be permitted to purchase any necessary typesetting and composition equipment to control the design and development of their message, allowing the printing process to be accomplished through the GPO. ССThirdly, printing should be redefined to recognize the technological advances of the last two decades. My suggested definition is included in the prepared statement. These steps would effect government-wide savings of over $265 million annually.дh)U0*0*0*ААдŒ™ССHere is how that works. Begin with the total amount budgeted by the Federal Government for printing, as stated by the OMB. This amounts to $1.4 billion but excludes additional printing which may be hidden in other budget line items. Of this $1.4 billion that we do know about, the GPO procured or produced $719 million of printing. The balance, $681 million, is the known size of the inefficient agency in-plant problem. If Congress were to allow only $150 million to be retained in agency plants, regardless of the cost, for immediate needs or office support, the remainder is $531 million. If that $531 million is put through the GPO procurement system, the Government will realize a cost savings of 50 to 60 percent. ССAt 50 percent only, that amounts to $265.5 million in real dollar cost savings, not projected, today. Under this proposal, the savings begin right now. In less than 4 years, the $1 billion saved could be applied to fund needed projects or to reduce the deficit. ССThank you. СС[The prepared statement of Mr. Gindlesperger follows:] в ШX01УУФФ УУФФААX01УУФФ УУФФАА вСС[Note: This statement contains footnotes which will not be displayed in View mode. To view text of footnotes, download and print document.] ааXА` И hРpШ xа (#€%и'0*ˆ,р.813ш5@8˜:№oИ ž™д ‰? длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл A listing of GPO contract bid results for a typical week has been д r5и дsubmitted with this statement.л#footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#блл>ж It allows printers to choose the jobs they wish to bid based on their need to fill open time and/or convert paper inventory to cash. ССPerformance statistics for GPO private sector vendors are also д ‰?  дquite impressive:жШ џž™д ‰?g длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл U.S. Government Printing Office Annual Report, 1992. л#footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллж СС1. 95% of all jobs in 1992 were delivered on time; СС2. Only 1.2% of all jobs in 1992 had quality problems. ССThe GPO also produces printed products in its own plant. The total dollar volume of that production in FY '92 was $203 million. Of that, $90 million was for Congressional printing, with the remaining $113 million representing printing for executive agencies. $26 million of that $113 was for the Federal Register. The balance ЉЉ approximately $87 million ЉЉ represented agency print jobs produced by the GPO in its own plants. This doesn't seem like much of a production monopoly when compared with the $629 million in executive agency print orders which the GPO bought on competitive bids from the private sector in the same year. Nor is it a major portion of the $1.4 billion the government spends on printing, according to the OMB. ССAnother comparison puts GPO current internal printing in д ‰?А дperspective: У УDefense Printing Services Ф Ф(У УDPS) produces $213 million д ‰?x дin house;Ф Фж НxЧž™д ‰?# длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл Statement of Rear Admiral R. M. Moore before the Joint Committee on Printing, July 15, 1993. The DPS projects income of $363 million in FY 1993. According to both GPO and DPS, $150 million of that total will go through GPO, д r5% дwith the balance of $213 million being produced in DPS plants.л# footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллжУ У GPO produces $203 million in house.Ф ФжМ x„ž™д ‰?Ф% длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл US Government Printing Office Annual Report, 1992, Page 45 (excludes the sale of blank paper to agencies). This $203 УУincludesФФ all Congressional д r53' дprinting, but excludes $18.3 million in blank paper sales to agencies. л# footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллМж ССShould the GPO reduce its internal agency printing even lower?д Zš 0*0*0*ААд That's a decision which must be made by the Public Printer, not by the National Performance Review. What is clear is that agency inЊд ‰? дhouse printing must be reduced. GAO and DPS/GPO studiesжs ž™д ‰?ш длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл Defense Management: Printing Operations of the Department of Defense, A Report by the General Accounting Office, July 15, 1993, GAO/TЉNsaidЉ93Љ19, pages 6Љ8; DPS/GPO Joint Study Group Report, September 22, 1992; Government Printing Office: MonopolyЉLike Status Contributes to Inefficiency and Ineffectiveness, U.S. Comptroller General Report to the Joint Committee on д r5L дPrinting, 1990, GGDЉ90Љ107, Page 4.л# footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллsж show that д ‰?X дУ Уprinting procured from the private sector cost 50% Љ 60% less than д ‰?  дagency inЉplants.Ф Ф DPS will suffer a net loss of $21 million in FY д ‰?ш д1993,в X01УУФФ УУФФААX01УУФФ УУФФАА вж: oш›ž™д ‰?K длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл Statement of Rear Admiral R. M. Moore before the Joint Committee on д r5 дPrinting, July 15, 1993.л#(footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#блл:ж despite charging DOD customers more than two times market prices (or four times market price according to a recent memo from the Secretary of the Air Force to DPS). Operating losses make agency production even more expensive than studies have indicated. Unnecessary capital expenditures for equipment (which duplicates capacity in the printing industry) further compound the loss. ССClosed, nonЉcompetitive agency procurement from the private sector will yield prices 31 Љ 494% higher than the open, very competitive procurement from the private sector currently managed д ‰?И дby the GPO.ж, oИ ž™д ‰?Š длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл GPO Competitive Bidding Price Comparison, ABC Advisors, Inc. October д r5R д27, 1993.л#(footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#блл,ж Congress has established a system of print procurement under which jobs of any value are openly and competitively procured. Why trade even a portion of that for a closed, nonЉcompetitive system that will dramatically increase the likelihood of questionable procurement practices ("sweetheart deals") and cost more money? д ‰?0 дУ УССHow would a closed, nonЉcompetitive agency procurement system д ‰?ј дaffect the printing industry?Ф Ф Printing is one of the few manufacturing industries left in America, and is also one of the largest. In order to provide technologically current production of every conceivable product for the commercial market and the Government, the industry invested over $17 billion dollars in new plants and printing equipment in the last ten years. The commercial printing industry in the United States consists of approximately 42,000 firms, which employ 808,600 workers. One quarter of these companies are registered to produce work for the GPO. Of those reistered, 3,031 bid on programs (term contracts) and 4,891 bid on д ‰?Ш дjackets (one time purchases) in FY 1993.ж^oШyž™д ‰? # длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл A report listing all program bidders and all jacket bidders (company, д r5б# дcity, state) for FY 1993 is submitted with this statement.л#0footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#блл^ж ССMost GPO bidders need these contracts to stay in business. Reduction of the amount of work they have access to will result in layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies in one of America's major industries. д ‰?@ д У УССContinuation of private sector access to government printingд@[ш 0*0*0*ААд opportunities and open competitive bidding is critical for printers д ‰?Ш дand their employees.