role of medical debt on risk, because it's kind of a special category because it often takes folks a lot of time to figure out what they actually owe in our complicated medical system. fico has recognized this in their modelling. they have produced fico 8 and 9 which more fairly treat consumers in this regard. why do the seller/service guidelines still require the 2004 model? >> because the cost of changing from one fico model to another fico model or from fico to an alternative credit scoring model are heavy. and the systems that have to be

adjusted are complicated. so what we're trying to do now is get through an analysis of not only fico 8 and 9 but an alternative scoring credit scoring model and try to come up with a system that is a better system and then adjust the operational things that it would take to -- >> let me cut you off there. i only have a little bit of time. i encourage you to put pedal to the medal in that regard. >> we have pedal to the medal. we are at it. i guarantee you. >> i'm not quite persuaded of that, but thank you for pursuing it because a lot of people would be more fairly treated with an appropriate credit model.

i wanted to turn to first place insurance. there's been reports from npr and ap recently but these issues go back a long ways. it's something i've been pointing out a long way. the kick backs that go to mortgage insurance often drive people into foreclosure and of course that has an impact on your agency. i understand that in june you all did issue a requirement that these kickbacks ind, whether they're direct financial or in discounted services. and i applaud you for that. can you comment a little bit about these recent articles that team to indicate this still is a big and challenging issue in how you're taking it on? >> well, insurance in and of itself is a big and challenging issue. and we've taken some of the

abuses out of it by issuing guidelines. but i don't think i could represent to you that we've taken every concern that we have about how it's done out of the process. and we're continuing to work on methods of trying to improve the way we handle forced place insurance. by definition, if somebody is in default or if somebody is already moved out of the house, they've put insurers into a different situation. and so -- there's really no good effective market out there yet that takes that into account. >> let's -- >> we're looking at it aggressively and trying to continue to improve it.

but it's a tough area. >> so both fanny and freddy at various points have looked at directly contracting for replacement insurance so it would be at the market rate, which is fundamentally fair to the homeowner that would eliminate the middlemen and the kickbacks. and are you willing to aggressively pursue a model which would be fundamentally fair to homeowners. >> i'm willing to pursue a model that's fundamentally fair to homeowners, but i'm not sure that you would want fanny and freddy to be in the insurance business themselves. >> no, they would be contracting. and that's what has been proposed. >> when you say fair market value, then the risk associated with vacant properties are higher than the risk associated with -- >> these are often not vacant properties. >> but you have to make those differentials. >> are we providing a list of excuses here? >> no.

i'm just explaining the reality of the difficulty of the problem that we're facing, senator. i'm not providing excuses. these are difficult issues and we try to deal with them and give them the kind of consideration that -- >> okay. well, i would like you to keep dealing with it. i'm not satisfied yet that homeowners have gotten the fair shake wch we've been through this time and time again and homeowners are still being saddled with insurance that is two to three times on average by various studies, some cases four to ten times the market rate. that's predatory practice. you're in a position to stop it. i'm asking you to do so. >> i think you and i have exactly the same objective. we're moving in the direction that you would like us to do. >> thank you very much. probably not at the base you want us to do it. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

if i may thank you for your leadership on this committee, your time spent, i do appreciate it as i do most members of this committee do. i want to thank also the ranking member, in fact, director watt, i would like to continue with some of the questioning that he had beginning earlier. but thank you very much for being here, for taking time and being here available to answer some of our questions. you're probably well aware, there's quite a few members here on this committee that are pretty passionate about housing finance reform. i'm included in that group. i think most have recognized that the current models of fanny and freddie mac cannot remain and we must reduce the risk that currently american taxpayers face. just recently i heard from the hud secretary castro when he was calling for housing finance reform. but i haven't heard anything on

this subject from you. in fact, when we had the committee vote on the johnson critical housing bill, we didn't hear any word from you. i guess my question for you today is, given your position and of course the importance of this issue, are you going to continue your hands-off approach when it comes to housing finance reform or will you start engaging with congress and work with us to end this current fanny and freddy model? >> i'm going to continue to say that it is -- that our role at fhfa is in the here and the now of -- and that's what the statute gives us. it is congress's roll to tell

