bottom line are not uniquely different. that you can increase top line, but if it doesn't flow to the bottom line it is of no value. and you can make cuts and never get to a profit. that it's a combination of the two. the post office has, at its current volume, billions of dollars of excess inefficiency that we all know can be cut. innovation, i think in the case of your product and others, innovation depends on efficient delivery. the more efficient it is, the more promising they will be for innovative products. including -- it amazes me that brown trucks go to any rural or suburban areas. i think they go there because they can't quite get as good a deal as they will be able to get from the post office if these innovations happen. so, ms. norton, i appreciate the extra time. there's nothing more important to me than to try to have all of you be part of it. and, mr. davis, i appreciate your showing the way.

my hope is that even if they don't take it from you, that they will, in fact, see the direction that you gave as having value in they will in fact see the direction is some derivative product. thank you, mr. chairman. >> we never message on the lady for the district of columbia. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i must say i welcome this hearing on innovation and the postal service and i particularly welcome private businesses who worked with the postal service. i have often wondered about the potential identity to keep the postal service in. and came to the federal government. whereas the essence of being a private business doesn't give you anything cu can go out and fill foyers of or rise as the

case may be. most of the downsizing of the postal service had been done by cats. i much prefer us the chairman indicated the innovation to be the rule to the feature the postal service. every time i see on television and innovative tool that the tow postal services using i say wow because i had become used to and yet i do see those and i'd like to ask about some of those. the new products in particular, since some of you have been involved with those products. one of the success tories have been the every door direct mail. i was interested that it

apparently is hoped the post office generate more than a billion dollars. mr. cochran, is that not correct? >> that is correct. >> apparently this product has been a great success for the business community. i like to know how the postal service understood that this was a product that would catch on with the business community, why the pass caught on with the business community and what they are doing to enhance a product that has had success. mr. cochran, are you the person who could best answer that? >> am. thank you for the opportunity to talk about a product we are pleased with. it is an innovative product created to really leverage to elegy in some ways.

we've done is facilitate the ability for a customer to go to her website and literally pick a neighborhood. if you're a dry cleaner or restaurant, you can pick a neighborhood in ross to want to see a piece of mail delivered to. you don't have to deliver to entire zip code. you can pick the neighborhood you know your customers live in. it's got not been to highlight the streets you want the mail to be created. there's a commercial version right there at the point of service terminal. drop a mail often we delivered the next they are two. >> i take it you have a competitive advantage over your competitors with this particular service because of your own infrastructure. you have any competition with the service? >> with mail going into the mailbox, no. others may be more sophisticated mailings that tape place and that was the initial concern of

business partners that the cd dm would force people to buy down from a more traditional peace in our findings is that opposite. it creates a non-ramp or someone begins with an edm product and morph themselves up and they start seeing the value of mailing a creative agency can start working with a commercial printer and expand where they send mail to. so it is like a first step of mail and a very easy way that is hoped miller's moving to a much broader mail stream. >> or haps also do the same mail based on what they learn by going online? >> i think the key issue is they can pick what they wanted to go to. it is a saturation tape mailing when they pick on a carrier route with 500 deliveries will receive. >> so it saves money as well?

>> absolutely. sometimes you get a mail piece or may dry cleaner three times over. this becomes a lot more targeted. neighborhood males at that rate to describe it. it really gets usrely gets focue area you try to reach. >> the post office has had fair success collaborating with others. mr. everett, logistics developed products. i regret that i did not hear the testimony as to your collaboration. >> acoma worked extensively with the postal service. >> did they reach out to you? >> i wasn't with logistics in the initial meetings were held, but my understanding was reignite you reached them in the project ideas they have as well. >> mr. weissberg, your company has successfully collaborated with the postal service i understand. >> yes, we have.

>> who reached out to? >> we reach out to the postal service initially. >> mr. cochran, do you find your pursued businesses like mr. weissberg's? >> it is very flattering and it's a recognition of the presents we have come a 153 million doors today. i was part of the early conversations and they did reach out and say we want to do something with returns. they shared their business model with us and we were thinking of some in the same vein, so i went to a pilot, created a product and then one for regular full-time product, which 10 years ago as an e-commerce is starting to take off in one of the bears with each of returns in the state is a market research in the thing holding people back. it was in everyone's best interest with the postal service

khmer retailers come until facilitate a more easy return. we're proud to partner and i think it's a great success story. >> i ask one more? >> sure, absolutely. >> your difficulties with the postal service. is it the case he went to ups instead? >> a couple we spent over two years really believe in the post office is the best solution. we still believe that the best solution. they offer services that nobody else offers ms a certain point been a fairly cell phone of business, you kind of put their weight behind the aeros do you believe in. after reaching with the post office we approach the psn said we know how many to put on a plane. we'll give you a great rate for it. they are naturally contractual rate, but they are talking about a dollar from the destination. second a service that wears.

>> mr. cochranarmitage a response? >> i would like to weigh in. thank you for the opportunity. the fact is we have different automation. 10,000 pieces of automation in our network. a very complex network as if it of may opening comments. we do delineate and differentiate letters from flat type mail, catalogs, magazines in particular and parcels. it is important echoing to the distinct strains they are supposed to so it's not creating problems on our machines. the boxes are inside an envelope doesn't necessarily make them flat. it's a parcel or not is the reason why the return down to now the flat rate because of the rigidity of the pieces to stay in the appropriate mail stream. now we would welcome customers shipping us packages. it's an innovative design. the whole concept that it's tamper-resistant i think is a nice value set for

pharmaceutical companies. we deliver well over hundreds of millions of pharmacy items on an annual basis. but the issue as it is a parcel. at the end of the dates got to be mailed as a parcel. >> may i speak? >> it's mrs. norton's time. >> i think this dialogue is informative. >> may offer battle to the testimony? >> my background is automation. or to founding partners came out of electric calm. the entire genet is around the impact was around initially their frustration with doing drugs by mail to me for one day said why don't we do a square of the industrial automation that columbia records, record of the month club cassette. they were handling this 25 years ago at 300 pieces per minute yet they couldn't automate. so we had a long-term personal

and professional relationship with those folks. so when we started this process and came up with this mailer, the first thing we did because all of us come from an industrial automation background. we know what none can table means. we know what machine above means. i built 100 distribution centers in my life. the first thing we did was purpose for her flats. rebrand mr. flats. we have video resubmitted with our application showing this running through disorders in fort worth before we ever submitted our package. we provided this with our submittal. it passes every mechanical test of a machine above flap. advanced this way. it does this access. it follows every mechanical test in the dml. it sorts on the equipment at 300 pieces per minute. we've offered to change the mail

piece at our expense. we want to partner with the post office. hello, we have volume. we can make money. please, work with us. i don't know what to do. >> thank you very much. >> we've gotten to everybody. i've a few more questions that will do a quick second on the question and give ms. norton's wartime after if she wants it. mr. williams, in some of the innovations you talked about -- you mentioned virtual p.o. box. can you tell me what a virtual p.o. box this? at first luscious sounds like what mr. davis is offering. >> well, perhaps they are related to one another. today the postal service is limited and the number of post office boxes that can offer users and a small box and rigid

and it's limited in the number of things you can put a mayor. the idea we examine for the virtual p.o. box would allow people -- we can talk about classes of customers, but allows the customer to open a box that has no dimensions and it could be delivered to an address and the name states that people apply for. there are a lot of foreign customers that would love to buy u.s. goods that they can't because they don't have a u.s. address. the virtual post office address would allow it to go there and not post office to combine with other things going to that country in the senate at a discounted rate. we think that would be good for commerce. it also provides for small businesses and small innovators, the ability to almost operate their business out of the virtual p.o. box. he would be temporarily stored.