Ф Ф Given the state of the economy, many printing firms are operating at extremely low margins, and even minor decreases in volume can be disastrous. Open access to all bid opportunities allows printers to win the last bit of incremental volume that makes the difference between profit and loss, or more importantly, jobs or no jobs for many of the plants' employees. This is especially true for the small shops that employ the majority of print workers. Small to medium shops do not have the sales force to market to hundreds of agency line managers if print procurement is closed under NPR proposed legislation, which does not require public posting or competitive quotes or bids on over 88% of agency print jobs. ССDuring the time ABC has been in business, I have surveyed thousands of printers. From that prior data and a survey of GPO vendors conducted in late January and early February of this year, we can determine the extent of private sector reliance on GPO contracts. Generally, the approximately 3,500 printers who win GPO contracts each year fall into one of three groups based upon the percentage of their plant capacity allocated to government contracts: ааА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАrSџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа1. Those firms who do almost exclusively government contracts ЉЉ about 23% of GPO vendors. 2. Plants where GPO contracts represent 25 to 50% of the volume ЉЉ approximately 26% of GPO vendors. 3. Plants where GPO contracts represent 25% or less of the total volume ЉЉ approximately 51% of GPO vendors. ааАrSџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџrџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџааСrrСAcross the three groups, one fact has remained constant throughout all my years of experience: if printers could obtain more profitable commercial work to replace the GPO volume, they would do so instantly. The fact is that most GPO vendors accept GPO contracts with demanding quality requirements, difficult time schedules, and the lowest prices in the printing industry in order to keep their equipment and employees busy, thus keeping their plant doors open. СrrСNo one has or could argue that without access to government printing contracts through the GPO, the 1700 printers in the first two groups ЉЉ whose volume consists of 25 to 100% GPO ЉЉ would д ‰?`" дclose, causing the loss of 20,000 to 30,000 jobs.жPo`"xўд ‰?И$ длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл PIA surveys show that the average printing plant employs 21 employees, д r5€% дand that average hold true for GPO vendors.л#@footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллPж What may be less obvious is that those 1,800 firms who produce ааrџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџrџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа25% or less for the GPO will likewise be laying off employees and/or filing Chapter д ‰?И$ д11 Bankruptcy in the event of a reduction in GPO volume.жHoИ$џxўд ‰?( длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#бллааrџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа See, Statement of Printing Industries of America (PIA) Љ Analysis of д r5G) дLoss of Defense Contracts, before the Joint Committee on Printing, July 15, 1993.л#@footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллHж дИ$\n0*0*0*ААдŒааrџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџrџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа™СrrСPrinters accept the loss of work due to government cutbacks and budgetary restrictions, but they cannot and should not accept loss of contracts to more costly agency owned plants and/or a closed agency procurement system. д ]0*0*0*ААд УУGPO Registered Printers Affected By State ФФааrџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАи `ˆШ8"џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџааAlabamaСJp и С316ƒС``&СKentuckyСJ ˆ8С228ƒСШШAСNorth DakotaСJH!8"TС33ƒ AlaskaСJш и С87ƒС``&СLouisianaСJ ˆ8С287ƒСШШAСOhioСJр8"QС1,034ƒС8"8"VС ArizonaСJp и С270ƒС``&СMaineСJ˜ˆ9С49ƒСШШAСOklahomaСJа 8"SС328ƒС8"8"VС ArkansasСJp и С115ƒС``&СMarylandСJ0ˆ6С1,260ƒСШШAСOregonСJH!8"TС40ƒС8"8"VС CaliforniaСJ€ и С2,816ƒС``&СMassachusettsСJ ˆ8С676ƒСШШAСPennsylvaniaСJр8"QС1,380ƒ ColoradoСJp и С764ƒС``&СMichiganСJ ˆ8С518ƒСШШAСRhode IslandСJH!8"TС89ƒС8"8"VС ConnecticutСJp и С237ƒС``&СMinnesotaСJ ˆ8С336ƒСШШAСSouth CarolinaСJа 8"SС296ƒ DelawareСJш и С53ƒС``&СMississippiСJ ˆ8С148ƒСШШAСSouth DakotaСJH!8"TС81ƒ D.C.СJp и С471ƒС``&СMissouriСJ ˆ8С724ƒСШШAСTennesseeСJа 8"SС388ƒ FloridaСJp и С765ƒС``&СMontanaСJ ˆ8С112ƒСШШAСTexasСJр8"QС1,320ƒ GeorgiaСJp и С943ƒС``&СNebraskaСJ ˆ8С175ƒСШШAСUtahСJа 8"SС182ƒ HawaiiСJш и С21ƒС``&СNevadaСJ˜ˆ9С96ƒСШШAСVermontСJH!8"TС44ƒ IdahoСJp и С106ƒС``&СNew HampshireСJ ˆ8С103ƒСШШAСVirginiaСJр8"QС1,221ƒ IllinoisСJ€ и С1,337ƒС``&СNew JerseyСJ ˆ8С710ƒСШШAСWashingtonСJа 8"SС697ƒ IndianaСJp и С370ƒС``&СNew MexicoСJ ˆ8С143ƒСШШAСWest VirginiaСJH!8"TС95ƒ IowaСJp и С227ƒС``&СNew YorkСJ0ˆ6С1,280ƒСШШAСWisconsinСJа 8"SС417ƒ KansasСJp и С267ƒС``&СNorth CarolinaСJ ˆ8С479ƒСШШAСWyomingСJа 8"SС 50ƒ ааАи `ˆШ8"џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа УУHow should cost effective print procurement be achieved? ФФ ССIf the goal is to effect savings (admitted 50%Љ60% by open, competitive GPO procurement), cut the federal payroll, operate a fair, open procurement system, and avoid plant closings and massive layoffs in the private sector, it is recommended that: ааА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА ` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџааС  ССС1) Congress retain the current GPO procurement system and д ‰?Ј дrestrictionsжШЈJ/д ‰? длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл Section 207, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act.л#Pfootnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллж on direct agency print purchases, and require public д ‰?p дposting of У УallФ Ф print bid opportunities and print procurement by competitive quotes or bids. С  ССС2) Agencies dramatically scale back or close costly and inefficient inЉhouse printing facilities. С  ССС3) Agencies be purchase any necessary typesetting and composition equipment to control the "front end" of the printing process. С  ССС4) "Printing" be redefined to recognize the technological д ‰?А дadvances of the last two decades.ж5YАXJ/д ‰?а длџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#блл I urge adoption of the definition proposed by the GPO Contractors Coalition: "Printing" shall include the processes of: platemaking, wet and dry offset; letterpress, gravure; flexography; ink jet; electrostatic or other copying or duplicating; laser or variable imaging; silk screen processes; production of an image on paper or other substrate by any means or equipment; binding; microform; or the end items of such processes; provided that desktop or other composition and the production of camera ready copy, negatives or д r5‚% дelectronic media to be used in the printing process shall not be included.л#Pfootnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#блл5ж дx^Б0*0*0*ААд С  СССThese steps would effect governmentЉwide savings of over $265 million annually: С  ССС 1.4 billion in printing per OMB (excludes purchases in line items other than printing) С  СССЉ719 million in GPO procured and Congressional printing С  СССЉУУ150ФФ million retained in government plants (for immediate needs and office support) д ‰?а дС  ССС 531 x .50 (private sector savings per GAO/GPO) = У У$265.5 д ‰?˜ дmillionФ Ф С  СССUnder this proposal, the savings begin now ЉЉ in less than four years, the $1 billion dollars saved could be applied to fund needed projects or reduce the deficit.дИ _0*0*0*ААд д PЙV дEXHIBIT 1 ааааА ` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџјP Ј XАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџааСрМьСУУBreakdown of jobs procured by GPO in fiscal year '93ФФƒ Срф ь#СУУ(Oct. 1, 1993 Љ Sept. 30, 1993ФФƒ СрШ ьСУУFiscal Year 1993 Job Value DistributionФФƒ аа СјјССP P СУУValueФФС&ССXX+ССАА1С УУCountФФС€€9СС€€9С УУPercentage ФФС@јјСƒСP P С$0Љ1,000С&ССXX+ССАА1С180,605аајP Ј XАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџјP Ј XАЈџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџааСBИЈDС75ƒ.09% СјјССP P С$1,001Љ2,500СXX+ССАА1С 31,126СBИЈDС12ƒ.94%СHˆˆJСƒ СјјССP P С$2,501Љ5,000СXX+ССАА1С 13,938СB0ЈEС5ƒ.79% СјјССP P С$5,001Љ10,000СXX+ССАА1С 7,585СB0ЈEС3ƒ.16% СјјССP P С$10,001Љ25,000СXX+ССАА1С 4,867СB0ЈEС2ƒ.03% СјјССP P С$25,001Љ100,000САА1С 1,955СBЈЈFСƒ.81% СјјССP P С$100,001Љ500,000САА1С 333СBЈЈFСƒ.13% СјјССP P С$500,001Љ1,000,000САА1С 31СBЈЈFСƒ.01% СјјССP P Сover $1,000,000САА1С 14СHЈЈFСƒСЈЈFС.006% ааСјјССP P ССЈ Ј СС&ССXX+ССАА1С_______ д ‰?0 дСјјССP P СУ УTotalС&ССHXX+СƒСАА1С240,517 ааФ Ф СјјСBased on records from Office of Financial Management, U.S. СјјСGovernment Printing Office of procurements for agencies. др`0*0*0*ААд аа д PЙV дEXHIBIT 2 Ср| ь СУУGPO Competitive Bidding Price SurveyФФƒ аа УУааBackground ФФ Based on GPO procurement tapes, ABC Advisors, Inc. conducted a study of small purchases bid from August 1, 1993 to October 26, 1993. Jackets were chosen randomly, without regard to type or quality level. Every hundredth job was earmarked for comparison (approximately 1%). They are presented below in ascending price order, not in random order. УУPurpose ФФ To determine the range of individual prices on small purchases. To determine whether random choice of 1 or 2 bidders on each job (closed nonЉcompetitive bidding scenario) would result in a price increase and if so to what extent. The columns below list: 1) the jacket number; 2) the number of printers responding to the request for bid, 3) the lowest bid received by GPO, 4) the award price per the GPO purchase order, and 5) the highest price given to GPO by a vendor. в ^ ddx !