what you say the future of gse reform is and we have cooperated fully in terms of being a resource to the committees. all proposals, both the house and the senate, but if the committee is expecting me to have a position on what the future of housing gse reform should be, they will be sorely disappointed. i will not be -- and, you know, when i left congress, i know this is counterintuitive, but i left that role behind. if i get embroiled in what is good and what is bad in the future of gse reform, it's going to make it more difficult to do the job in the present. >> so what you're saying, don't ask for your opinion? >> beg your pardon? >> don't ask for your opinion on

gse reform? is that what you're saying? >> i expressed my opinion before i became the director, but i don't have an independent opinion now because any time i express an opinion now, people take it as the fhfa opinion. >> let me ask you for your opinion. you support eliminating fanny and freddy as they are today? >> i don't have an opinion on whether there is a fanny and freddy. i think they are roles that somebody will have to play in the process. and you've got five trillion dollars of outstanding obligations now that somebody has to deal with. that's in the current of housing

finance. that's not in the future. so, somebody has got to deal with that. and whether it's fanny or freddy or somebody else, i mean, that's, i think, a decision that congress has to make, not fhfa. >> let me switch topics here for just a minute. that has to do with the mortgage debt relief act. director watt, i don't think any state has felt the impact of falling home values more than the state of nevada. congress passed mortgage debt relief act to ensure those who owe more on their mortgages than they do on their homes are now worth would not be hit with additional income taxes. i'm not going to ask your opinion on the ira or -- >> thank you. >> on income taxes. but i think it's unfortunate. no one gets hit more than low-income, middle-income families. i think it's unfair and i think most would concur that it's unfair, that individuals would

have to pay taxes on income that they have never received. so i guess quickly, do you have any picture in your mind of what the consequences would be if we did not extend the mortgage debt relief act and retroactively for this year or extend it into next year? >> it would certainly have severe consequences for a number of decisions. but, again, that's a decision that congress has to make. i can't make it. and what i've realized is that sometimes expressing my opinion on things that i can't influence have more negative impacts than they have positive impacts. >> well, we look to you from time to time, director watt, we do look to you -- >> well, i appreciate everybody looking to me, but it's just -- you know, i'm in a difficult position. and i don't want to have a

negative outcome as a result of something that i say. so i think i try to stay in my lane doing the things that fhfa has either perceived or real control over and trying to do those well and effectively. >> direct, thank you for being here today. mr. chairman, thank you. >> i would like to thank director watt for his testimony and for his on going service to our country. this hearing is adjourned.

on the next washington journal, we'll talk with national journal correspondent daniel newhaaser. and former national security agency deputy director, col cedrik lighten. washington journal begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> jennifer epstein has been following today's immigration developments.

she is white house reporter with politico. let's break this down, first of all. what specifically will the president announce? >> so the white house hasn't actually what the president will announce to the press. but they begun the process of briefing advocates and other people who work closely with the administration on immigration over the last couple of years that the big piece of it will be that he is shielding as many of 5 million immigrants from deportation. it's kind of what's been out there recently. it is indeed what the white house intends to do. that includes 4 million undocumented immigrations who qualified for deferred deportations and another million who would get it through or means. >> senator ted cruz saying the president would be acting like a

monarch and the spokesperson for speaker boehner is calling him em por r obama. >> you know, that's the argument that the white house and people aligned with the white house have been making very strongly this week. we know from some of the talking points that had been leaked that it's something that the white house wanted to make clear to its supporters is pointing to the executive actions that ronald reagan, george h.w. bush, george w. bush took on immigration that the white house argues we don't know yet for sure, we're sort of in line with what the president is doing this week but are things that were done by republicans and now we have the republicans saying that president obama is reaching too far with what he intends to do. so that's kind of the argument that's coming from the white house on this. and at the same time, what we're

seeing from republicans on the hill is a very clear direction that they're going in which is this overreach, this king obama, which is what the chairman of the republican national committee called it this afternoon, em perrer obama from boehner spokesman, michael steel. and then ted cruz writing in politico that obama is acting as an monarch and then suggesting how the republicans should respond. one thing he would like to see is for mitch mcconnell, when he takes the helm as senate majority leader come january to announce that the senate will not be confirming any of the president's nominees except those needed to be in place for critical national security functions until the president reverses course on these executive actions. and he also -- and ted cruz also suggests that congress, which