they could be sent out as directed by business. >> you also talked about print at the destination mail in response to some earlier questions. i mean, didn't we try that with milligrams and how fedex try it with a fax type service? >> this is not something they strongly advocated. we have more followed its path. it remains alive. it strikes me as a good idea and there are takers for it. but this is also something i mentioned earlier in the meeting, taken a moment in which to me and exists in this environment is very, very difficult and i would say it hasn't come in a strong compelling way to hybrid mail. >> i want to go to mr. weisberg for a second. kind of a success story working

with the post office. the cps supportive when it all started out? >> when we initially started, it took process of years of speaking with the postal service by us and other companies that wanted to do postage to convince the postal service to approve it and allow it to exist. there were people within the postal service who were encouraging and directors who are more discouraging. >> giovanni suggestions for how we can change the process of getting the innovative products like stamps.com to be adopted by the post office? >> we do think that it would make sense to add some protections to companies that come with new innovations to the postal service, to make sure that the postal service doesn't unfairly launch its own projects or to what those companies do here be very much support the

concept of using public-private partnerships and having a private industry players be able to come up with the best solutions. >> the postal service is now kind of competing with you what they're quick to ship products. that has got to be a little bit awkward in that they are your regulator and your competitor. >> it's a very difficult position to be in when you invest a lot of time and effort into launching products regulated by the postal service. you have to provide the postal service detailed information about how your products were and they launch it directly on a product. >> let me get here to a couple more questions to go. with respect to outfox, mr. davis, one of the things

that a service like outfox has the potential to offer his targeted ads. i am an avid internet user and i will go shop for some drescher's online and i will hop every site i visit has an ad for drescher's. this is highly targeted advertising is valued by advertisers. the postal service talks about advertisers marketing their product delivery. when a service like outfox house more value to advertisers, and now, a random catalog is your best hope is something on the cover strikes somebody's interest in the few seconds between mailbox and recycle bin. >> absolutely. as i said earlier, intent spending come intent on brand affinity is a holy grail of all

advertising. so you can imagine a digital ad piece that is actually free to present, so it is free to show that on the digital device to an end-user. they can decide if they want to engage with that or not. we did some very interesting test with kind buyer, starbucks via packets, small sample size products where we present digitally and off for her. would you like to try this new flavor of kind bar? some of our tests we had as much as 50% engagement, which is astounding for any digital advertising piece. people would say yes, send this piece to me. i went to engage kind buyer and a way to track this new product and then we would deliver to their front door the next day. to give you an idea of how much that is worth three cpg, they average about $20 per siebel product given to a product.

right now there aren't targeted in front of a store, maybe on this side of the road. >> that advertising would be revenue to the postal service. >> is very model for some thing with a third party tested or is there some pain do you develop the technology to sell it to the postal service and they do it. was that kind of a feeling you got in your negotiations? >> right. well, it is hard to unpack. it is such a complicated web of interest in politics and mandate at the end of the day, there could be winners and winners. it does not have to be winners and losers. it is our hope that if the postal service could not create this time around were worked to

slow to do that, outside third party company could develop it, spend private dollars to develop it and be a third-party contractor. they have called her votes. we have a little time before we have to leave if ms. norton has some questions. >> i am interested in what keeps the postal service from developing new and innovative products. respond them off of course and act as a business. are there any other issues or impediments that stand in the way of the post office doing the usual work of seeking innovation, particularly given infrastructure. >> if i could real quickly, i

think the challenge part of it is the current motley operate on. it is restrictive. >> what about that love? >> it says that the products that were allowed for entering a bid as box around things we can do. so if we get approached by somebody with an innovative idea, some of these things are against the law. in some of them are not legal. we have very restricted privacy rules and we have a lot of data on what goes into the american household. for good reason nurse privacy statutes that exist. unlike a lot of other private-sector companies we are not allowed to data mine had information that is restriction on our ability to market.

>> they buy into this postal products when he admonished those, more daring to suggest that nonbanking products might he suitable. i disagree with the chairman. it seems to me we have information that we look historically for 60 years of the 20th century the postal service actually had a service used mostly by immigrants. it was savings accounts. there were limits on the amount of savings accounts. there are postal facilities. in fact, banks have pulled out of many neighborhoods because they do much more digital than

the postal service says. i don't see what's wrong with nonbanking service. this is what i meant when i open my last question thing a little bit private is like a little bit pregnant. you just can't do it in a market economy. so that means i mr. cochrane and mr. williams to elaborate on some non-postal service says that you think the postal service could enter and dry them truly compete with the private sector. >> actually, with regard to the financial services, you are correct, ma'am, that the postal service is in the banking business for a large number of years.

worldwide, and anywhere they provide financial services and provide about 14.5% of their income, which helps them continue to provide universal access and reduces the overhead. we provide financial services with money orders and other kinds of informal services in remote areas for the customers. this idea was to update the money order into the digital age. we don't think it is good for citizens or for e-commerce to be cut off from one another. you can't use money orders to engage in e-commerce. as a result, as many as 68 in adults are cut off from commerce and commerce is cut off from them. so it did look a what would happen if the u.s. postal service did i say used to be witnessed many other nations do

today. >> i would just add him on the financial sector, but the postal service is really in it. if you can't change in our business model. that is well documented as male declines. we shifted to do more and more parcel delivery. in a course of innovation, we have to look at ourselves in our network. we have ubiquitous retail network. how do we use that in many ways to help us generate topline revenue? the last mile or talked about a lot today, but there's more things we can deliver the think about the fact year 219,000 people people out there today in the streets of the united states, working hard and delivering product for mailers and shippers. and then there is a robust of processing centers and transportation that can be further leveraged and maybe the future grails, the one we talked a lot about today is the digital space. there'll be places where the postal service needs to step foot forward and have a strong

footprint in the digital space and pre-information i santan we talked about what we are doing with the government with the fcc asked to help authenticate. there's a lot of opportunities for the postal service to leverage the brand, trust, the security in this world class network that we have. they are focused to use the infrastructure to generate revenue and keep providing great service to the american people. >> i do think it is important to god that the law may be to restrict or you might be good for you are looking at the 2006 law. that law was put in there to be mean-spirited or to hurt anyone. it was put in there to make sure the postal service doesn't drive a small businessman or innovator out of business. the challenge today is enormous and it is from horizon to

horizon. the postal service doesn't need to go and where it's going to harm private enterprise. on the other hand, it does need to calm. >> can i say, mr. chairman, i would certainly agree, but i do not agree the postal service shouldn't harm competitors in the same business. i think that is the whole point of competition of the market economy. >> it is a topic for a future hearing on the subcommittee as to where we can grow and find the right balance. to increase revenue without using some of their advantages i guess to be the right word is the government entity to harm the private sector. we may do that in the future. i would like to thank our witnesses for being here. we were able to cover a very

complex topic in a timely manner. i think we all have food for thought as to how we can move forward and was modernizing and bringing it to elegies to the postal service that are good for america. thank you all very much for your time and we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations] >> louisiana governor bobby jindal spoke of this year's commencement address at liberty university. you can see that tonight on c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> are those of you that follow pop culture, even if taken out of the recent flap between the robertson family and to dynasty

in any network that produces and broadcasts it to dynasty show. you may have noticed that one of the first and loudest and most aggressive defenders of the robertson family was the governor of louisiana. [applause] now, you may think i was defending the robertson simply because i'm the governor of their home state, the great state of louisiana. beneath that i defended him because my boots are huge fans of the show. he would have been wrong about that. i defended them because they have every right to speak their minds. however indelibly they choose to do so. >> you can see by the candles commence an address tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on our companion network, c-span.