АZZx8aаp ^ вм4„€ 4Š 8мд  дм мд s4Р дб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#бУ УJacket #мw м# of bidders per abstractмl мlow bid per abstractмl мcontracted $ per awardмl мhigh bid $ ааper д s4 дabstractФ Фм4„€ ?Š 8мд Y дм м770050мЋ маајP Ј XАЈџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6мЋ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа40.00мЋ м40.00мЋ м155.00м?„€ ?Š lмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа780909мъ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџааstrappedмъ ммъ ммъ мм?„€ ?Š Ћмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа739521м) мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа11м) мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа64.32м) м64.32м) м260.00м?„€ ?Š ъмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа770009мh мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа11мh мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа75.00мh м75.00мh м297.00м?„€ ?Š )мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа777215мЇ! мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мЇ! мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа89.01мЇ! м89.01мЇ! м285.00м?„€ ?Š h мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа753146мц" мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа9мц" мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа98.50мц" м98.50мц" м278.00м?„€ ?Š Ї!мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа712635м%$ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6м%$ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа109.39м%$ м109.39м%$ м287.00м?„€ ?Š ц"мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа722398мd% мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мd% мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа120.00мd% м120.00мd% м*192.00м?„€ ?Š %$мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа748573мЃ& мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мЃ& мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа129.50мЃ& м129.50мЃ& м268.00м?„€ ?Š d%мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа748621мт' мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мт' мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа139.00мт' м140.00мт' м249.00м?„€ ?Š Ѓ&мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа357043м!) мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа12м!) мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа150.02м!) м150.02м!) м395.00дj(a0*0*0*ААдн?„€ ?Š т'нм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа794157м? мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5м? мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа165.00м? м165.00м? м405.40м?„€ ?Š мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа769995м~ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6м~ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа181.65м~ м181.65м~ м330.00м?„€ ?Š ?мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа744782мН мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа10мН мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа196.00мН м196.00мН м378.00м?„€ ?Š ~мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа787130мќ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа9мќ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа210.00мќ м210.00мќ м792.00м?„€ ?Š Нмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа738819м; мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа13м; мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа225.00м; м225.00м; м585.00м?„€ ?Š ќмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа730911мz мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6мz мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа245.00мz м245.00мz м329.00м?„€ ?Š ;мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа722261мЙ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мЙ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа267.00мЙ м267.00мЙ м1223.00м?„€ ?Š zмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа701817мј мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа10мј мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа292.97мј м292.97мј м622.00м?„€ ?Š Ймм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа777073м7 мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа7м7 мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа300.00м7 м314.00м7 м787.67м?„€ ?Š ј мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа731426мv мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа7мv мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа339.38мv м339.38мv м717.00м?„€ ?Š 7 мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа772600мЕ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мЕ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа364.00мЕ м364.00мЕ м600.00м?„€ ?Š v мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа731221мє мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мє мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа392.00мє м392.00мє м1036.00м?„€ ?Š Е мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа738429м3 мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа7м3 мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа422.68м3 м422.68м3 м1637.00м?„€ ?Š ємм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа770000мr мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мr мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа458.00мr м458.00мr м694.00м?„€ ?Š 3мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа744987мБ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6мБ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа489.00мБ м489.00мБ м1041.00м?„€ ?Š rмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа358144м№ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5м№ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа523.00м№ м523.00м№ м979.02м?„€ ?Š Бмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа356760м/ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа9м/ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа574.00м/ м574.00м/ м880.00м?„€ ?Š №мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа354429мn мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа10мn мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа558.00мn м629.00мn м1601.12м?„€ ?Š /мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа776845м­ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа10м­ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа689.00м­ м689.00м­ м1220.00м?„€ ?Š nмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа744471мь мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа9мь мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа748.00мь м748.00мь м3611.00м?„€ ?Š ­мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа357064м+ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа17м+ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа807.50м+ м807.50м+ м2500.00м?„€ ?Š ьмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа722983мj мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мj мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа868.50мj м868.50мj м*1295.00м?„€ ?Š +мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа767758мЉ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа11мЉ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа941.00мЉ м941.00мЉ м5590.47м?„€ ?Š jмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа758722мш мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа11мш мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа1017.60мш м1017.60мш м2930.88м?„€ ?Š Љмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа772601м' мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6м' мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа1128.00м' м1128.00м' м2730.00м?„€ ?Š шмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа762492мf мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа14мf мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа1261.00мf м1261.00мf м2834.00м?„€ ?Š 'мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа730999мЅ! мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа7мЅ! мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа1380.00мЅ! м1380.00мЅ! м5000.00м?