we hope in the near future to put guidance on tuesday and other stakeholders on how we are going to land or propose to him and those issues as well as clarifying operationally how the action will occur between federal government and the state. their other issues about actuarial value of car sharing reductions in many of these provisions that were following through as well. we are continuing our work on building the federal exchange. we get a lot of questions about that as well. a lot of walking and tackling we are doing internally. you are probably familiar with a lot of these steps. we've got to first define the key exchange functions. what does an exchange two?

>> pleased to have mr. dan akerson with us, and you know the reteen here. swearing in and then the five minutes and we go from there. raise your right hand. solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. let the record show the witness

answered in the affirmative. you were here for the first panel, get five minutes, lenient with that time as you saw, and then we'll go to questioning and hopefully get this done before we have to go to vote. >> i did the same thing, turn on the microphone there if you would, and then just pull it close. should have a red light there. >> got it. >> there go. >> good morning. i welcome the opportunity to testify today and stand bind a car that all of us at general motors are proud of. allow me to start with some volt history. gm unvailed the volt con cement at the january 2007 detroit dire volt product for production well before the bankruptcy and the infusion of government funds. the battery story goes back much further in the early 1990s with

gm's work on the ev1. drawing on that experience, we engineered the volt to be a winner on the road and in customer's hearts and proud to say the volt is performing exactly as we engineered it. in the first year, it garnered the triple crown of industry awards, motor trend car of the year, automobile magazine automobile of the year, and north american car of the year. volt is among the safest cars on the road earning five stars for occupant safety and a top safety pick with the insurance institute for highway safety. in 93% of volt owners report the highest customer satisfaction with the car, more than any other vehicle and highest ever recorded in the industry. beyond the accolades, the volt's importance to gm and country's long term prospects is far

reaching. we germinged the volt to be the only ev that you can drive across town or across the country without fear of being stranded when the battery is dead. you can go 35 miles, and in some cases much more, on a single charge, which is for 80% of american drivers is their total driving range. after that, a small gas engine extends your range to 375 miles, roughly, before you have to recharge or refill. if the volt message boards are indications there's some real one upsmanship going on a there. customers reported going months and thousands of miles without stopping once at the gas pump. no other ev can do this or generate that much passion for its drivers. we engineered the volt to give drivers a choice to use energy

produced in the united states rather than from oil from places that may not put america's best interests first. we engineered the volt to show the world what great vehicles we make at general motors. unfortunately, there's one thing we did not engineer. although we loaded the volt with state of the art safety features, we did not create the volt to be a political punching bag, and sadly, that's what it's become. for all of the loose talk about fires, we're here today bout tests resulted in a fire under lab conditions that no driver would experience in real world. in fact, customers drove over 2500 miles without a single similar incident. in one test, the fire took occurred seven days after a

simulated crash. in another, it took three weeks after the test. not three minutes. not three hours. not three days. three weeks. based on those test results, did we think there was an imminent safety risk? no. as one customer put it, if they couldn't cut him out of a vehicle in two or three weeks, he had a bigger problem to worry about. however, begin those test results, gm had a choice in how it would react. it was an easy call. we put our customers first. we moved fast with great transparency to engineer a solution. we contacted every volt owner and offered them a loaner car until the issue was settled. if that was not enough, we offered to buy the car back. we assembled a team of engineers who worked nonstop to develop a

modest enhancement to the battery system to address the issue. we'll begin adding that enhancement on the production line and in customer cars in a few weeks. in doing so, we took a five-star rated vehicle and made it even safer. nonetheless, these events have cast an undeserved, damaging light on a promising new technology that we're exporting around the world right from detroit. as the "wall street journal" wrote in its volt review, "we should suspend our ranker and savor a little american pride. a bunch of mid western engineers, bad haircuts, and cheap wristwatches just out engineered every other car company on the planet." the volt is safe. it's a marvelous machine representing so much about what's right about general motors and frankly, about american ingenuity and