>> when i visited a little time actually and i would visit montgomery and are busy running him. i saw signs that said white men, colored man, white women, colored women, white waiting, colored waiting. i asked my mother, my father, grandparents, great grandparents why and they would say that the way it is. don't get in the way. don't get in trouble. one day in 1955, 50 years old in the 10th grade i heard about rosa parks. i heard the words of martin luther king jr. on the radio. the words of dr. king, the action of rosa parks inspired me to find a way to get in the way. some of my brothers and sisters and cousins went down to the little town of troy in 1956 to

the public library, trying to check out books, trying to get library cards. and we were told by the librarian at the library is for white only and not for colors. i never went back to the public county library until july 5, 1994 book signing of my book, walking with the wind in hundreds of blacks and white citizens showed up. have a wonderful reception. the ending of the book signing at the end of the reception they gave me a library card. that may not sound that important, but when people tommy nothing has changed in mississippi, change in americans , i say, and walk in my shoes.

>> but if we don't step up the enforcement side, the enforcement side rings the media attention. so if we are going to say the only thing we can rely on to make these universities and colleges do what they should be doing is for them to get a bad story. first of all, that is a lot of the times. you know, back to me would be a depressing conclusion. so we have got to figure out some way to up the ante that is sure to waiting for another tragedy to hit the front pages. >> i would almost say less a dollar amount, more folks with the department of ed.

again, the changes i've seen institutions start to make her when they are immediately under investigations. we don't know if the finest 35,000 are upwards of a million. so i would almost rather see that in a snit in a bigger key. >> in all fairness, the fines will be paying for this. we have an issue with much in our government. we can't just endlessly hand out institutions that have done wrong. they can fund their enforcement. every survivor will back out. >> is we cannot c-span, senator claire mccaskill in the first of several discussion.

>> when you write, you can't write mechanically and why. in other words, you shouldn't think about that issue at all when you sit down to write. what you should do when you sit down to write is to write what you find interesting and to follow your curiosity. so when that was writing and point, for instance, i can honestly say that i never for a moment try to imagine how well that book would sell. i just wanted to write something

cool. i was interested in this. i wanted to write some in that my friends would read, you know, that my mother would like. >> the federal protective service is responsible for security and federal buildings. through this week the house transportation and infrastructure subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the law-enforcement agency. we stare with questions from pennsylvania congressman, lou barletta, who chaired the hearing. >> protecting federal buildings in the 1.4 million workers and visitors to those facilities. the public will in fact crafted by this committee gave fps law enforcement authorities for that very purpose, to protect

buildings and the people in them. after moving from gsa to dhs into the three, there has been gao report after report detailing serious security deficiencies of facilities. given the importance of this mission, one would expect the department of homeland security to make federal building security a top priority. get these problems continue. just recently we received a copy about me first memo from the dhs security from chief security officer. the remote the protection service from its lead role of providing security headquarters on nebraska avenue. my first question, mr. patterson , why was the federal protection service moved its elite security provider at the dhs had quarters and does

this mean that dhs has lost confidence in fps? >> to answer your question, to my knowledge this is not an issue of performance. i do not believe we have lost confidence in the service. i believe this is an issue of efficient the of the secretary's vision and in effect, fps will continue to provide security for a long first minute. we will continue to do assessment of a hopper of us present at the facility. so this is about the overall contract management and loosing confidence in our ability to provide security for law enforcement support. fps supports 2100 dhs facilities across the nation to include ice headquarters, fema headquarters,

cbp headquarters, secret service headquarters, tsa and the u.s. coast guard headquarters. we do a very good job fair. we have a robust presence there and i'm sure we will continue to provide the same level of support. bottom line is we are proactive partners with the opposite security coming shortly provide a safe and secure environment. >> the problems at the department of security headquarters because the chief security officer to take this action and are there similar problems at the other 9600 federal buildings sps provide security for? >> and finally, could you explain why fps security is inadequate for dhs, but did not for the other agencies quick >> is to miss her. i nothing this is an indictment of fps security. this is a matter of efficient the and managing contract. we are going to continue to

provide security. that is not the issue. this is a the opposite security i believe looking to fulfill the secretary's vision of how they will streamline a better conduct business at the neck. >> today, who is in charge of security at the dhs headquarters and if there were an active shooter incident right now, who would be the incident commander on scene and was the first responders know who was in charge? what will be the role of fps in that situation? >> as connoisseur, federal protective service cherri partnership. so they could be either the opposite security or could be the federal protective service. just depends who is first unseen. that is who is going to assam situation and it will evolve from there. we will look at the metropolitan police department and support to help us in resolving the

situation. >> mr. goldstein from what percentage of security guards has an active shooter training? what percentage has security trainer screen and a security guards not a proper training, how would you expect and to keep weapons and bombs out of the federal building or respond to an active shooter? >> mr. chairman, our study was not generalizable, so i can't say for sure how many do have that kind of screening today. however, what we found in looking and talking to several different companies around the company was there are still pockets of guards that you not. several years ago when we did this work, we found 1500 cards in several regions they did not have screener training. for the companies in the sacramento is still several hundred that do not and they would expect there would be others, although as i say this not generalizable. however, because of this problem persisting and the lack of training that is required being

actually provided, we do have concerns that remained in that remained for a number of years as you know about the ability and possibility of bombs and other kinds of weapons getting into federal facilities because there is no assurance the person standing guard and responsible for putting things with the magnetometer and extra machine has the training to prevent something from coming through that shouldn't come through. >> thank you or the chair recognizes ranking member carson for questions. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. director patterson, how often does the fps find and penalize car companies for price it should not have the proper certification or training? >> i don't have that to stick revenue available for you, sir. i had to get that to you. go to present what they're contracting office. >> yes, sir. based on the status quo, how

would you expect guards to react to a shooting at a gsa patrol facility quick >> yes, sir. we are working aggressively with the national service ration of security companies at masco and given the current laws if you love how we can work with the security guard companies to respond. currently, we have just produced some guidance to provide each one of the security guard two hours of active shooter training. but what really does rss makes them aware of what to shooter event is. that individual will have a the discretion given the circus and at that point to actively pursue depending upon again what the circumstances are because each one of these companies is still under the oversight of their stay up all.

so they're kind of caught between a rock and a hard place right now. goodbye to train them to a standard where we can get them active shooter training and move them to a position where there is no question. right now because we don't have that authority, it creates a little bit of a dilemma. >> thank you coming director. mr. goldstein, in your testimony discussed the fact they are using a vulnerability assessment tool that does not take into account the consequences of a desirable attack or an event. what is the impact of assessing the consequences of a terrorist attack or serious karmic duty out of the federal facility quite >> the standard requires agencies look at the threat and vulnerability and consequence and they look at a list of the number of undesirable events from each of those undesirable events, they are required to determine whether there's a

threat of ability and consequent component of all of those events. in our work, we have found examination of consequence is is important because it helps to determine how best to protect the facility. because we're talking about the mid-resources in trying to protect, in this case, some 9600 facilities. but because of the way in which the federal government and fps actually look at each building, it is kind of a cookie-cutter approach and i said this a number of times here and elsewhere before this committee, there is no way to fps is able to examine threats of vulnerability and consequences across the portfolio to target resources across facilities. alex had a stovepipe kind of way and therefore becomes quite difficult to better provide resources to which are as we all know quite limited to fps.