„€ ?Š f мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа758757мф" мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6мф" мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа1516.00мф" м1516.00мф" м1923.00м?„€ ?Š Ѕ!мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа722595м#$ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџааstrappedм#$ мм#$ мм#$ мм?„€ ?Š ф"мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа787260мb% мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мb% мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа1723.00мb% м1723.00мb% м2255.00м?„€ ?Š #$мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа357199мЁ& мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа9мЁ& мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа1250.00мЁ& м1948.00мЁ& м2880.00м?„€ ?Š b%мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа753232мр' мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6мр' мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа2192.00мр' м2192.00мр' м3656.00м?„€ ?Š Ё&мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа359044м) мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа15м) мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа2376.00м) м2484.60м) м6339.60дh(b0*0*0*ААдн?„€ ?Š р'нм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа753045м? мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа9м? мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа2904.00м? м2904.00м? м5047.00м?„€ ?Š мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа358913м~ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа11м~ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа3360.00м~ м3360.00м~ м6991.00м?„€ ?Š ?мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа772602мН мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мН мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа3892.00мН м3892.00 мН м7150.38м?„€ ?Š ~мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа786937мќ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа7мќ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа3908.00мќ м4655.42мќ м6495.00м?„€ ?Š Нмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа723270м; мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа6м; мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа4853.00м; м5585.00м; м7975.00м?„€ ?Š ќмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа794481мz мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5мz мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа4403.00мz м6797.00мz м10418.95м?„€ ?Š ;мм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа356583мЙ мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа17мЙ мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа9656.00мЙ м9656.00мЙ м20160.00м?„€ ?Š zмм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа358167мј мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа7мј мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа2680.00мј м13092.00мј м28121.00м?„€ ?Š Ймм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа707667м7 мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа5м7 мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа20819.50м7 м21619.00м7 м28832.00м?„€ Š ј мд Y дм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа706923 мv мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџааabstract not availableмФ  ммФ  ммФ  мм„€ ?Š 7 мд Y дм мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа345272м мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ џџџџаа7м мааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ Tџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа67841.00м м67841.00м м108293.89м?„€ /Š     Ф мд YJ дм мд s4{ дааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџааУ УTotalsм2 мм2 мм2 мааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0џџџџаа165409.04м2 мд s4{ д286366.38Ф Фм/„€ 8JмааTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ0а(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа д ‰?й дб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#баа* highest bidder not listed on abstract ЉЉ only lowest four bidders listed Strapped jackets (multiple jobs bid separately, but awarded together) were not included in the study. Assumptions: С(( СС€€СAll available data is correct Conclusions: С(( СС€€С1) GPO awards the contract to the lowest responsive and responsible vendor, which is not always the lowest price bid. GPO keeps track of quality and compliance to help make the responsiveness decision. GPO may also disallow a bid if it discloses an obvious mistake. С(( СС€€С2) If a closed agency bidding is simulated by randomly choosing two printer's quotations from each job in the survey, there is no guarantee that the lowest price will be obtained. In fact, if two or three bidders are "randomly" chosen from each abstract, the "low price" could be anywhere from 31% to 494% higher than the actual price paid by the GPO using open competitive bidding on all jobs. С(( С С(( СС€€С3) The average variance between price paid and highest bid is 73%. С(( СС€€С4) The survey is statistically valid. (Study completed 11/3/93 by ABC Advisors, Inc.)д)c0*0*0*ААдŒдNPЙVааРРР8Р-!@Си и ССРРРР-Р&РРРРEРСи и ССРР/ Nддd0*0*0*ААд EXHIBIT 3 СрШ ьСGPO PRINTING & BINDING INCOME BREAKDOWNƒ Ср˜ ь%СFrom GPO 1992 Annual Reportƒ б#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#б С(( СС€€ССи и СС0 0 ССˆˆ$С RevenueС880СС6С % of TotalС@@BСС˜˜HСС№№NСProfitааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш@˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџа(€и 0 ˆр8ш.˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџаа д r56 дУУFunctionФФСи и СС0 0 ССˆˆ$СУУin millionsжШ6•cд ‰?m д лџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#бллPercentage calculations exclude the sale of blank paper to agencies.л#footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллжС6СPrint or BindСB˜˜HСƒС№№NС(loss)ФФ д r5„ дPrinting & Binding forСˆˆ$С 86.2жQo„X•#д ‰?ƒ д лџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#бллIncludes $6 million appropriation to cover shortfalls from prior years д r5K дЉЉ 1992 actual production was $83.6 million.л#footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллQжС880СС6С 10.8% Congress (at the main facility in Washington) Printing & Binding forСˆˆ$С 113.4С880СС6С 13.6% Agencies & Federal д r5n дRegisterжШn Ч•#д ‰?м д лџёfootnote texлб#Œdў6X@ЩќC‰пє@#бллFederal Register billings in 1992 were $26.1 million.л#footnote tex#лб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бллж (at the main facility & 5 regional plants) УУCombined inЉhouseФФС0 0 ССˆˆ$С 203.0С880СС6С 24.4%СB˜˜HСƒС№№NС (8) УУPrinting & Binding ФФ Procurement of PrintingСˆˆ$С 629.3С880СС6С 75.6%СB˜˜HСƒС№№NС 1.4 & Binding for Agencies from the private sector (through open, competitive bidding on specs issued for the Washington office & 20 regional/satellite offices) С(( СС€€ССи и СС0 0 ССˆˆ$С УУ ФФ Printing & Binding Subtotal 832.3 Sale of blank paper to AgenciesСи и СС0 0 ССˆˆ$С 18.3 С(( СС€€ССи и СС0 0 ССˆˆ$С УУ ФФ С(( СС€€ССи и СTotalС0 0 ССˆˆ$С $850.6 This summary was prepared by The GPO Contractors Coalition on behalf of its 350 members and over 2,000 other printers who rely on a fair, open, competitive system to acquire contracts for agency printing. For more information on the effect of the National Performance Review's recommendations on the printing industry, contact the Coalition at 717Љ267Љ0511, or Printing Industries of America (PIA), Government Affairs Department, at 703Љ519Љ8180. дYe0*0*0*ААд д ‰? дб#лxў6X@ЩќCљЪX@#бааааа(€и 0 ˆр8ш.˜№H!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRVА d О rЬ&€к4Žш џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџааС  СThe CHAIRMAN. My friend, those are outstanding, hard, cold facts, and I like them, and I am going to see that the Vice President gets a copy of those personally. С  СMr. GINDLESPERGER. Thank you. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Mr. Horne, do you want to proceed? СрdьСTESTIMONY OF NORMAN HORNE, VICE PRESIDENT, HARRINGTON BUSINESSƒ СрФь'СFORMS, ROCKY MOUNT, NCƒ С  СMr. HORNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Norman Horne of the Coalition of GPO Contractors -- С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Pull that microphone up just a little bit. Thank you. С  СMr. HORNE. I will start over. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. That is fine. С  СMr. HORNE. I am Norman Horne of the Coalition of GPO Contractors and Harrington Business Forms, Incorporated, Rocky Mount, North Carolina. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak to you today regarding Title XIV, H.R. 3400. С  СThe coalition solidly supports the GPO centralized procurement system. It is through this open and competitive print process that GPO is able to obtain low prices, quality products, and timely deliveries. For GPO vendors, large and small, this system provides access. Government requirements are advertised and posted, and the specifications are made available via computer, direct mail, or fax. On multiple-award contracts, requirements are made available through telephone polling. Private-sector printers can, therefore, bid competitively and win contracts at minimum costs. Because of the cost-effectiveness of the centralized system, the vendor, Government, and taxpayer benefit enormously. С  СProcurement integrity is another concern for the members of our group. We believe that GPO's publication of bid result tabulations assures procurement integrity. A decentralized system immediately increases the chances for abuse. The abuse would soon erode the integrity of the current system. Most of the vendors in our coalition are small businesses. These small businesses perceive the centralized system as being open and accessible. It is very important that the current system be maintained. С  СThe Small and Disadvantaged Businesses strongly support the centralized system also. A majority of 700 to 800 printing businesses exist because of this system. Most of them could not afford to employ a sales staff to visit the various agencies to solicit contracts. These expenses, in most cases, would be prohibitive and would put the SDB printer at an enormous disadvantage.дh)f0*0*0*ААдŒ™С  СCurrently, the following initiatives are being discussed with the Public Printer: One, the expansion of the SDB set-aside program beyond the Defense Department; and, two, the current SDB contract award system where SDB bids would be compared, when possible, with previous SDB bid performance. We have experienced positive support for these initiatives and look forward to more effective participation in these matters. It is important to note that the centralized system permits effective strategizing and implementation of improvements to the SDB program including data collection to monitor performance. С  СSort of off the record, Mr. Chairman, SDB's -- С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Let's put it on the record. С  СMr. HORNE. On the record, Mr. Chairman, Small and Disadvantaged Businesses are truly small and disadvantaged. Most of them have five or less employees. Eighty percent of the employees in small and disadvantaged businesses are members of a minority group. If we consider that there are 700 small and disadvantaged employees, then we are looking at some jobs in the minority community that could have some real meaning. So I am very happy that Mr. DiMario has been accessible. We met with him last week, and I really feel that we will be able to move forward in this regard. С  СFinally, technology has impacted the printing industry tremendously. President Clinton spoke of an information highway in his recent State of the Union address. This level of communication can only facilitate the activities of the current GPO procurement system. Improving the current centralized system is the objective that best meets the needs of the Coalition of GPO Contractors, Small and Disadvantaged Businesses, vendors, and taxpayers. С  СThank you again, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me the opportunity to speak. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Horne. С  СYou express the concern of people that I am afraid will be overlooked in this process, because, as you say, they are small, five employees. If we get into this mass operation, how are you going to have access to 135 agencies, 400 agencies? Where now you have got a central location, you can get it on fax, you can get it by telephone, you can get it by mail, and if you have got a computer, you can pull it up and get the information. С  СI am on your side 101 percent. I just do not know whether I can beat city hall or not, but I am going to try. С  СMr. Cooper? ди'g0*0*0*ААд TESTIMONY OF BENJAMIN Y. COOPER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, С  СGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA, INC., С  СALEXANDRIA, VA С  СMr. COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. С  СMy name is Ben Cooper. I am Senior Vice President for Government Affairs of the Printing Industries of America. I want to thank you for holding what I believe is the only hearing on this very important issue on either side of the Hill and through the executive agencies. So without this committee, I am not sure this issue could have been aired, would have been aired, and none of us would have had an opportunity to present some of the facts and figures you have heard today. С  СI am not going to be able to add anything to the substantial testimony in support of the procurement system and the efficiency of the GPO, the efficiency of the employees of the GPO, and I would not attempt to do so. С  СI would like to take a slightly different approach in this hearing and bring up something that is not being considered, and I would think the Vice President, as a proponent of the information highway, would be quite concerned about the direction that his own proposal and that of the House proposal has taken. My testimony may seem somewhat ironic. С  СWe are in the process now in the printing industry of examining the future of the printing industry, and what we are seeing is that the printing industry is changing radically, dramatically, and what we know as printing today is not going to be the same in the future. С  СWe just completed a study in which it was projected that, by the year 2000, 50 percent of the products produced by the printing industry will be products that are not produced today. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Repeat that for me, please. С  СMr. COOPER. Fifty percent of the products produced by the printing industry in the year 2000 are products that will not be produced by the printing industry today, in other words, through media, new opportunities for communication. С  СMy biggest concern with both the NPR proposal and with the bill that was passed in the House is that it treats printing as strictly as a process and not a product. It draws a ring around the printing industry and it starts to draw that ring tighter and tighter, and my guess is that if either one of these proposals passed -- the bill in the House has some very good provisions that we like -- if either one of these bills are passed, you will not be overseeing the Government Printing Office in 5 to 7 years, because there will not be that much left.дh)h0*0*0*ААдŒ™С  СI would like to submit for the record, if I may, a copy of an article that was in The New York Times yesterday, entitled "Seeing a Digital Future, Printers Rush to Get Beyond Ink and Paper." С  СI would also like to submit -- and this has some advertising in it, it is only the text material -- a copy of an executive summary of a report that our association did called "Bridging to a Digital Future." [Graphic Arts Monthly, January 1994] С  СThe CHAIRMAN. They will be included in the record. С  С[The submitted material is maintained in the committee's files.] С  СMr. COOPER. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I would like to read a portion of that "Bridging to a Digital Future" report, because I think it is important for this committee and the Joint COmmittee on Printing to consider. С  С"Bridging to a Digital Future is an apt description of the challenge printers are facing over the next few years. Printers must remain active in the analog world of today, to produce the current selection of print products and services, while at the same time stepping into the digital world with its emerging mix of new products, services, and relationships." С  С"The printer's role in the digital future is yet to be determined. We foresee a blurring of the differences between printers, broadcasters, software and hardware developers, and others. The term printer, with its implied ink on paper, will be increasingly inappropriate. The traditional prepress services are evolving into a distinctive imaging business with the potential of feeding a wide range of media, only one of which will be print." С  С"Increasingly, printers' reliance on ink on paper for sales and profits will shift to new products and services focused on the integration of data and multimedia. The most successful printers will be those who can meet rapidly changing customer needs. Inevitably, that will mean faster turn-around and lower cost in a more competitive business environment. It