manufacturing. i look forward to taking your questions. thank you. >> thank you, mr. akerson, we appreciate you being here with us today and the fact you talked about you contacted every volt owner over the response you took when this was brought to the public's attention. in your opinion, mr. akerson, should they have known to drain the battery -- when they conducted the test, subjected it to a crash, took it to a lot and let it set there, shouldn't they have known that they needed to drain the battery? >> i can only speak for general motors and the protocols within the industry. the protocol on whether it's a combustion engine or an electric assist as the volt is, is the disconnect the battery, the 12-volt battery in a combustion engine car and drain the gas.

our protocol at the time with the understanding and the background that this is a new and evolving technology was the battery, the 12-volt battery's disconnected and the large 16-kilowatt hour battery was disconnected, not depowered. lesson learned. that's part of the protocols going forward. >> let me be clear. is it fairly common knowledge that when there's a crash, you drain the battery, drain the gas tank, and that just -- is that comps? >> no, you disconnect the 12-volt battery, disconnect it from the circuitry, and you drain the gas tank. >> okay, but should have we expected them to know to drain the battery or unfair? >> again, i can't speak for the administration. >> any testing you had done

before any testing other that you know of other manufacturers with similar type electric vehicles? do they know they're -- i mean, did they drain their batteries in those tests? i mean, it seems to me this is something they should have known to do other than just park it on a lot with a bunch of other cars. >> let me speak to what general motors knew. we had $285,000 testing on this battery, equivalent to 25 car lives if you will, and everything we found was this was a safe -- >> any of that testing involve draining the battery after subjecting to a crash or after the battery was punctured? >> no. >> okay. when did you give them the protocols that included draining the battery? >> in the case in question where the car had a fire three weeks after the crash, it was left, as you saw, on the side of the

road, and i don't know that the battery was even disconnected. i believe it was. i'm talking about the 12-volt battery. i believe it was, and i believe the larger battery was disconnected from the circuitry, but not drained. >> okay. okay. and when did you plan on, if at all, informing the owners of the volt and the public about potential concerns? did you plan on doing that, or is that something you worked in conjunction with, or what was your plans at general motors for informing the public? >> well, after listening to the administrator's testimony, as the summer progressed, we had to disassemble the battery itself and look for the root cause, and as he said, there were concerns about arson or one of the other, three or four cars involved. it was not clear to anyone

exactly what happened. it happened over a weekend. there was no observation. there was no witness to what happened. in september of last year, we tested again, and we could not replicate a fire. >> okay. >> we did the same exact test, we, general motors, they did the same test, we could not replicate, and so there were further tests. as he said, the battery itself was extracted from the vehicle. it was pierced with a steel rod which is highly unlikely in the real world, and then it was rotated simulating a rollover, not in a second that you would expect on the road, but by an hour, and it was drenched, if you will, in fluid, coolant. it took seven days for a fire to

occur. i'd like to underscore there was no explosion. a fire. that -- at that point after that extreme -- what i would call not real world situation, seven days, that's when they said they wanted to open a formal investigation. we notified our customers immediately after that. >> okay. thank you. yield now to the gentleman. >> thank you, mr. akerson, for being here. is the volt safe? >> it is safe. >> have you had communication with anyone in the obama administration to ask them to provide some kind of consideration to gm with respect to the testing that you became aware of, not to disclose it or to defer disclosure of it? >> absolutely not. >> and you're sure that in terms of your line staff it didn't happen?