will be fully in republican hands, choose to pass funding bills for the government, department by department and to, you know, attach writers that make it so that the administration can't enforce the orders that the president puts through. it's very much about trying to restrict the president financially and then to also try to take -- hurt him, you know, somewhere else with the various nominations. >> jennifer epstein, this came up in today's daily briefing with josh earnest, but is the white house worried that this executive action poison the well on any congressional action dealing with immigration moving ahead? >> you know, the white house has been very reluctant to agree with that argument. they point to the fact that there haven't been any progress on immigration coming from house

republicans in the more than a year since the senate passed its comprehensive reform bill. so they're much more in that kind of direction than they are in the direction of saying we are attempting to help in a different way. >> and what about the mechanics of the announcement? we had the facebook posting today by white house.gov what can we expect today and tomorrow? ? >> the next piece of it is going to be the president speaking at 8:00 p.m. it's not going to be on the major tv networks. it will be on tell mun doe and univision. it will be streaming online and very aggressively live tweeted by washington political journalists. you know, available through other means. that's sort of the white house's argument just in general with

it's communications is that it's more about the targeted outreach, so spanish media and social media to get out the the president's strongest supporters. >> jennifer epstein, white house reporter for politico. thanks very much for being with us. >> thanks for having me. >> thursday, president obama will announce executive action on immigration. wooil bring you his remarks live at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. the miami book fair is this weekend. join us both days starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern for our live coverage on book tv on c-span2. you'll see best-selling authors talking about their non-firks books. we'll take your calls, e-mails and tweets. john dean, norman lear and philosopher and activist, cornell west. the miami book fair, live coverage all day saturday and sunday starting at 10:00 a.m.

eastern on c-span2's book tv. next, remarks by allison ma macf macfarlane. she spoke about the agency's mission and what lies ahead. this is an hour. good afternoon and welcome. my name is myron belkind. the national press club is the world's leading professional organization for journalists committed to our profession's future through our programming with events such as this while

fostering a free press worldwide. for more information about the national press club, please visit our website at press.org. on behalf of our members worldwide, i would like to welcome our speaker and those of you attending today's event. our head table includes guests of our speak r and working journalists who are club member. members of the general public are attending, so it's not necessarily evidence of a lack of journalistic objectivity. i would also like to welcome our c-span and public radio audiences and you can follow the action on twitter using the #npclunch. after our guest's speech concludes, we'll have a question and answer period. i'll ask as many questions as time permits. now it's time to introduce our head table guests. i would ask each of you to stand briefly as your name is announced. from your right, joseph martin,

washington bureau chief of the omaha world harold and a member of the national press club board of governors. joshua higgins of inside washington publishers and a new national press club member. kevin bagardis. i'm pleased to say another new national press club member. suzanne of baker and mckenzie and member of the national press club board of governors. maureen wily the chief financial officer of the nuclear regulatory commission and a guest of our speaker. commissioner, william c. austindor f of the nrc and guest of our speaker. the washington bureau chief of the buffalo news, chair of the speaker's committee and former national press club president. skipping over our speaker for a moment, rod cookrow of energy wire and the speaker's committee member who organized today's event. thank you so much, rod.

phillip, chief of staff to chairman macfarlane. ester woodland. jason fordny. keern greenhouse. margaret ryan of interfax energy. thank you all for being at the head table. [ applause ]. it's not often that a senior government official relinquishes the reigns of power as readily as our speaker today. allison macfarlane is in the third year of her job but she's leaving in a few weeks to return to academia, her first love. director of george washington senltder for international science and technology policy. with a doctorate in genealogy,

she is an acknowledged expert on issues surrounding the long-term safe storage of nuclear waste. that level helped her lead the five-member nuclear regulatory commission to begin to implement safety improvements at the nation's 100 nuclear reactors. the improvements are designed to prevent the type of nuclear disaster that occurred in japan in 2011 when an earthquake and tsunami resulted in the meltdown of three nuclear reactors. during macfarlane, she is cutting short by three years -- we're interested in her perspective on the future of and safety concerns about nuclear power here and abroad. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming to the national press club, the chairman of the nuclear

regulatory commission, allison macfarlane. [ applause ]. >> good afternoon. welcome. thank you for the kind introduction, i guess. so i appreciate the invitation to be here and talk with you today and reflect on some of the issues that the nuclear regulatory commission has on its plate and talk about some of my accomplishments during my tenure at the nrc and some of the challenges we faced as well. but before i go on, i just want to acknowledge some of the folks in the audience. we have -- i'm really glad that commissioner austindorf could join us as well as our cfo, maureen wily and my chief of staff as well. we have a couple of nrc tables. i think there are three, at least. there, there and there.