>> mr. goldstein, what is the value of facility security assessment currently entered these assessments thorough enough to properly assess the threat to federal employees and how could current assessment even be improved for that matter? >> it is our understanding that since myst has been in place, but 18 or so, that fps is once again begun to do assessment that they've done around 1200 based on the information we have. but they had a backlog when they started about 5000. so that his celebrity to the purple number that hasn't been done from the past. level three a model for expected to be done roughly every three

in being able to allow them to allow assessments in the future.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. >> we now recognize mr. crawford for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. patterson, i think the chairman addressed this earlier, this memo regarding the nebraska avenue complex. if i understand correctly, what you said is essentially a command-and-control issue. it wasn't necessarily anything otherwise. is that after a quick >> yes, sir, to my knowledge. >> i'm curious on a facility without level security, and concerned about about proliferation of ieds been a target. can you describe what is -- what is the protocol, response protocol in the event of an ied detection or large-scale ied attack? >> well, first of all, folks who are visitors coming have to go through screening.

if at that point there is a detection we believe there is mixed posted device, the area is cleared. we will then call the metropolitan police department who will bring in their explosives team to assess whether or not it is truly an explosive device. it is an explosive device, then the emergency evacuation plan put into place. >> okay, i'm earned and i've had talks with other metro bomb squads in some of the federal agencies that are also equipped or staffed with bomb types. in the event of large scale, do you have anything upon relying on metro bomb squad or are there some other federal agencies that night was on this tobacco? >> yes, sir. we complete the fbi will respond. we are probably going to have

park services respond. this is going to be a significant response. the challenges we talk about an explosive device, or to at least limit the scope of the response until we decide the magnitude of the threat. >> does fps have any capacity, any technical capacity to deal with an ied? that is to say other bomb techs? >> now, but we do have explosive ordnance dogs that were used. that is our first line of defense. if we suspect there is an issue, we will bring in the canine to give us an alert. they begin to evacuate that area anaconda much about police department. we have the capability to further explore what the issue is. >> so outside of d.c., i would assume there is a similar protocol with the capacity to

respond. >> absolutely. if and fps targets and available, we have relationships with local encores that where we can leverage assets as well. if in fact we get a hit, the city of chicago recalled the city of chicago. a smaller city, whatever arrangements have been made for a response. >> do you have any relationships with dod assets? wedding getting wackier is, for example come in the united states army has the primary responsibility of providing support to law enforcement at every level within the cut and the united states. you have those arrangements in place for the dod assets? >> we have a relationship to where we can call them if we need them. >> appreciate that. one other thing you said you had detection dogs. that means you have handlers that have been trained?

>> yes, sir. we have 74, 75 canines with their handlers across the united states and we have one at the nebraska avenue complex for about 18 hours in the day. >> mr. goldstein, what percentage of federal buildings complete security risk assessments? >> it is not possible to say at this point in time. as i mentioned there's a considerable backlog at this point of past-due assessment plus the work we've done in the past show because there are a number of them that have no date in the system at all, we cannot determine when the last one is done. they reduce the backlog and to hopefully move forward with new ones so they can come up today. but they are not at the place today. >> well, that is kind of disturbing. so why the backlog? >> backlog occurred over a

period of time for a couple reasons. one, the old system that was being used called the ramp, its functionality was not deficient and they pulled the plug on the program. and so then i backlog, you know, began to grow. additionally, i think over time as the federal protective service change the nature of its workforce from a police officer forced to an integrated 47 spec there's that had a lot of different duties that this particular responsibility for doing the assessment which fell on them and many were not trained for took up an increasing amount of time, including managing contract cards and other things. and so, they fell behind quite frankly. they make is this not part of an annual review? you to be something done annually to make sure the assessment is that to date all the time. >> it should be done on a level

three and level for building every three years. as i mentioned, it is not occurring at this point in time. >> my time is expired. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. the chair recognizes mr. norton for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate this hearing. their chronic problems that fps and i would like to look at the difference between fps officers in a contract cards do we understand who is guarding the buildings. on page two of your testimony, you describe the law enforcement and law authority of ps officers , specific police powers, including enforcing federal laws and regulations carrying firearms, and better. then of course on page five of your testimony, you distinguish these officers from the contract

guards. this is important to just lay right here on the record in your testimony. the ps those rely on private laws such as citizen arrest was. so, that means they can do no more than i can do in a federal building. i mean, is not technically correct? >> yes, ma'am. they are governed by the state ties to the extent of their authority. >> were the nebraska avenue contract cards replaced by federal protect its service officers? no, ma'am. they were not. >> what is that nebraska avenue now? >> contract protected security officers. >> so what is the difference? what was the change?

i'm sorry -- >> was the change in nebraska avenue? >> to changes in the oversight of the contract. fps is oversight in the contract. we had core responsibilities. contract office of representative responsibilities. the day-to-day oversight of the contract. how the contract is executed. >> so fps is supervising in oversight over these cards at the department of homeland security? >> we were. that particular responsibility has now moved to the office of security. >> and that is unique. only at the department of homeland security to set arrangement -- >> only at the nebraska avenue complex. we still retain the responsibility that hundreds of dhs facilities around the country. >> i want to ask you to tell us. i think we addressed the

department, but it is pretty apparent why they felt they had to be made more secure and they went to professional security authorities. now, when fps guards who are about the rest of the buildings in the federal employees and visitors, if someone comes into one of those facilities and has a gun, with or without a god and decides not to go through the magnetometer, can a contract guard pursue that person? >> yes, ma'am. they can be tamed. at that point they call the fps make a center who would then dispatch either in fps inspect her or local authorities. >> i ask that because there have been in since his reported were contract cards stood right now when someone had a gun, but when there was a disturbing santa could not leave their posts.

>> every day, ma'am, we have contract cards were engaged in responding to disturbing is, especially social security offices. we have literally hundreds of happen every year. >> the contract guard is not another post he can go anywhere in the facility where there may be a disturbing he can pursue someone with a gun, even though he does not have a gun. >> i'm not sure he understand that the question is. >> someone comes through and remember what you are therefore is for surprises. not for the average person coming through. someone comes through with a god. i'm trying to find out whether the contract guard who has no content or see a person or what he must do. >> yes, ma'am. contract cards are armed. >> all of them armed? >> yes, ma'am.