>> i'm quite sure. i can't justify to that 100%. i don't think -- >> as a policy, you, gm, did not try to get the obama administration to fail to disclose any tests that were made in a laboratory setting? >> no, no one. >> you're not aware of any accident or any injury that occurred to anyone driving a volt? >> absolutely none. >> they're safe in the vehicle; is that right? >> i own one, yes. >> you drive it and your family members drive it as well? >> i just bought it. >> let me ask you something -- if there was a material defect in a car that was out in circulation right now, would that affect, let's say, your insurance that gm would be buying from, you know, your

insurance carrier, wouldn't they increase your cost of insurance if you had a claim for a product liability? is that a problem for you? >> yes. >> has that occurredded and your insurance company called you say say, wait, there's questions here, and it's going to cost you more to to have insurance, has that happened in >> i insured the car, but that was low because it's a five star rated car by the insurance institute. >> so the very people charged with determining risk as a question of the market now, they have not increased the cost of insurance, but to the contrary and gave it a high rating? >> i assume, yes. >> can you discus what effect

designing has had? are they more competitive? >> this is an evolving area of automotive engineering and technology. it's a halo car in the sense that we get a cashay of being innovative, and all companies innovate. for a background, we sold more volts in the first year than toyota sold priuses in the first year they rolled out the preeout. new technologies take awhile to take hold and gain traction, and i think that the engineers around this has been viewedded as -- described as a moon shot from a technological point of view, and, indeed, i think it was, and that's benefited other cars. we're rolling out -- >> so it's your experience then

that the manufacturing of the volt puts america, essentially on the map with respect to the electric vehicles; is that right? >> the derivatives are going into many of the cars, and, for example, the buick lacrosse, with e-assist, jumps to 30 miles a gallon. we have impacts of exploring technologies and deploying them in the real world ring yes. >> and so the manufacturing of the volt, then, moves america towards clean and first efficiet technologies, not just used in the volt, but other cars to help them become more fuel efficient; correct? >> yes, sir. >> and that, in turn, i might add, has a lot to do with saving jobs in this economy. how many jobs has gm added to the automanufacturing sector to build the parts for the scroll

-- volt? >> one plant outside detroit is dedicated just to the volt production. they put out about 400 every couple days, and they are a couple thousand employees there. i would also say since we've emerged from bankruptcy, we've invested over $5 billion in foreclosure in the country hiring just short of 16,000 additional -- >> $5 billion for the services of? >> all the capital programs here in the united states. >> final question. so it's your intention as the ceo of general motors to have the volt lead the way towards let's say electric and hybrid electric vehicles, revitalizing the manufacturing sector by providing products that consumers find attractive because it saves them money; correct? >> yes, sir. we're developing great combustion engine cars as well that are fuel efficient. >> i understand that from my own

district. thank you very much, sir. thank you. >> thank you. pleased to have with us a member of the full committee from the great state of michigan with unanimous concept from the committee, like for him to join us. before going quickly to mr. kelly, i just want to be clear on a question asked. with the exception, general motors -- you, mr. akerson, had no conversation with folks at the white house concerning this incident? correct. >> no conversation with people you or anyone in general motors had conversation with people at t.a.r.p., and who handled the now defunct task force? no conversation at treasury regarding the issue? >> i had a conversation with mr. massad earlier this week on another general matter and observed to him i was going to testify today, but other than that, no conversation.

>> anyone else at general motors that you know of talk to someone in the administration? talk to mr. lahood about this issue? >> no, sir. >> okay. now yield to the chairman of full committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome. >> thank you. >> i'll be brief. the question here is not whether or not gm is making good cars and whether or not it's coming back. i think it is, and we take great pride this that, and i think the president did last night. is this, in your history, recognition and as far as you know a typical response to a typical catastrophic event? is this less aggressive or more aggressive in their response to a brand new automobile? >> as we speak, there's about