also means the ability to innovate rapidly, either internally or by out-sourcing work, to provide new services both at the front-end and distribution areas, as well as participating in new media. Creating and nurturing the best possible relationships with customers remains a critical success factor." С  С"A related issue will be the ability of printers to understand their customers in order to be more pro-active in meeting their needs and to focus on their bottom line profits." С  СThe reason I wanted to read that, Mr. Chairman, is we regard the GPO as a printer. It is part of our industry. In fact, we are very proud of the GPO. We do not regard the GPO as a sleepy, tired old agency sitting down on North Capitol Street. Probably theдh)i0*0*0*ААд biggest difficulty that GPO faces is that it has been there a long time and it is still called the Government Printing Office. We are proud of that name, and I know the employees there are proud of that name, and we are not proposing it to change. С  СBut we are proposing that the agency start a new program to bring itself into the next century. We have talked with Mike DiMario and we are eager to work with Mike on that type of proposal. We have talked with executive branch agencies and, despite what we hear, these agencies are not out to dismantle the GPO. С  СThe numbers of agencies that are thrilled with GPO's work, I wish they would come forward and testify. We are going to be meeting tomorrow with Federal print managers with many of the Federal agencies around the city. They are not upset with GPO services. They are thrilled with them. They save them money. Even in the case of the Defense Printing Service, they tell us -- and we will wait to see the results -- that they are committing to start shifting more work back to GPO, which of course implies they somehow shipped some back, which they said they did not do. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. I think we have pretty good testimony, and the Admiral, when he was asked question if he had complied with the law, four different times he said no. Then he pledged 80 percent of their printing to the Government Printing Office. I said no, that will not satisfy me. I said whatever is supposed to go to the Government Printing Office ought to go, and whatever you can do, you are supposed to do that. So if that is 70 percent or 90 percent -- but they set the 80 percent figure, and we will see exactly what happens. That may increase the opportunity of some of our smaller printers out there. С  СMr. COOPER. You bet it will and we will certainly be eager to have it. I see that they have got a new director at the Defense Printing Service, and he seems to be talking in the right direction. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Well, action I like up here. С  СMr. COOPER. We also believe that there is a couple of areas of justifiable -- I would not say criticism, but concern at GPO. One of those concerns is that GPO has to recognize that it is a printing business, it has customers. Its customers are the public, its customers are industries like ours, its customers are Federal executive agencies. It has to make those agencies happy. С  СIt has to sit down with the Defense Department and the Department of the Treasury and Commerce and make the necessary arrangements to make them get their products through the system, and I believe sincerely that these Federal managers, some of them would want to bring work inside for their own purposes, and there have been plenty of examples of those things. But I believe, for the most part, they want to serve their agencies and they want toдh)j0*0*0*ААд do it efficiently. С  СBut Mike DiMario and his staff have to present them a deal they cannot refuse. It has to make it worthwhile. We have been meeting with Mike regularly and we intend to do so again. С  СAmong the things that I think Mike needs to do -- and I was very interested in Mr. Boarman's proposal about creating an executive representation in the procurement shop -- but Mike also needs to create an information advisory council over there, and I think the committee could be of a great deal of help in doing that, to have people from the executive branch and the private sector, the judiciary branch, the legislature, everybody in there helping the GPO move as a print media company into the next century. This is critical, and I believe if we do not take steps, I believe if we pass the wrong legislation or, quite frankly, fail to pass the right legislation, we will not need to have these hearings by the year 2000, there will not be a Government Printing Office. С  СI know for one that we would be very eager to sit down with this committee and anyone else to consider taking the time to pass some meaningful legislation that would address this issue, and I believe the result would be that people like Mr. Horne would still be in business, Mr. Gindlesperger's clients would be in business, and Mr. Boarman and Mr. Lord would be happy with the results, and I believe that the Congress would, also. С  СThank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to testify. С  С[The prepared statement of Mr. Cooper follows:] STATEMENT OF BENJAMIN Y. COOPER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR С  СGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA, INC., С  СALEXANDRIA, VA С  СMr. Chairman and members of the Rules Committee, my name is Benjamin Y. Cooper. I am senior vice president for government affairs of the Printing Industries of America. On behalf of the 14,000 members of our association, I want to thank you for allowing the Printing Industries of America an opportunity to comment on H. R. 3400. This legislation would have a profound effect on the future of the Government Printing Office and those printing companies which provide printing and graphic arts services to the federal government through the GPO. Since this hearing will also address the recommendations of Vice President Gore's National Performance Review, I am submitting for the record a letter outlining the printing industry's response to the Vice President's proposal. С  СThe provisions of H.R. 3400 place our association in an awkward situation. The proposal includes many features we have sought for years. The bill would redefine printing to include technologies such as photocopying which are similar to traditionalдh)k0*0*0*ААд printing processes in terms of the products produced. The bill would give the Public Printer authority to close and consolidate federal agency printing plants. We believe the legislation would also provide additional strength to the GPO's procurement and internal production activities. These are all worthy goals. С  СUnfortunately, the legislation fails to recognize that the world of graphic communications is changing faster than even we could have predicted. We are concerned that passage of H. R. 3400 without significant modification may provide a short term solution to some critical and aggravating problems at the expense of GPO's future. Further, we believe the legislation could significantly harm the distribution of federal information to the nation's citizens. С  СWe believe legislation to reorganize, refocus and restructure the Government Printing Office is overdue. The single biggest criticism we have of H.R. 3400 is that it assumes that the primary business of the Government Printing Office of the future will be traditional printing. While we are certain that a significant share of the agency's business will be printing in the years to come, we know that it will be a declining share. С  СPIA recently released a report entitled "Bridging to a Digital Future." I wish to read from a portion of the executive summary of that report. A copy of the executive summary will also be submitted for the record. С  СТДd d Т"Bridging to a Digital Future" is an apt description of the challenge printers are facing over the next few years. Printers must remain active in the analog world of today, to produce the current selection of print products and services, while at the same time stepping into the digital world with its emerging mix of new products, services, and relationships.Ц(#d Ц С  СТДd d ТThe printer's exact role in the digital future is still evolving. We foresee a blurring of the differences between printers, broadcasters, software and hardware developers, and others. The term "printer" with its implied "ink on paper" will be increasingly inappropriate. The traditional prepress services are evolving into a distinctive imaging business with the potential of feeding a wide range of media, only one of which will be print. Increasingly, printers' reliance on ink on paper for sales and profits will shift to new products and services focused on the integration of data and multimedia...