>> is very central curriculum for how they are trained? >> yes, ma'am. >> who provides the curriculum? >> you have requirements for the training and we are currently development of a national program for training that we work to an employee. >> and sorry. i yield back for the moment. >> thank you. we now begin our second round of questioning. i will look with questions of mr. patterson. clearly, fps does not have enough federal law enforcement not to to respond to all federal buildings in a timely manner. you have to rely on contract cards is your first line of defense yet united in your your testimony the authority of contract first use deadly force comes from state and local laws in most cases do not have the authority to first two subjects. in order to address the threat

posed by active shooters, would it be helpful for fps to have the authority to delegate some federal law person authorities to contract cards into other agencies had disability? and how does the work of most cases? >> yes, sir. if you look at tsa, that is a federalized force. if you look at the u.s. marshals service, they have the authority to deputized which gives them extensive power to direct their workforce in just about any direction that they want. ..

to see if they could help a response and what we found was we would have had to to go through the state of new york approval process which took quite a bit of time where we had the authority to just more or less empower them at the federal level to go in to do that than

we could've done this more quickly in response. so it would help improve, we give help improve the pso training training because now we could directly provide focus trading on the areas that we want them to respond in an order also help with the fps readiness so yes sir anything of that nature would be of help. >> somewhere in areas where sbs does not have many law enforcement personnel sts rear relies on state and local local law enforcement in an event of an emergency. to the state and local personnel have all of the authority authorities and tools that they need to respond to an incident at a federal facility and du have agreements in place with the relevant state and local authorities to ensure that they respond accordingly? >> from time to time sir we do have a problem. if we are responding and there's an impromptu demonstration especially in some of our smaller cities and towns if

there is an impromptu demonstration or a national security event that may take place we may ask the local law enforcement folks to assist us. in some instances their response is you know, we can't respond. we would love to respond you but we don't want to be held liable for anything. this is a federal event and we don't have that authority. so if we were able to provide that authority and say listen you are now functioning or acting on behalf of the federal government that would clearly give them some relief if you will on their willingness to help us. steve there have been some concerns about fps staffing levels for some time. in fact language carried in a preparations bills have required a minimum staffing level. you only have 1300 employees but we understand that up to 40 of those employees may have been reassigned to functions outside of fps. is that correct and how many fps

employees have been assigned outside of fps and white? >> yes sir. well when we left i soon came to the end ppd relax the infrastructure for things like human resources and logistics and those things so clearly we had to come up with some staffing levels for that. that's what we have contributed. that's the benefit that we derived when we contributed these assets to end ppd as they help us in creating our infrastructure if you will. >> mr. goldstein given the number of outstanding work items at fps can fps afford to assign its employees to other parts of the department? >> it's probably not a question i can direct lancer because we haven't looked at where they are signed and what the rationale of those assignments are but it's clear that fps still struggles

with trying to get the basic job done that we have talked about here this morning in terms of risk assessments and contract guard oversight of the things you have brought up sir so i do think that's something you need to look at routinely. >> the chair now recognizes ranking member carson. >> thank you. mr. goldstein are you aware of any of the shelf technology that would effectively allow the fps to digitize their oversight of contract guards and training and you believe this technology would allow fps to improve their oversight clinics be we haven't look specifically at it but in the course of our work have been told by many people that there is off the shelf products that can readily do this job and fps does not have to reinvent the wheel. >> director patterson you no sir

federal law requires fps to have just over a thousand law enforcement officers. how many law enforcement officers does fps actually need to meet its mission and has fps prepared a report that indicates that based on activity-based cost model for human capital that fps need significantly more one-person officers and what might that number be in general? >> yes sir we have looked at data and given the circumstances of today limited the assessment it's about 1300 law enforcement that would give us the proper leveling if you will for the commitment that we have today but is that commitment grows absolutely that figure will change. see thank you. thank you mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes ms. norton. >> thank you mr. chairman. how many fps officers are there and how many contract awards are there?

>> yes maam. today we have 1000 sworn law enforcement fps officers and the contract guard force fluctuates depending on the requirements. today they are about 13,000. >> how budget cuts or the sequester had any effect upon contract guards or fps officers? have there have been a reduction in personnel for example in the last two years? >> no maam. actually there's not been a reduction of the fps staff but there was sequestration did have an impact on the contract guard force and that when buildings close there was no requirement for contract guards. as such we did not have it. >> but most buildings did close. >> there were many buildings that did close. >> let me ask you this. were fps officers sequestered clerics were fps officers put on

for low? >> no maam. no fps personnel were put on furlough. >> and contract guards were affected when buildings close would otherwise have buildings close but otherwise they run to the? >> yes maam. c. i would like to ask you mr. goldstein about the supervision at the committees. he spoke about a cookie-cutter approach no cross-agency are crosscutting agency approach to security but agency by agency security. these agencies each have committees. now these committees of course consist of personnel who are no more than the people who work in the building and none of them have any security background training or knowledge. is that not the case? >> yes maam, that's correct.

>> they have some significant responsibility for security. can you describe the role of these laypeople and security? >> yes maam. we have done some work that's a couple years old now but it takes a look at the facility security committees and it explains the individuals who make up those committees as you rightly said tend to be the tenets of the building and the tenant has the largest footprint in the building typically chairs that committee. i have gone to in my staff is gone to a number of facility security committee meetings over the years and they do tend to be made up of lay people. they tends to be for instance perhaps the administrative assistant or office manager or a specific agency. people like that. it tends to be frankly a delegated job that many people don't really want.

>> so what is it that they have to do with security? >> they are responsible for taking the information provided them by the federal protective service in making decisions about what kinds of common measures they are going to put in place and then going back to their home agencies to get the necessary funds for doing those. as you know it's a process that could take a number of years. >> and of course through what expertise can they recommend changes in security and to get the funds for? >> they rely on the expertise generally provided by the fps as well as they may call on their own security, people from their agencies or departments to assist them but the problem is as we described it is you have the security of federal buildings essentially being

decided by a lot of laypeople over very long period of time. measures need to be put in place fairly rapidly. >> mr. chairman i think one of the most -- one that i believe the security committees or agency committees have our central points of vulnerability. obviously when you're talking to somebody who says he represents the head of the agency and he says for example i will take the department of transportation. i know this only by chance. the department of transportation is close to this very capital. it could go to the department of transportation. you have to get someone in the department of transportation to come down. even if you have a badge from

united states congress. if you are a member you can't get into that public building at all. of course if you are a member of the public you can come into the capital. you can use our cafeteria. beautiful new building with a new cafeteria. we haven't they got away for the public paying for that building to be able to command or if they have a kid to use the lavatory. you can't get into that building and that has everything to do with these agency committees. do you believe these committees are appropriate as the decision-makers on how that security is needed for a specific building so you can have vast differences between the capital in and the department of transportation for example? >> the security committee recently put out standards which is going to help to hopefully better professionalize these committees that we have long had concerns that this kind of a call at a three-legged stool.