8,000. >> there were about 4,000 when this occurred. you may be making 400 a day, but you're selling far less than that. 4,000 or less in june or july, 8,000 or so now. the question is when this occurred -- >> yes. >> the director said, administrator said that it takes six months to do it, but in your experience, would you consider this to be an aggressive response, an average response, or a little slower than average when it comes to when it lights up your phone and they come running in and have emergency meetings and the it's all you can focus on even though you are bored and everybody else had something else in mind for you that day, and when it happens to all great automobile companies, was this more aggressive i typical, or quite frankly, a little less speedy >> thank you

for the colorful description of my routine. [laughter] >> been there done that on a smaller scale. >> i understand. i describe it as proportional. we tried to replicate and find what we suspected to be the root cause, try to replicate it in the field, crashed and tried to stimulate the same outcome we had in the may/june time frame. we could not do that. when they drewed battery out of the car and then impaled it with a steel rod and spun it, it took awhile to get it, and then it was seven days after being impaled in order to replicate a similar situation. the fact that we couldn't replicate it in the field, it's proportional. >> i appreciate your candor.

last question. lithium ion, new technology to you, but not new to the world. the aviation industry regulated volume of it and all other things. do you think you're behind the power curve and have to play catch up? you described not knowing how to replicate that. is that one of the problems going forward on a mass basis with large vol yules of a new, basically other sealed battery that you used? >> well, arguably, we're teamed with the probably one of the leaders, not the leader in battery technology in the world, and that's lg kim out of korea, and they built a plant in holland, michigan to supply not only our cells, but the other competitors in the same market. i'd say we're a leader in this. we understand the battery technology well, we have a battery lab specifically to study the technology and the

evolution and improvement we expect over the years. >> i was not trying to ask what you were doing because i know you're doing that, but in fairness, it's catch up. the american automobile companies, including your previous leased automobile, you're playing catch up on all electric cars and even hybrid, and i applaud you for doing it, but from a safety stand point, don't you think if you had to do it over again, you would have been and would have worked to be a little more aggressive in public confidence by doing what you needed to do sooner? in other words, six months of selling a car that could, and turns out would potentially explode and need different safety procedures. didn't we find as a country that you shouldn't have kept selling this relatively new car the way you were? >> the battery, as you know, is well used throughout the industry.

..

any customer when you have a where from seven to 21 days to remove yourself from the car if there is an accident. after 25 billion miles on the road for this card there has never been an incident anywhere close to this. there have been no injuries, and so we felt as we found an extreme simulated lab fire that to seven days that this car was safe. as i said in my opening comments, we were not satisfied with this. he wanted to address the issue with our customers, for the law requires, but the cars back, media just as commander being implemented over the last month. >> to characterize it, to make sure you're understood, is fair to say that what you have learned is the entire nation of repair facility salvage yards and other people involved in the automotive industry by going to have to learn and adapt to a lot of new procedures that are continuing to evolve if we are to ensure safety of handling of these new components both

because of high voltage in a potential fire and explosion. that is what you have learned from this, is that those of us who are not -- we get out of a car, but will we go to the salvage yard they need to know what, the tow truck company needs to know it. all the other people need to know it. that is, in fact, the risk that you found after six months. >> before we launch this car, mr. chairman, we conducted nationwide safety tourist across the country to make sure that the public safety was paramount. that is the core values of general motors. we talked to the national fire protection agency, the international association of firefighters, international association of fire chiefs, the a source jim -- association of public safety communication officers, fire chief, police chiefs, 911 call centers to make sure that we have this understood. we now trained over 15,000 people across the nation on the

city protocols. he will have to go back and make sure that it is well understood that the new safety protocols. so i think every organization, an individual should evolve and learn, and we have learned some lessons that i think will benefit the entire industry. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thanks you, mr. seale. >> we're pleased to be joined. we have four minutes, but only 67 votes of comment as a memberf the board of ministers of the naval academy of want to congratulate you o being named a graduate of the year. thank you. -- you herve said. collateral damage from this hearing. as the head, you are assuring the public. listen up. the vote is a safe vehicle. is that right?

>> system sir. >> actually, i view this as a positive. it is our chance to get this before the american people. you represent the american people to get our story before you. we have taken ads in the paper : with this that the investigation is incomplete. i do think there has been collateral damage. it will have to work hard to get back. >> i wanted thank you for your leadership and want to take the smaller to think of the employees of gm for producing such a great product. >> it will be about a 20 minute break. we will be back for our full committee folks who want to ask questions. we will keep that is because we can. >> the committee stands in recess for 20 minutes more less.