Ц(#d Ц С  СТДd d Т...The most successful printers will be those who can meet rapidly changing customer needs. Inevitably, that will mean faster turnaround and lower costs in a more competitive business environment. It also means the ability to innovate rapidly either internally or by outдh)l0*0*0*ААдЋsourcing work, provide new services both in frontЉend and distribution areas, as well as participate in new media. Creating and nurturing the best possible relationships with customers remains a critical success factor. A related issue will be the ability of printers to understand their customers in order to be more proactive in meeting their needs and to focus their bottomЉlines profitability."Ц(#d Ц С  СWith these issues in mind, PIA recommends that any effort to reorganize the Government Printing Office must take into account the issues which follow. THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE NEEDS TO ADDRESS MORE THAN "INK ON PAPER." С  СAs stated above, the printing industry is changing. A recent study by the Printing Industries of America noted that four percent of those companies surveyed offered CDЉROM replication as an alternative to traditional printing. We have printing companies which are making major investments in electronic systems rather than printing presses. The Government Printing Office needs to model itself after these companies and prepare for the new generation of printing. THE CONGRESS SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT COMMUNICATION WITH THE NATION'S CITIZENS MUST BE COORDINATED BY A CONSISTENT SET OF GUIDELINES, IDEALLY THROUGH A SINGLE AGENCY. С  СWhen the federal government communicated only through printed materials and the Government Printing Office was the only printer, federal information policy was simpler. Once federal agencies began to bypass the information stream through inЉhouse printing or copying capacity or through electronic capture and distribution of information, the ability of citizens and the government itself to get information began to change. No longer is information routinely flowing through the Government Printing Office, the Superintendent of Documents and the depository library system. Such information is limited to printed information and selected electronically distributed material sent through the GPO voluntarily. С  СThese changes have been occurring innocently in some cases, but in other cases agencies have aggressively sought to bypass the GPO system. When this occurs, the public information and distribution of information function is also bypassed. While some of these documents are internal, we have no way of assuring that information intended for the public is made available. THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE MUST DEVELOP AN AGGRESSIVE PROGRAM OF SATISFYING ITS CUSTOMERS WHETHER THOSE CUSTOMERS ARE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, PRIVATE CONTRACTORS, OR PRIVATE CITIZENS. С  СGood customer service is one of the major reasons printing companies survive. The GPO must assure that its customers in theдh)m0*0*0*ААд federal agencies, the Congress, and the private sector understand the products, services, and requirements. The GPO must commit itself to keeping its customers happy. We are pleased that Public Printer Mike DiMario and Deputy Public Printer Jim Joyner are committed to this effort. We have offered the assistance of our industry in whatever way we can to improve these relationships. THE CONGRESS NEEDS TO INCREASE THE DIRECT ROLE OF THE EXECUTIVE AGENCIES IN THE OVERSIGHT OF THE GPO. С  СGood customer service requires constant feedback and communication with customers. The GPO has a history of forming groups to receive such feedback; however, it may be wise for Congress to formalize this process. We would propose the creation of a Federal Information Advisory Council under the auspices of the GPO and the Public Printer to serve as a forum to discuss existing and emerging communications issues and to assist the Public Printer in his efforts to lead the GPO into the 21st century. С  СMr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important matter. We look forward to working with the committee. С  Сд0n0*0*0*ААд Attachment to Printing Industries of America, Inc. September 9, 1993 The Honorable Al Gore Vice President of the United States Old Executive Office Building Washington, DC 20501 Dear Mr. Vice President, We have had an opportunity to review the document entitled "From Red Tape To Results: Creating A Government That Works Better and Costs Less." You and your staff are to be commended for the enormous effort required to review federal agency activities. I want to take this opportunity to comment on your recommendations regarding government printing and the Government Printing Office (GPO). There are probably a small number of people inside or outside government who would state with confidence that the way the federal government goes about meeting its printing requirements is ideal. There is little doubt that reform is in order; however, some aspects of the current system are working. Among the successes is the manner in which the GPO purchases printing from the private sector. Through its competitive procurement system, GPO utilizes a network of about 10,000 printing companies nationwide. The competition among these companies is so keen that the government is virtually assured of the best possible price. Further, by all accounts these companies are responsive in terms of meeting delivery schedules and quality requirements. The success of the GPO program has been noted by the General Accounting Office and independent comments by federal agencies. It is ironic that your proposal for changing government printing would abolish the part of the government's printing effort which is working for that which has been subject to criticism. As we understand the proposal, the executive branch agencies would no longer be required to use the GPO for its printing and printing procurement needs. Instead they could purchase printing directly or produce the work inЉhouse. Quite obviously, the latter option would enhance government's competition with the private sector. We can not support a greater investment by the government in the manufacture of printed products.дh)o0*0*0*ААдŒ™ The other option proposed direct purchase by federal agencies seems to suggest that improvements will result from the purchase of printing on a decentralized basis. While we can see such purchases offering some advantages on selected purchases, we would predict a net increase in the cost of federal printing through such a system. It would appear that the review of federal printing by your staff focused on one aspect of meeting printing needs without looking at others. Direct purchase and inЉhouse printing may be more convenient, but unless very clear guidance is adopted and adhered to, it will not be more cost effective. The basic operating principle of the GPO is that printing equipment is expensive and printing employees skilled. If the government must be used in the most efficient and cost effective manner possible, this effectiveness means running the equipment as many hours per day as possible. In recent years, the GPO has begun to encounter problems of inefficiency as executive agencies have begun to expand inЉhouse printing and duplicating capacity and add personnel to duplicate the printing and print purchasing function at GPO. The Department of Defense alone has almost 3,000 employees in the printing business, many of whom directly duplicate activities at the GPO. While we may take issue with the reforms you have proposed for government printing, there are some reforms which can be undertaken to reduce costs. 1. Establish once and for all that there should be one printer for the government. Ordinary citizens are unmoved by arcane arguments suggesting that the legislative branch should not perform printing service for the executive branch. Frankly, it may be unimportant where the GPO is located; however, once a determination is made, it should have authority over all federal printing entities to assure efficiency. 2. Expand the use of direct deal contracts by federal agencies, but have such contracts coordinated by the GPO. In this way, the GPO could provide a list of eligible bidders from which the agency could choose. 3. Establish within each agency personnel who have responsibility for printing and printing purchasing. Empower them to develop the specifications for their printing needs. When appropriate reduce GPO staff accordingly. 