gsa has some responsibility fbs has some responsibility and individual security committees have responsibility. that may not be appropriate today as a way to direct and oversee security of federal property. >> this as i think an important issue for this agency. nobody's in charge. if possible we should put people in charge and i submit these committees of lay people who are really in charge of security and buildings. not the fps and not the contract guards. thank you very much. >> thank you. the chair now recognizes the former chair of the transportation committee mr. mica. >> thank you mr. bartlett and thank you for holding this important hearing and following up looking at the federal protective services making certain that our federal and state facilities are secure. an important responsibility. a couple of questions. first of all, mr. patterson all

the threats still remain and probably one of the most devastating attacks, well for most devastating attacks i can recall was the bombing in oklahoma. i think more than likely that was a domestic terrorist act but international terrorist act received the use of bombs, the boston bombing. we are probably overdue for another hit as you can get a lot of explosives and creative explosive devices. fairly easily have as we have seen. how often are you briefed on intelligence and who briefs you? can you tell the committee who is -- who you are getting

intelligence information from and how often are you meeting with those folks? >> yes orr i can. within the federal protective service we are really beginning to build a very structured intelligence apparatus, intelligence gathering apparatus. >> again their agencies to do that. >> i'm just saying how we collect it. what i'm saying is what we do is we have our folks assigned to the joint terrorism task force with the fbi. >> so you are getting most of your intelligence on the joint task force at the fbi. >> no sir. we are getting it from a friday of resources. >> tell me who. >> i'll start at the lower level at the fusion centers from the state fusion centers. >> from the state's? how often do you meet with them? >> our folks we meet with them every day.

federal from the fbi and from the defense department, all of the federal and the intelligence analysis centers. >> how often do they meet? >> we talked with them every day. >> everyday? >> every day yes orr. >> the bulk of your people are contract people, 15,000. how is that information delegated? you don't don't get too everyone of the 15,000 that someone in the chain has to be made aware that a certain threat or a risk is occurring and make people aware of what we are looking for >> yes sir. immediately want to receive a threat that information is packaged in a way that we can communicate out because quite often depending upon what the thread is it might be classified and if it's classified we have to figure out how to get it down to the lowest level. >> and you have a thousand

lao's. >> yes orr. >> are they at each location and? is there someone at each each location and? >> no sir. >> that they're someone who can get the information. >> we electronically get those to our folks. >> how often are some kind of warnings put out? daily weekly sporadically. >> depends. >> it would be good if you could give us a chain of command who you meet meet with and when does for the record. i would like to see this part of the record if you could end how you meet with them because they think most of what has happened is we still have -- we are still not able to connect the dots. we didn't connect the dots with boston in late haven't connected the dots at all and it's usually local law enforcement and others who are at the final scene but

again the deficit in intelligence information is what is going to do a send. that's what i want to know further history of the committee. i see a mass of dogs. how many dogs? >> and think it's about 74 today. >> i thought you had thousands. is that contract dogs? >> no sir. >> i don't see a lot of explosive detection devices in these buildings. i see the metal detectors which are useless. the biggest threats are in our closest but i don't see a lot of them. do you have a lot of them out there? be not explosive detection that fight -- devices. >> i think you are missing the boat there and that is where i think our threat is. finally you have a thousand lao's.

did they participate in live fire testing and training for xps orr. >> do you use simulation? >> we don't use simulation. >> our report back and i want to know why you are not using simulation. it's more cost-effective. you can train them to the highest levels possible. we use it for our military. many of you guys are in combat. i haven't seen a lot of firing of weapons on the scene. our military are on the scene and combat and a good portion of their training now comes from simulation. you are behind the times. i want to report back to the committee and to me on your proposal to use simulation for training those lao's and start using all the expense costly live fire ammunition. >> can i clarify sir matt? are we talking about submunitions? i just want to make sure.

>> using simulation training, weapons training simulation training the whole thing. >> we do have weapons training where we do simulating training that we don't use simulations. simulations is where we take where the officer will have devices that are strapped to him and when another officer files a weapon -- fires a weapon it will tell whether there's a hit or not. we do assimilate training. >> want to see exactly what you have. a full report and i want to see what your new proposal is and we can introduce you to people in simulation training that is used for military for our readiness. very cost-effective and saves a lot of those expensive bullets. i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you. the chair now recognizes mr.. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. patterson we have obviously had a lot of discussion here on human resources and management by the fps but you guys are also

responsible for managing related equipment such as security. is that correct? vs orr. speedway understand it is there indications that some cameras may not be working and there's also no mechanism to track and maintain these cameras. is that correct too? db2 track and maintain cameras. we develop a more robust system to do that more effectively but we every time regarding conduct a facility security assessment we are tracking that. when our inspectors go out and visit their facilities they are also looking and inspecting cameras. >> what time f. -- type of expense does fps require by these cameras? the installation and -- >> those are all paid for by the fsc. the building, the folks who

occupied the facility. >> so what percentage of the cameras do you guys go out and check? i say this because i have several companies on my phone right now. i haven't asked where i can hit and check in on other companies because because the security cameras we have around there. it's an unbelievable asset when utilized correctly. when utilized correctly but it's also a huge personal expense that her company has had to take on. but the cameras are worthless if they are not being tracked, if they are not being watched and the percentage of those is 10%. it's not 5% but is 100% of them. they are all installed for a purpose to what percentage has fps actually looked at? >> when you say? >> when you are looking at them and tracking them and maintaining them and making sure they are working what percentage

of that? are you saying when he just visit the facility? the no sir. where about the business of insuring all the cameras were, and they don't work we move forward to work with the security facilities security committee to either fix the cameras or replace the cameras. >> i guess what i'm trying to get to is are you actively seeking these? ps. we want to ensure that the cameras are working. you're exactly right. the camera is ineffective or security is less effective if the cameras aren't operating. >> mr. goldstein was about with gal and the cameras that you guys have? >> we have taken a look at some of the cameras over time that fps has. we have done work in which we have shown a number of facilities have not had adequate cameras and fps was unable to

determine when crimes had been committed and who committed those crimes perhaps when things were taken out of the building. we also know of a number of instances where other tenants particularly the coup courts have become quite frustrated with the types of service because they did not feel that the maintenance of the cameras was sufficient and they took over those responsibilities and paid for them themselves. i continue to hear anecdotally we have not done a compromise of report so it's not generalize but what we do here are anecdotes all the time about frustrations with keeping these cameras working and modernized. >> you are saying the same thing that this committee has heard and mr. patterson that was what i was trying to get out, the frustration behind it. we have the technology that's out there and is not being utilized. the tenants in these buildings, the ones that are depending on these cameras, that is supposed

to have a layer of security. instead it's becoming a layer of frustration. there is a better way to do things. i would be curious if you guys could or if you would take a look at it. see if there is a better practice. it's the way that we are doing it just spot checking it and just going for it obviously you heard from mr. goldstein and the committee has heard the same things. there's a layer of frustration that's taking place. >> i recognize there is a layer of frustration. i spend quite a bit of time on the road talking to the clerks of court's to the irs and social security. >> mr. patterson the difference between talking and doing is two different things. there a lot of people up there that give lipservice. >> i am not giving lip service. i am ensuring that when folks are not happy with our service that we are rendering service

like we are supposed to. >> i hope that maybe the next time we visit we can see a plan that is laid out because i would like to thank that we could improve on this. thank you sir. >> mr. chairman i appreciate you giving me the extra time. >> thank you. one final round of questions. mr. patterson law enforcement authorities from the fps lies in the public buildings. it's our understanding that this authority has been re-delegate it to other entities such as the chief security office, fema, i smack federal law enforcement training center. why is this law enforcement authority being delegated across dhs and isn't this fps's responsibility? didn't this delegation of authority create the unity of command problem at the headquarters that dhs is the