[inaudible conversations] >> the committee will come to order. i will recognize the gentleman

from pennsylvania, mr. kelly, for five minutes. >> apology as for the delay, but we -- and forgot that we are going to have a very appropriate ceremony. you're recognized. >> thank you. thank you for being here. uni have never met. we have never been a socially are never done anything from a business standpoint. i buy a lot of cars. we are linked in a different way. we grew up in boulder, pennsylvania. you yourself, great relationship. i know the reason you are here is not because of any monetary gain that general motors could that possibly offered you because really your decision to go with gm was made with your heart and now with the head because he could have stayed in the private sector and been a lot more rewarding and you would not be back here today going through this. but the question goes back, nothing to do with general motors, but it does have to do with the apparent partnership

that the government has with gm. the reason i bring that up, and i know you say no, but that is not true. i know, that is not true, but you can't get away from certain things that are already on the table. if we go to a slide to my ticket is on pace three. there are two slides. in one of the slides, this is some advice coming from the administration. it is kind of a marketing thing. one of the slides -- this is 2009, treasury officials directing gm and how we could structure press releases. but represents the government ownership be removed. then we go to another slide in showing you any no from may of 2009 ended talks about a member

of the automotive task force telling general motors to coordinate with the uaw, united auto workers about the termination of pension plans. this is at a minimum this could get messy. the uaw should probably be brought into the loop. having served on a lot of dealer councils and been part of a lot of that group's where we try to get the message out about how big our cars were and have better deals were, the zero lovers, what we through some of that stuff. it is, perception is reality. this hearing today is not about the chevy volt, but about nhtsa. a great partnership, and that told you early on that my dad started in 53 after being a parts maker in a warehouse. my relationship has never been a quality, always been clear and transparent. i know which side of the table i

said. the mother manufacturer and distributor. actually sell these. you looked at these things, my gosh. if it really isn't government-run, if the government really is at arm's length away from this, the sharing of disinformation or how we will market these different messages, how does that happen if it's not that way to iraq and how does nhtsa sit there and say, no, no, no predated the same way we always do. as a matter of fact, they didn't . again, payroll products. and the stand. nothing to do with angels, but it does have to do with the we're trying to do. we can compete with anybody in the world that any product at any level. our success has been driven. producing cars in mass quantities the people want to bite. one advocate those two e-mails, if you're really not involved and they really don't have an

influence y deasy melson by back-and-forth the mire of the advising general motors on how they should messes these different things? rise me of what you're doing. there are a lot of different things. he speaks highly of you all the time. if you could just tell me to understand that help the american people understand it would appreciate it. >> thank you for your questions. i want to make something perfectly clear. i joined the board in july of 09. deasy mills preceded any knowledge or specific odds that i would have the situation. i would allow when i was in the deal merger and acquisition business, there is a lot of conversation back-and-forth when you are about to put money into an investment. so possibly that is the context, but that is just pure conjecture. i don't know.

i will say this, and i mean this as sincerely as i can. when i was first queried on the possibility of joining the board of was clear that i did not want to be associated with the venture, company as great as general motors is and as important as i think it is to this country's manufacturing and industrial base, if there was going to be government involvement. was the company going to be allowed to function as a business? and in my tenure both on the board for the first year from 09 to september of 2010 and then the subsequent year-and-a-half i will testify in front of the good lord that this administration has never had the presence in the border more any input on the operations of the business. u.s. come more specific question , but nhtsa and its involvement with us, what did

they know, when did they know what, i think the administrator and i have commented on that. if there is any question in anyone's mind that they gave us a free ride to live the last two months of negative publicity and the fact that i am sitting here is blueness, we will go along the future. >> i yield back. >> i think it's a lament. >> that gentleman from virginia is recognized. >> thank you. welcome. the chairman of the full committee indicated the nhtsa study was done roughly halfway through the number of sales that currently have occurred. that is to say, i think he said that there were above