and i want to acknowledge those two in particular because they are my current and former staff. so thank you for coming. and we also have assistance secretary pete lions somewhere in the room. there he is. and as well as the president and ceo of nei -- i don't know where marv went. but we had all of these folks. so, i wanted to acknowledge all of them. so, first, let me review some of our accomplishments and then i'll take a little while to look forward to upcoming issues for the commission. let me start with my first impressions. so when i first came to the nrc in 2012, i was eager to work with my colleagues and the nrc staff but i was unsure of what i would face. the agency was going through a tumultuous time in which relationships within the commission and between the commission and the staff were

strained. it had also been just over a year since the fukushima accident and the staff was moving ahead with pertinent lessons learned. just weeks before my arrival, the d.c. circuit of appeals vacated and remanded a mayor rule known then as the waste confidence rule. which would require nrc to undertake a substantial rule making and suspend certain licensing actions. i should also mention that at that time the federal government as a whole was in the context of sequestration experiencing budget challenges. in short, i knew i was walking into an environment where there was a lot of work to do and limited resources with which to do it. i also had my own priorities and objectives in my mind as i began my tenure and i wanted to use

the benefit of my knowledge and prior experience to enhance and strengthen my time at the nrc. when i was america's nuclear future which set a new strategy for dealing with the nuclear waste, i had seen the benefit of effective public engagement. i was determined to approach with a commitment to openness and transparency. i had long believed that the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, everything that occurs once spent fuel is removed from a reactor vessel, does not receive the attention and respect it deserves. and as an academic, i intended to champion a broad minded, inclus i have approach in the agency's decision making. for my first day on the job, the nrc staff impressed me with their technical skill, their commitment to the agency's commission and their sense of community. after visiting my first few reactors, i was impressed by our resident inspectors and their role at the role at the facilities we

regulate. i take great pride in the tremendous work ithe nrc staff has accomplished in two and a half years. now let me turn to some of the topics i want to cover. fukushima. in the first few months of my tenure as chairman, i had the opportunity to travel to fukushima and see firsthand the devastation wrought by a nuclear reactor accident. traveling through deserted villages with weeds overtaking parking lots and thick layers of dust settling on artifacts of hastily abandoned lives i came to better understand the societal costs of nuclear reactor accidents. the site itself emphasized this lesson even more strongly with debris from hydrogen explosions still littering the ground. as a result, i felt compelled to push for changes at u.s. plants based on the lessons we learned from that accident. given all of that, i'm pleased with the progress the nrc has

made in implementing post-fukushima safety enhancements. our inspectors are working hard to confirm that plants meet their obligations under nrc orders requiring them to ensure reactors can cope with the prolonged loss of off site power, accurately measure spent fuel -- sorry, accurately measure water level in spent fuel pools, and successfully operate containment vents during emergency conditions. plants have been acquiring additional equipment such as diesel generators, punchmps, cabling and piping, staging in the orthoquake proof and tornado proof locations around their reactor sites. for instance, the plant in tennessee has completed our order and awaits our review. this year, two industry response centers opened their door. the industry's objective is to be able to provide emergency equipment to a stricken reactor

within 24 hours. many plants have already put into place instrumentation that measures water levels and spent fool pools and are working on installing containment vents that will be operable under high pressures, temperatures and radiation feel fields that would exist during an accident. the staff has also made significant progress in reviewing licensees flooding and seismic hazard re-evaluations and is working through two significant rule makings on mitigating hazards and determining strategies at boiling water reactors. now let me talk about the back end of the fuel cycle. the staff completed the continued storage rule, formerly known as waste confidence, and accompanying generic environmental impact statement, the work prompted by the aappeals court ruling.

this rule making maximized engagement. they received more than 33,000 public comments, each of which was reviewed and considered. . i believe the successful process should not be a model for how the agency conducts future high profile rule makings. to those of you mo who track such things, you'll recall i only gave partial approval to this new rule in my own vote. i was concerned the staff had not adequately explored what would happen in the event of a potential loss of what is called institutional controls. that is a future where no one is responsible forren suring that the waste remains in a safe condition indefinitely. i feel strongly that we should not use this as an excuse to not make progress in developing 5 permanent repository.