reason for removing fps as the security lead at the headquarters? the sir i don't have an answer for you. i don't know why the different agencies are different elements have been granted that authority. i don't have an answer. >> this will conclude our first panel. i would like to thank you for your testimony today and for your time and cooperation. thank you. we will now call on our second panel. [inaudible conversations]

our second panel that mr. david albright person that aig local 918 amster stevens amitay executive director and general counsel national association of security companies. i asking them as content that are witnesses and to be included in the record. without objection so ordered. censuring testimony has been made a part of the records the subcommittee of a request that your oral testimony to five minutes. you may proceed. >> thank you. chairman barletta ranking member and members of the committee my name is david wright back in the right back in the impression that aig local mind when it which represents sbs employees nationwide. i'm also an inspector with the federal protective service since 1986. federal employees of facilities are vulnerable to attack from criminal and terrorist threats. are they as secure as they should be?

they are not. is that security is effective as his congressional office building? definitely not. solutions include accountability for fps leadership pushing staff to the field effective on-site security effective tools for risk assessment and recruiting. regarding the culture of accountability in 2010 and 2013 gal reported problems with guards training and certification requirements. there is no excuse for these failures. three years later they should've been fixed and the responsible managers should have been held accountable. however often lost in a broadbrush of gal reports these are not organizationwide failures. in several of the 11 fps regions almost everything seems to go well. the guards receive fps training. untrained guards are not used for screening. firearms qualifications are monitored and guards are trained on the active shooter scenarios. in these regions tenants trussed

fps to deliver. for these fps field employees simply refuse to fail. fes appeared to treat these failures is a structural issue resolved -- to be solved by reorganization. this resulted in an unclear direction i'll appear next to layer of management who either ignored or missed problems. dhs by your oversight should remove the extra layer and fire or demote managers who fail to accomplish critical tasks or uphold the fps code of conduct. building security is not a tivo game to build self-esteem. serious business with serious consequences. ..

>> and mandate the use of gsa potentially. regarding tools for risk assessment, we use mist. it was found not to be compliant with the government wide standards but there are available tools that do. the remedy is to mandate they

acquire and field a compliant risk tool. regarding retention and recruiting, when applicants look one question is are we covered by law enforcement requirement and when told no the best and brightest start looking else where. at the memorial where names of officers died are inscribed are recognized and among them are six who died in the line of duty. should any other officer die in the line of duty their name is added to the list. congress should recognize the service of law enforcement by allowing us to retire like one.

thank you for hearing us. we await your action on these matters. >> thank you for your testimony. >> chairman and ranking member, i am the chairman for the national security association. we employ more than 300,000 security officers across the nation. since its founding in 1982, we are worked legislator and officials at every level in the government to put in place higher requirements for private companies and security officers. we provide security officers to numerous agencies including the majority of the protective service officers or psos. not counting the millary

services there are 35,000 contract security officers across the federal government and the use of this is an effective measure for safe guarding federal facilities, employees and visitors. the gao has identified challenges that we face in the mission to keep federal places safe. issues related to the pso program. we have been working with congress, gao and gsa to address the issues. the pace of progress might not be as fast as we would like, progress is being made. since the appointment of director patterson the degree of talk has been unparallel. there is no doubt the director and others are committed to improving the pso program. fps is working on a variety of initiatives that will improve

the program. to address the efficiency to give the training to fpos, it launched a pilot program that is training and certifying security contractor instructors to provide the training. this training has been revamped and expanded by fps also. in the area of active shooter training, nasco met to discuss the development of new active shooter training for pso's. an effort that is definitely on the fast track at fps. and we are looking at what other agencies are doing with their active shooting training for contract security officers that they utilize. we are working with fps on revising and standardizing training plans and recommendations of having all training instructors certified.

other program areas, fps came out with a much-needed revision of the manual. it is called the smart book and governs pso's on how to act. not following the book is a violation. there is a new chapter on shooter response, better language authority, and by design the format allows for making revisions as-needed. we are taking a review of post orders and seeking ways to improve training and data. for the latter effort, we recommend fps explore technology and work closely are security contractors who have to provide and up load the data. a pso's authority to act is challenged and the liability to acting in preventing or

responding to a situation such as an active shooter. they should authorize pso's to make arrest on such property. and there are other elements of the federal security and risk assessment and security process not related to pso's that need to be addressed. take for example, the decision to implement security measurements for a building. fps is responsible for conducting the security assessment and recommend recommendations but implementing them is up to the agencies. jo has found quote agency representatives generally do not have security knowledge or experience but are expected to make security decisions for their respective agencies.

and with a tighten budget putting pressure on agencies to accept more risk, it calls into question whether they are making informed risk-based decision. it should not be rejected because of lack of understanding them or funding. they allowed dhs to challenge to decision not to implement closures. in closing, we look forward to working together to find ways to support the mission to render federal property safe and security for federal employees, officials, and visitors in a professional and cost effective manner. >> thank you for your testimony. we will start the first round of question and limit to five minutes for each member. if there are additional

questions, we will have additional rounds as needed. you highlight challenges with the staffing and the number of law enforcement officers. 67 officers are assigned to head quarters you point. do you think if they are assigned to fps head quarters or other parts of dhs? >> those 67 are assigned to fps head quarter and the point being those individuals don't respond to law enforcement calls for service on a daily bases. they don't meet the definition of field law enforcement staff. >> mr. wright, you mention the delegation of buildings outside of fps, and the dup li -- duplication at other facilities. can you explain how this affects

the chain of command? >> most recently was the issue with the nak. >> can you pull the mike closer? >> yes. the issues which security staff also took control of security. recently and in past years, immigration and customs enforcement has stood up their own security unit. they use hr-1315 as their authority and they assess their ice buildings across the u.s. it is duplcative in nature. that is probably the most recent example. >> you highlight in your testimony differences between fps oversees and manages

contract guards compared to other agencies. you highlight doe and the united states marshles. what do they differently in terms of the authority and training they provide to their guards? >> excuse me. the major difference is with their contract security officers have authorized them to be able to make arrest on the federal properties where they are employed. this is statutory authority granted through an act of congress and we would like to see this considered for the pso's at fps. >> there would be additional training that would be required with that additional authority. >> mr. wright, have you looked at how private contractors have been used at doe, and -- even --

dod -- to improve security at the buildings? >> of the agencies you site, i have worked most closely with the u.s. marshal service so i can site experience there. the contract security officers in the federal court houses are all hired as former law enforcement and have been through a law enforcement academy and they are deputized. they are an effective force in the court house. it is that ability to deputize by the marshles that is more important. >> you mention that most of the other federal agencies that use contract security officers or

contract with them, the companies provide training, can you provide us with examples of what other agencies are doing in that regard and how that can be applying to fps? >> doe requires the security companies they contract with to provide all of the training for the contract security officers there. the training is comp rehensive involving weapon training, intermediate force, basic training and all of the training and that is provided to the contract security officers is done by instructors who are certified and also they are responsible for 100% of the training. big issue at fps is that for some reason, fps has held back the authority to provide thex