8,000 volts on the road. this happened at around 4,000. is that right? >> sure. quite a few less than that because we saw 1500 plus in january alone. a ticket has been gaining momentum. what has deposited two or 3,000. now, of the 8,000 families or consumers : how many have blown up or have biased? >> none. >> i'm sorry. >> none. >> none. now, the only example of a safety concern with respect to that occurred in a laboratory? >> no. to be precise the first one occurred in the fields. a contractor, i guess a contractor, nhtsa, it was a test facility in wisconsin. we hit it with a severe side

impact, and did had alongside the road with three other vehicles to the weeks later a fire occurred, and it took us awhile not only to understand which vehicles started the fire and under what conditions it happened over the weekend and then we had to find the root cause, dissemble the battery, you some pictures of it. it was not all that easy to ascertain precisely what happened. subsequently tests were conducted to try to simulate that again because you could have a bad test. >> sure. >> we ran tests. we crested again. we could not replicate a fire with the same conditions. we did not the power do anything. >> could not do it. >> i was listening to the chairman of the full committee questioning you. in the process of asking a question he asserted some pacs, and i want to make sure that you either do or do not concur.

the special, in light of this test, you know and it is not applicable to be replicated, we need to give special instructions for people so that it does not explode and blow up, you know, if you are taken by tow truck or put in a storage facility or a jackyard were in a garage because there is reason to be concerned. i think the kernel of the issue is what do we do in a post-crash multi day, multi weak environment if we did not the power of the battery? the lesson learned is after a week to three weeks we could not simulate the real world the conditions that race. step two weeks, we had to pull the battery out, pier said, and essentially this will be a slight exaggeration, address the battery in coolants and then a week later it occurred.

and it was not an explosion. that has been a little bit of hyperbole, i think. there was a fire. it takes awhile. and then it does burn. when that occurred even in this simulated laboratory extreme non real world environment they initiated a formal investigation and we went to general quarters. >> and u.s. this deal are so concerned about this u.n. out about one yourself. >> i bought one of the karzai was returned. just a lesser. >> less that the president alluded to the lithium battery research and development of advanced lithium battery. if i recall at the time we adopted the recovery and tear in congress before we made the investment in advanced lithium battery research the u.s.

manufacturing share, something like 5%, and the projection, like my next year, with 40%. is that correct? >> enough familiar with those numbers. >> and a brief time may be venturing the advanced lithium batteries has expanded. >> that's correct. >> and briefly gm, before and after the bell of kiddy just refresh my memory in terms of your world market share. >> our world market share today at the end of 2011 stands right around 12%. roughly one that of every eight vehicles. through the end of 2011 it was the first time since 77 that we

gained market share two consecutive years zero. >> and the returns to number one. >> just tell us sir. >> thank you, chairman. >> i think the gentleman really quickly. just to be clear, the protocols prior to this investigation and assistance were commonly understood common-sense common knowledge to drain the gas tank and to disconnect the smaller battery. >> in a conventional car, yes, sir. >> okay. >> and so for an electric vehicle off the particles were the same tone disconnected twelvefold country in the gas tank, but do nothing with the larger lithium ion. >> it automatically disconnects from the circuitry. >> the protocols for the electric vehicle words if this same as for a non electric vehicle. disconnect both batteries, disconnected battery operations,

drain the gas tank. but that was common knowledge. >> yes. i want to make sure i am perfectly clear. >> okay. >> that was my next question. >> the protocols today are disconnected battery which entails both batteries, drain the gas tank, and in your word d. power the larger battery which means trade the : >> node. >> tell me. >> destroys the battery. >> what does that mean? >> think of connecting a giant lightbulb to the battery and just run it down. >> okay. okay. got it. >> sorry for the and articulation. >> thank you very much. welcome to the committee. i would find it very difficult to imagine an america that did not make its own cars. so i am pleased that the