i should also mention yucca mountain or i would manage you will. as many of you know, in august, 2013, the d.c. circuit court of appeals ordered the nrc to resume the review of the yucca mountain license application using its remaining nuclear west fund money which amounted to about $13 million. while we acted to resume work on yucca mountain in a timely and transparent way, the work we're doing now represents only part of a lengthy and complicated licensing process which is not near completion. at the time the staff's yucca mountain work was suspended in 2010, there were more than 300 contentions challenging the application. the safety evaluation report and the environmental impact statement that will be coming out in 2015 may trigger additional contentions. hearings must be conducted on

each contention and must be resolved by the licensing board before the nrc's review can be complete. only then would the commission make a final licensing decision. i want to emphasize that the department of energy and the administration have been clear that they're not currently pursuing a license application for yucca mountain and congress has not provided by them resours resource s to do so. without a willing applicant, the nrc cannot pursue the remaining portion of the licensing process. in the area of permanent high-level waste disposal or any of the other technical areas i've just discussed i think there's a lot to learn from the international community. the nrc engages in significant international work from collaboration and -- with partner regulators to assistance to newcomer countries. i view all of this work as essential as it provides the nrc an opportunity to learn from others and helps us ensure

nuclear safety and security practices are followed worldwide. i've advocated strongly for the nrc's continued international engagement by maintaining close relations with my counterparts at regulatory agencies around the world. the nrc works closely with the international atomic energy agency, which has enabled us to engage in multilateral and regional regulatory development assistance and advance our ballot bilateral relationships with developing countries. i also chaired what's called the multinational design evaluation program which oversees a framework of regulatory collaboration on new reactor designs. through this program, regulators around the world who are or may soon be licensing and overseeing new reactor construction are leveraging resources and addressing common issues like vendor oversight, quality assurance, and digital instrumentation and control. one important theme in my discussions with my

international counterparts is regulatory independence. it's essential that regulatory decisions in any country are taken without undue political pressure or industry influence. i've been fiercely protective of the nrc's independence. but i also recognize that it doesn't equate to isolation. that's why i pushed for us to be more engaged with the executive branch agencies that deal with nuclear issues, in particular the department of energy and the state department. i've established productive and cooperative working relationships with my u.s. government counterparts. i meet regularly with them to discuss areas of mutual interest and participate in various interagency activities. for example i chair an interagency task force on radioive security. i chair a forum of independent and executive branch regulators who share lessons learned on cyber security issues affect the

industries they regulate. these activities have enabled me to raise awareness across the government of who we at the nrc are, what we do, and why it's so important. it's equally important for the public to be -- to have this kind of awareness. i've been a strong proponent of nrc's public engagement and am proud of the progress we made. we've established a requirement that the staff report uniformly on public meetings. we've asked the staff to provide training for employees who regularly engage with the public and we also require professional facilitation for some of our public meetings. for the nrc to be an effective regulat regulator, i believe public trust is essential. in many cases, the nrc achieves that trust but in some cases ichy we have to work harder. for example, when i came to the nrc, public hearings around the san onofre nuclear power planted

that potential to become highly contentious and it was clear that significant portions of the public there didn't trust the nrc. i'm happy to say that we've turned that situation around and have had many successful meetings in southern california. public engage system equally important, i believe, for industry. having an effective relationship with the local community around a nuclear power plant is essential in both everyday and especially emergency conditions. in my discussions with industry, both formal and informal i've encouraged them to keep an open dialogue and some have risen very well to this challenge. one other aspect of maintaining public trust in my view is the assurance that an agency is operating efficiently, using its resources wisely and prioritizing its work appropriately. in the past few years, the commission and senior management have had to confront the fact that the future the nrc is facing is different than what

was previously anticipated. the predicted nuclear renaissance did not materialize in the united states and unplanned work resulting largefully fukushima and waste confidence resulted in resource limitations that had a real impact on the staff's ability to manage its ongoing workload. sequestration, the government shutdown and the decision to decommission several reactors before the end of their license lives also impacted the nrc during my tenure. in response to this situation, the commission directed the staff to work to enthat tsure te nrc is well positioned for the coming years regardless of what the future holds. the staff is currently addressing this issue. now let me turn to give you my perspectives on what lies ahead at the nrc. i'd like to address fukushima, operating reactor performance, new reactors and the nrc's role internationally and i'll be