ray training and because of personal resource issues as pointed out sometimes the x-ray training isn't provided. >> the chair recognizes ranking member carson for his questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. wright, what is the relationship with the security committee from a union's perspective and did you believe the community rely on the expertise with when providing recommendations for counter measures? >> as an inspector, i have worked with different committees across the government. firstly, it is a matter of how serious the agencies take that facility security committee. if it is a smaller property with fewer agencies, even less budget, they don't tend to take

those facility recommendations seriously. fps is the expert at the table, for the most part, as you go up in the size of buildings, you have more tenants, agencies heads, these committees tend to, like any other, in some cases undesirable task becomes a collateral duty. my experience is that when it becomes a collateral duty or especially when agency funding isn't available for security, then it is the recommendations that don't make it through. no matter what the inspector says these issues and counter measures are not going to be funded and that is the primary

promise with facility security committees is no agencies is funded for security counter measures. >> how often are members of your association fined or penalized for not having proper documentation for their contract guards and as to your knowledge has any company been debarred for not fulfilling such duties? >> in terms of information on the rate or amount of times that contractors have been fined for not having officers who have their training and certifications -- i don't have that information. but we fully believe that in those situations that proper action should be taken. i think contractors have to payback for the hours they are provided and there is also

monetary fines and it should affect their performance rating for future contracts. we have no problems with fps enforcing the provisions of the contract against contractors but i think an issue is who has the right data. you know? one company has data and then it has to provide it to fps and fps' data management system is very problematic. but if there are pso's being put on post who don't have the trainings and certifications in violation of the contract that company should be held in violation of the contract and punished. >> thank you, sir. how does the lack of recognition of law enforcement officers for purposes after retirement -- does it have an impact on the

moral of the officers? or is it substantially enough we need to look deeper? >> it effects in the sense that sometimes you have law enforcement officers past the age of the mandatory requirement of 57 years old. you tend to have officers that stick around perhaps a lot longer than they should for their own safety and the public's safety. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> what is the current protocol to respond to an active shooter in a federal building with an fps officer may not be on the scene? and can you walk us through the role of the contract guard in that scenario? >> contract guards are limited

by their post orders which are basically subscribed by their private contract. the contracts spell out what services will be provided that is translated to what the facility needs and goes into the post orders. generally, guards do not leave their post. guards are responsible for maintaining that post and locking doors and letting the tenants out and letting the good guys in to come to pursue the active shooter. but generally, these guards will not leave the post. and that is per post orders and basically per contract which is tied to state and locality

issues with their authority as well. >> so another scenario where an active shooter by a guard maybe on another floor and begins shooting, the guard doesn't leave his post. there is no authority that that guard would have to do other than wait for help? >> correct. technically the guard should not leave that post. in some federal buildings, you have a rover, which isn't tied to a post but they are few and far between. what is going to happen when it happens? we have a lot of good security officers in the field. i think just like any law enforcement officers, individuals are going to do what they have to do, and then you face the consequences of what

comes after. >> you highlight in your testimony the steps fps has taken to improve post orders for the guards at federal facilities. are they clear on what is expected and what the authorities are of the contract officers? >> they are getting better at providing that. one thing that we have emphas emphasised is they need to be facility-specific and tailored to the building. but they -- in this review they are trying to provide better instructions and guidance to the pso's and that includes this recent issuing of a manual. and i would like to respond or comment on the last question. i would note that in 2010, there

were three active shooter insidants on federal facilities. all three incidents the shooter came in and started shooting at the security personal on duty and the active shooter was neutralized in all three of them. so the pso's do have the guide guidance and instructions to engage an active shooter and protect self and third parties and that goes to the issue of the state law and the state powers and under most state licensing laws an armed security officer definitely has the authority to use his weapon to neutralize an active shooter. >> thank you. chire recognizes ranking member

carson. >> thank you, chairman. my last question. in your testimony, you indicate that members of your association use off the shelf technology to manage your contract guards training and certification. have you shared this technology with fps? if so, when? and have they indicated they would use this technology? if not, why not? >> that is a great question. i was talking with the program manager about this issue the other day when i read in previous testimony about how fps is working with the science and technology division to prototype a guard tracking system for lack of better terminology when those systems are commercially available. some of the difficult is in terms of the layers of security fps would need to put on its security officer certification

and tracking data management system, but the bottom line is that whatever system they use it will have to interface with the systems being used by the contract security companies. and there are commercially variable technologies that fps might be able to use elements on their side. but without a doubt that is a big problem and i think it can be solved because there is no reason why there can't be a database management system where the security contractors and fps can access, upload data and the idea that the security contractors are sending in paper form and they are manually up loading that seems wrong. >> thank you, sir. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> chair recognizes mr. perry.

>> thank you. it is my understanding the federal protective service has four alarm centers or mega centers. one in maryland, pennsylvania, michigan, and colorado. and they have the function of dispatching federal protective service officers on emergency call. has your agency every done an analysis on what the overall oprationale cost is to maintain the facilities, including staffing, and whether it would be more cost effective to move it to a commercial monitoring center? >> we have not looked into that. alarm monitoring isn't inherently a governmental function so i think it is something someone could look at. and that goes to the issue of response. the pso's -- when they see something or there is a problem,

they should contact the mega center unless there is an fps law enforcement officer online. in terms of the management and operation of the centers, whether it can be privatized, we have not looked at. >> would that be something you would seek to do from a cost saving standpoint? is there a concern of a breach of security or a dimnition of security by doing such a thing? >> i think in this type of situation where the fps' mega centers act more like a management function for fps over the contract security officer force, i think that maybe, fps, would want to retain control of the management function but that is something we have never looked at. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you. and thank you for your

testimony. your comments have been helpful to today's discussion. if there are no further questions, i would ask consent that the record of the hearing remain open until the witnesses have provided answers to questions submitted in writing and consent the record is open for 15 days to submit evidence by members and witnesses. i would like to thank the witnesses again for your testimony. i am concerned about what we have learned today. the fps is directly responsible for protecting 1.4 million workers and visitors at federal facilities. we know they are targets. gao has documented numerous security shortfalls and their recommendations remain largely

incomplete. rather than focus on the department's efforts to address the problems and enhancing fps, we learn that the department has removed fps from its lead security role at dhs' head quarters. we learned dhs reassigned the resources and staff for other purposes outside of protecting buildings stretching already thin resources even thinner. and we learned dhs has taken law enforcement authority and delegated them to the department security officer, to fema, immigration and custom enforcement, and the federal law enforcement training center. unfortunately, this looks like what we saw happen to fema. when fema was moved to dhs, dhs disbursed its authority throughout the problem creating confusion as to who was in

charge of responding to disasters and we saw the results in the poor response to hurricane katrina. i hope that is not what is happening here. but this shows no unity in command. this is disconcerning. i wonder if we had the correct witnesses from dhs because it seems decisions are being made from somewhere else in the department and it isn't clear by whom. i expect we will have a number of follow-up questions as we assess what we have learned today. members have anything to add? the submit -- subcommittee -- stands add adjourned.

>> later, a decision on how technology impacts policy making. next, a debate on whether state surveillance is a breach of freedom. this is part of toronto's biannual taped remark