president was able to report in his state of the union the progress that the car industry has achieved, and that would like to quote one line and put his whole statement in the record with unanimous consent. he said today's general motors is back on top as the world's number one auto maker. a report that i read last week said that there are over 700,000 jobs created by the auto industry now in america, and i would like to put the report and the record. >> yes. >> okay. >> i think that it is clear that this innovative car that gm is made has been caught up in the middle of politics. some members appear more interested in making wild allegations for political purposes than in recognizing their promising technological breakthrough. i would like to ask you, and give me a yes or no answer, is

it true that the volt was first shown at a general motors and electric vehicle concept at an international auto show in january of 2007 more than two years before the swearing-in of president obama and the company's filing for bankruptcy? >> yes, it was shown at the detroit auto show. >> and just curious, how did you get here? fly, take a train, drive, how did you get to this hearing? >> i drove a volt crises drove a volt. okay. and can you tell us how the volt is selling and what is the customer feedback? >> well, it is rated, for my customer satisfaction point of view is rated at the highest rate in the car as ever done, 92 percent of the people highly approve of the car that are. the highest recording ever. >> and will the technology developed for the volt be used

in other vehicles? >> there are derivatives that amount of our research and development and the project application of it volt another application cars that will benefit other vehicles and our fleet, yes. >> and how many miles does the typical voter -- volt owner drive? palin can you go? >> thirty-five, sometimes more. interestingly temperature dependent. really colder really hot. let's say in the typical day that is to bridge got 35 to 40 miles. will we do have is 80 percent of the american public derives less than 40 miles of less per day. the car was designed for that mass-market. i drove a test vehicle before launch. twenty-five to roughly 20500 miles of venue's 2 gallons of gas because of driving patterns were such that we did not drive 15 miles in one run.

>> so how often do you have to fill up? >> it depends on the usage pattern to be driving 35, 40 miles per day you may not have to fill up for months. we have instances and testimonies of some of the blocks of people drive, eight and 900 miles. your job in 100 miles per day, you will see a transition. it is really important to understand, this car is always driven by an electric motor. the gas engine is relatively small. there is no mechanical drag on the combustion engine. all a dozen stars the battery. >> and what are your future plans? >> well, i think this is been a good exercise for us because it's got everything out of the table and we have a fair hearing we will start exporting it with the enhancement. not only europe, but asia and china in particular.

>> everything you say is true, that you can get such mileage, you can drive for months if not driving that long, you cannot go up for two months or once every two months and you get such great mileage and safety and so forth, why aren't other manufacturers of cars copying and they volt? why aren't they building their own version of the volt? >> there has been interest by some of our competitors to license the technology. >> to you on the technology? is an american-owned? >> yes. >> it's a patent. >> yes. >> as a you could call lot to it. >> yes. so this fire scenario, it's seems to me that you have responded in a very unlike gm wait. no offense, not like a big

corporation, but responding very fast to provide a solution. has this fire happened in any other real life accident or other accidents? >> we have 25 million miles driven on the cars that are in the public domain. there has been no documented case of any fire of any nature on the volt? >> and i have heard that some of the consumer of the groups and what start groups have given new ratings. did you give us what those ratings are and the safety watch groups? can you elaborate? rated five stars, not only by nhtsa kamala by the international institute of highway safety for occupancy safety. so five stars in the arena. we want the consumer reports. the highest rating in the

customer satisfaction that they have ever seen. when we close to -- when we were first notified of a formal investigation we immediately offered loaner cars or the opportunity to sell the car back to the company. at the same time we embarked upon a very aggressive and active effort to come up with enhancements to the protection of the battery in which we have done and that will be implemented over the next sample of weeks. >> i would like to commend you and your company for this innovative addition to the world's and congratulate you on living in the right direction to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and eliminating, i would say, a harmful pollutants in the air. a wonderful technology.