brief. let me start with fukushima. all told, the post-fukushima safety enhancements have required tremendous effort and resources from both the nrc and the industry. much has been done, but our joint challenge is now to keep up the momentum, maintain our commitment and ensure the lessons of fukushima are memorialized in a sustainable way in our day to day work. the agency needs to continue to work through the remaining recommendations that the near term task force provided by. the tier two and tier three priorities include important topics such as consideration of hydrogen mitigation and control during an accident, the need to periodically review external hazards as more is learned about these processes over time, and the consideration of potential enhancements to venting system? reactor designs that are different from the mark one and mark two boiling react thoors are already being dealt with. i believe that complacency is

always a threat and the only way to avoid it is to keep the lessons learned from this tragic accident alive in our nuclear safety practices. i also believe we need to continue to focus on nuclear power plant performance. though the majority of nuclear power plants in the united states are performing well, we're seeing a few areas of concern. some of the lowest-performing plants in the u.s., for example, seem to remain in that that category for extended period of times rather than addressing the issues quickly to regain their higher performance status. in my time at the mar see visiting plants and observing performance i've learned the value of good management. poor management is easy to spot from lack of safety culture and other persistent problems at plants. i believe solid leadership the tom and not just attention to the bottom line is necessary to ensure consistent plant performance. in this regard i'm confident that the combination of a rigorously implemented reactor oversight process, a highly

qualified work force and committed resident inspectors are protective. still, our objective must be to prevent problems. in this regard, the industry's self-regulator, the institute for nuclear power operations, maintains a strong commitment to safety across the u.s. fleet. inpo formed after the three mile aisle accident plays a critical role in fostering best practices and less sons learned across the industry. the staff and the industry are also incorporated post-fukushima insights into the new reactor construction projects currently under way at vogel in georgia, vc summer in california and watts barr in tennessee. i've had the opportunity to see the progress at both vogel and watts barr in both hand and i can atoast the safety consciousness i observe in the building these large, complex

machines. one challenge we have encountered is that nuclear reactors haven't been constructed in the united states for quite some time. as a result, today's component manufacturers have had to agent adjust their safety culture practices to accommodate the rigorous, often unique, requirements presented by nuclear construction. some part of the industry continue to struggle with these issues. i believe industry has an essential responsibility in ensuring quality control, oversight of vendors and in preventing counterfeit and fraudulent frart entering the supply chain. this concern is not unique to the u.s. or nuclear industry and both the nrc and industry have engaged with foreign counterparts to champion strict adherence to quality control standards. as these reactors are being constructed, others have cloudsed and begun decommissioning, as i mentioned.

currently, plants follow operating reactor regulations during decommissioning. that means they may request exemption from certain requirements that may no longer be necessary once fuel is removed from the reactor core. while i believe these regulations provide a robust framework for the nrc's reactor oversight, i question whether they remain appropriate at a time when multiple plants have entered the decommissioning process. i believe it's time for the nrc to develop regulations specific to the decommissioning of nuclear power plants. and to structure public expectations of the process. as i noted earlier, i've longed believe that an integrated approach to the nuclear fuel cycle with sufficient emphasis on the back send essential in working with all forms of nuclear energy. in this context, some of my most

important efforts have been directed towards bringing greater focus to matters such as on sight spent nuclear fuel storage and spent nuclear fuel transportation and disposal. as an independent regulator, the nrc doesn't make energy policy for the nation but nonetheless we're impacted significantly by decisions of our energy policymakers. as the administration in congress continued to grabble with a path forward for nuclear waste management and disposal in the united states, the nrc must in turn continue to ensure radioactive waste can be stored safely at nuclear reactor sites until permanent disposal option becomes available. this raises a number of issues of particular significance to me. it's important to mention fuel is typically designed to maximize perform nantz the reactor, not in repository. considerations on the front end don't always account for how fuel may behave decades after

its use. another issue is spent fuel transportation. fuel that's been removed from pools and placed in dry casks may need to be repackaged before its ultimate disposal to account for the design of the disposal site or damaged fuel or heat considerations. research on the long-term spent fuel integrity currently under way in the u.s. and elsewhere will be critical to protecting public health and safety. i also note that an integrated approach to the nuclear fuel cycle means we have to address the reality that, as the blue ribbon commission concluded, current and projected spent fuel inventories will ruhr more than one repository. in addition, the administration is now exploring the potential for deep geologic bore holes for high level waste and placement. since our current siting standards for deep geologic disposal are specific to yucca mountain, i believe it's appropriate and necessary to