4. Employ a five year review plan for all federal agency printing plants during which time, these plants could be analyzed for efficiency and cost effectiveness. Based on the review, many of these plants could be consolidated. 5. Establish contractor operated copy facilities within the federalдh)p0*0*0*ААд government. It is the height of inefficiency for a federal agency to invest in equipment and personnel for its copying and duplicating activities when there are quick printers throughout the nation who could provide such service at a lower cost. Obviously, small selfЉservice copiers will continue to be needed by government personnel. 6. There is a suggestion that because of the growth of desktop publishing, government should change the way it prints. The growth of desktop publishing has been phenomenal; however, failure to coordinate software, language and equipment will result in a virtual Tower of Babel. Someone, somewhere in the government must coordinate those activities. The example used in "From Red Tape To Results: Creating A Government That Works Better and Costs Less" was interesting. Someone at the NHTSA saw a need to produce a "slick" publication. Approvals were complicated. The integrity of the piece was compromised. While we can not comment on the specifics of this particular job, we are aware that the federal government has limited funds. Simply empowering a federal manager with the ability to buy slick printing will not solve the problem. Someone needs to be able to ask, "Is this publication necessary" and "Do we need to spend this much on our message." We would contend that more often than not federal agencies tend to seek printing at a quality level above the utility of the piece. Because a federal manager thinks a piece should be "slick" is not adequate justification to pay for a slick piece. We thank you for setting forth this issue for discussion. Reforms in federal printing are necessary. Printing is a major part of the rapidly evolving communications industry and we need to take steps to assure its efficiency. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Benjamin Y. Cooper Senior Vice President Government Affairs да q0*0*0*ААд С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Cooper. С  СOne of the things that we need to look at is the advance funding, and we are beginning to look at GPO as self-sustaining, and that is as little difficult to do with the revolving fund. All these things I understand. If it is just you and me, we can work it out pretty quick. But somehow or other we have got other influences and we could understand why those in executive agencies are not jumping forward to support our position. But I can, and so we need to get to that. С  СMr. Gindlesperger, let me ask you a question that I need to have some answer to. How does the printing industry differentiate between duplicating and printing? What measures do they use, volume, cost? How do they do that? С  СMr. GINDLESPERGER. As I testified before you some time ago, sir, there really is not any differentiation between printing and duplicating. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. I want to get that in the record. С  СMr. GINDLESPERGER. The idea of putting ink on paper is the key issue. It has to do with presentation of images. What you heard today from Mr. Cooper, from Mr. Lord and from others has to do with the technology and how that technology is changing. The printer's role is to, in the end, give to you information, and traditionally that has been by putting ink on paper. We can apply lots of terms to that. We can apply duplicating, copying, printing, we could-- С  СThe CHAIRMAN. You mean you are telling me that you would include duplicating and photocopying in the definition of printing? С  СMr. GINDLESPERGER. Absolutely. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Mr. Horne and Mr. Cooper, do you agree with that statement? С  СMr. COOPER. I think for the most part, Mr. Chairman, when you look at something that is produced in this way, it is irrelevant to you what the process is. What we are dwelling on in my mind is a ridiculous process discussion. Technology is changing. С  СThere was a press introduced at our trade show in Chicago this past year that goes from direct color imaging to press. Is that a copying machine? Not in my industry, because they are buying it to satisfy customer printing needs. No matter how you produce the product, if the product is printed, it is a printed product. And dabbling in these kind of arcane arguments of something being talked as printing is mindless to the average person, and certainly mindless to us. С  СMr. HORNE. Mr. Chairman, I have in my own small company wellдh)r0*0*0*ААд over a million dollars invested in equipment to produce the printed image. Those who receive that image have no way of knowing whether I produced one image or whether I produced 100 of those images or 1,000. The point is that they received that image. С  СNow, I do not know whether I would call that printing, duplicating, copying or scanning with some sort of a laser image definition product. The point is that the product is completed and is delivered. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Do any of you believe -- and your comment from any one of the three would be fine -- that the proliferation of desktop publishing technologies -- I do not know all of these technologies -- and printer-in-the-box duplicators lessen the need for centralization of out-sourcing of government publication needs? С  СMr. GINDLESPERGER. Again, as Mr. Cooper suggested, we are dealing with process. Process has little to do with what the GPO is about. GPO in the procurement area is about putting together the requirements for a job, putting it into the most economical format that is known at that time, sending that format out to a number of interested firms for their pricing, handling it in a professional manner and finally awarding the job. Whether that be done through duplicating, printing, some magical box is really irrelevant. С  СThe CHAIRMAN. Mr. Horne, I want to thank you very much for representing the small and disadvantaged programs. С  СI have been looking at ways to expand, as you said in your testimony, beyond defense printing service. Any suggestions you might have -- and I want to reiterate that -- any suggestions you might have, I would like to have them. If you have got them now, I will take them. If you want to think about it and send me an addendum to your statement today, I could include it in the record. I would be most pleased to get that. С  СYou perform in your association, that particular association performs a very needed service. As you said, the overwhelming majority are minority and you represent them well, and I do appreciate it. С  СI have no further questions of you gentlemen. I just need your help and your input. I want to do it better. I do not want to lose it. I think the system works well. We just want to improve the system. С  СMr. Cooper, what you are talking about is to maybe sit down and work out something that would be to the advantage of all. That is difficult to do in the political arena. But if we do not make the attempt, we will never get it done. So I am willing to make that effort that we improve the system. С  СI think Mr. Boarman made a pretty good suggestion, let the executive have representation there, so that there will be somebodyдh)s0*0*0*ААд at the table. As I said, at the last hearing, what the Vice President is doing -- and I am not sure he meant it, but he is saying to all these 400 agencies, here is money, go do good. I am not sure it is going to work out that way. С  СSo we are going to continue on and we are going to be looking at all these things. С  СI want to thank you for your contributions to one of our outstanding issues before us, and your statements will become available to the Senate FTP server, as I mentioned here earlier today, hopefully later today. The hearing will be available on line to GPO as soon as we receive any corrections from those testifying. С  СI know that many of you took some risk in getting here this morning, and my thanks to you for coming. A safe return. Do not visit the emergency room and those sorts of things, so be very, very careful. I do not want to lose you, because you have been valuable help to me and to the government. С  СThis hearing is now recessed, and we will hold a hearing soon. It looks like we are going to have one about every week now through April, and "old iron bucket" is going to be here for every one of them. С  С[Whereupon, at 11:54 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]