the problem my support and the bailout of the other industry. it's an american success story, the american dream, and i'm very proud of you and your company. thank you for being here today. >> thank you. >> with the chairman deal just for a moment. i saw my friend put up a slide referring to the e-mails between gm and the department of treasury concluding that the u.s. government's was somehow running gm. now, i just want my friends and know that we really looked at this very deeply, and i wrote a letter dated june 209th 2011 which i don't know. i'm guessing you may not have had a chance to see it because what is effectively did is to debug any evidence of collusion ended june 209th 2011 letter to the chairman. i would specifically site pages

six and seven. when i wrote this letter i have not received any response to indicate that there was a dispute as to what was said. i just wanted to share that with my friend. with my chairman. we looked at this end we need to effect -- effectively did but it. >> i ask unanimous consent. >> i would just point out, the e-mails of the males. when the people and the administration telling people at the company how they should structure a press release and right things, i think that speaks for itself as well. ..

i think either of those two assertions might interesting to contrast my good friend. i think ever on the committee, every american is pleased by the success of general motors. but that doesn't dismiss the fact that even today, half of the board are approximately half of the board were selected by the administration to sit on the board, the taxpayers invest $50 million net company and there's all kinds of incentives,

tax breaks et cetera for people to purchase this project. those are the facts. >> agenda minutes correcting out that appeared >> he talked about the totality to situation. >> my friend is correct in asserting other thing was structured. i know some my friends are not. i want to say if you look at the e-mails, your government's role in characterizing what the government was doing i believe not trying to direct gm. so i want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to present that. thank you. >> on the subject if i could also enter into the record the committee on oversight for him on the administration to this issue. without objection so enter and i think -- >> i don't mean to have the last word, though he is the term the

government's investment. this is taxpayer money. we are not a monarchy that showers favors bond people. we take it out of hard-working taxpayers pockets that we decide to get there. somehow we have the ability to pick and choose winners and losers. now with their own money, that taxpayer money. we made a great decision for you, taxpayer. really? really? $50 billion. that is a lot of money in a time that her torontonians and it doesn't matter to them because it's not their money. we are entitled. the truth of the matter is they have been involved in this far deeper than ever should have been to begin with. distractors in the thunder run gm. he has a history of running great companies.

he does not need somebody who's never run a company to tell them how it's going to spend the money. i'm going to tell you. if you want to throw $7500 as a tax incentive in pennsylvania another 3500 talk about rate of sales. it's your product that has to turn to your dollars. this is taxpayer money that's being used. i'm not going to yield because i've got to tell you something. there's a a disconnect in the south of the real world works. general motors does not need the help of the taxpayers to subsidize their cars. there is $7500 on a cruise. you want to see that? you on a per thousand people back to work? you can do it in a lot of different ways. stop taking it out of my wallet. and i'm deeply offended by the attitude down here that somehow this merry-go-round is going to continue to spin and there's no

consequence. there are a lot of important things that happen, unintended consequences by people of never done it, don't have skin in the game and are spending taxpayer dollars. it's utterly ridiculous. this has nothing to do is general motors. this has to do with an administration that can't keep its fingers out of the pie. >> if i made in response just briefly -- i thought about the safety of the vote. it may have other dimensions. i want to tell mr. kelley who is my friend, i did not vote for the bailout of the banks. i didn't want the government to be involved in picking winners and losers. the american automotive industry with on the verge of collapse and i felt given the privacy of that american automotive industry to our strategic industrial basis including automated deal aerospace and shipping that the prudent thing to do would be to make an attempt to rescue it. sheehan's management has helped

to conclude it. but again, i don't see in my good friend and we have strong differences of opinion. i understand and respect that. but i just think that the evidence of collusion that is offered here hasn't been supported by the facts. and again, i respect you greatly. >> with that, want to thank