begin a rule making to address a generic standard. as we continue to learn from other countries' experiences with nuclear waste disposal, new countries are just beginning to consider nuclear power or nuclear applications. i believe that the assistance the nrc pro strides these countries to develop their regulatory infrastructure will remain critically important. nuclear power is viewed in some of these countries as a source of prestige and often a fledgling regulator has trouble keeping up with its government's ambition construction plans in flash i'm concerned about nations that seek nuclear power capabilities without building the necessary indigenous expertise and regulatory infrastructure to ensure operations are performed both safely and securely. heightening any concern is that some companies are marketing a build, own, operate approach in which a country needs only

provide financing and a foreign entity constructs an operates a nuclear reactor. this option has proven attractive for nations that are wish to fast track their nuclear energy development. but i firmly believe nuclear power operations must be peared with effective safety oversight and accountability by committed and highly trained regulators. so what's next for me? beginning january 1, i'll be a professor of public policy at the elliot school of international affairs and director of the center for international science and technology policy. as you heard. universities typically bring on new faculty twice during a year which is once in january, once in july which is why i've chosen to leave the nrc at this particular moment. in my new position i'll have the opportunity to continue research and writing, teaching as well and to train a new cadre of policy experts. my experience at the nrc will

certainly inform my vision for the center. in particular, i've come to better understand the essential role that regulatory perspectives play in policy making. i also appreciate the interrelation between nuclear safety and often more frequently discussed security and safeguards issues and the needs to treat the three holisitically. it's been an honor and pleasure to serve my country as chairman of the nrc for the past two and a half years. i'm grateful to president obama for nominating me and i appreciate the talented and hardworking staff at the for see more than i can say. i'm confident that, as i leave, and after i leave, the nrc will maintain its well deserved reputation as one of the best served agencies in the federal government. i'm confident the commission will continue to function effectively after my departure and i wish my colleagues all the best. their work, together with our dedicated staff, will entable nrc to remain an effective, independent, and trusted

regulator. i greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today and i'm happy to answer your questions. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you so much, professor macfarlane. do you think the united states nuclear energy industry will ever recover from fukushima and start growing again? what will make that happen? >> well, i think that i would separate that out. i wouldn't say that the nuclear industry is suffering necessarily because of fukushima. i think there are larger issues at play here, mostly economic issues. what would help that would probably be some price on carbon, my view. >> most u.s. nuclear facilities

are more than 40 years old and most want to extend their lives to 60 or even 80 years. how much confidence do you have that they can be extended to that extent and still operate safely? >> well, we've extended the licensed life of 74 reactors to 60 years. so already. so that's in progress and we've seen a number of reactors go beyond their 40-year life. they have aging management programs in place and we regulate that closely. the issue of going from 60 to 80 years is an issue is under consideration at the nrc now and you'll have to ask my collegues in the future where they're going with that. >> you've said a new rule is needed for firming up rules for closing reactors.

does that effort have any chance of moving forward in your abseasons? >> i certainly hope so. [ laughter ] >> how much confidence do you have in your foreign counterparts that they are maintaining the highest possible standards for their nuclear plans? >> well, that's a broad question. you know, i have a lot of confidence in many of my foreign counterparts. as i said in my speech, we work very closely together in a number of different fora and there's great regulators out there that are operating very safely. there are others that need to probably improve a bit and there are more and more efforts in place these days to help them do that. there is something called the world association of nuclear operators, it's on the industry side and it is stepping up its game a lot since the fukushima accident to bring everybody

along. and there are a lot of active discussions within the international atomic energy agency on how to improve as well. but we are really working hard at the nrc to try to ensure that we have a big reach out there, too, and we hope other countries that need the help. >> what effect do you think china/u.s. agreement on climate change will have on the nuclear power industry? >> i'm going to pass on that one. i don't know. >> what roles should a carbon tax play in a clean energy future? >> well, this is my view but i think a carbon tax would be very helpful in readjusting the situation for all those kinds of

electricity producers and we have the transportation side as well to go forward. those who don't produce carbon, it will give them a boost and that includes a nuclear industry. >> can you talk about the fire and explosion at the wipp -- and for those of you either here or out in the c-span audience, wipp stands for waste isolation pilot plant. can you talk about the fire and explosion at the wipp facility in new mexico in february of 2013 and what this means for the nrc's knowledge about and process for licensing and storage facilities. >> i want to be clear the nrc does not regulate wipp. we did not have a piece of that and i don't want to say much about the fire and then the subsequent explosion at or whatever it was conflagration at wipp because, again, it's not an

area of my expertise. there's some department of energy folks here, you can corner them later, sorry, pete. [ laughter ] and dave. i think there are lessons to be learned withipp that are very important not just for the department of energy but for the nrc to learn and examine and i think we need to wait a little bit until more analysis is done on exactly what happened but we need to learn a number of lessons on how -- what best practices should be fol flowed disposing of waste. it can be disposed of safely but i think we need to take a step back and see what we learn. >> what lessons can be learned from the safety issues that the nrc has worked through with the

fort calhoun plant in omaha and what is the future of nrc oversight of that facility? >> well, we are -- we're still continuing our oversight of fort calhoun and continuing to work hard there. we've put in a lot of hours there. and to ensure that they are going to be operating safely, they're operating now and we are continuing our oversight and we will reduce our oversight once they have shown us that they are ready for that h. that's how we go forward. >> you have opposed the yucca mountain site but support geological storage in general. what bothered you about yucca mountain? >> you know, i have not looked in detail at yucca mountain since 2003 or so. i have not read the yucca

mountain license application. i have not read a number of the nrc reports on yucca mountain so i don't have a view on yucca mountain right now. that was work i did long ago and right now i don't have a view on tha that. >> wel this is a question you might have just answered but to be fair to the person who sent it in, what would you say to the new senate leadership if it makes a move to revive the yucca mountain site? >> i think yucca mountain is not just a technical issue, clearly. it's clearly a political and societal issue and those pieces need to be resolved for any repository. clearly the societal and political side has to be resolved as well as the technical side. >> one last question. an nrc report issued in october

sediuk a mountain is safe. the commission recently voted to support continued long-term storage of nuclear waste at reactors. you had a bob that. may i ask why. >> well, i basically answered that in my -- can i see that question again? it seemed to be tying together two separate things. it's tying together yucca mountain and the continued storage rule which i view as totally separate. yes, the nrc issued volume three of the safety evaluation report in october. it has not issued some of the other volumes yet so it has not issued a complete safety evaluation report. we'll be doing that by january as we promised on the continued storage rule, yes, i had a problem with part of it and, as

i said in my speech, it had to do with the fact that i thought that we should account for indefinitely storing this material, the environmental impacts of that if there are not some kind of institutional measures in place in perpetuity to make sure this material remains safe. so that was one of my problems. >> how long could a licensing process actually take for a new permanent geological storage site and where should it be? [ laughter ] >> you know, ever since i started talking about nuclear waste disposal in 1996 everybody says "where should she put it?" i don't know. we're blessed in this country. we have an enormous country. lots of potential sites. so the first part of the question? sorry. how long could the process take? who knows? i leave that up to you.

you're probably more expert on that than me. >> what happens to money in the nuclear waste fund that has been collected from american electricity consumers. >> it's still in the nuclear waste fund. congress has that so i suggest you ask congress. >> why did you and the nrc take the lead role on the federal government's interagency cyber security forum? >> well, we have a lot of experience regulating cyber security issues. we've had regulations in place on cyber security since 2009 and we've actually been dealing with this issue since the early 2000s, 2003, 2004. so we have probably amongst other government regulatory agencies and executive branch

regulators, amongst the most experience on this issue so it seemed natural for us to take the lead. >> what role does that effort play into your efforts to boost nuclear facility safety and security? >> well, it's important for nuclear facilities and nuclear reactors to be protected from all the kinds of hacks that you read about. i'm sure you all read the paper today seeing how you are press people and you read about the state department's recent troubles. we don't want that kind of thing happening at a nuclear reactor or nuclear facility where there are grave implications and so that's what we are trying to be protective of. >> >> some of the largest owners of nuclear plants are seeking millions of dollars in subsidies from electricity consumers in states such as illinois, ohio

and new york to continue operating their plants. do you support such subsidies and if so why? >> we regulate nuclear power reactors, materials. we dent get into the pricing plans, et cetera, so we don't handle that bit. that's for the state public utility commissions. >> what didn't you get done during your tenure aznar see chairman? >> that's -- i don't know where to start. but i'm -- i've been ambitious. i would have liked to see more done with the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. i think there's more work to be done there. to make that front and center in people's minds. that's one piece of it. i'd like to see more done with

public engagement as well but i think we've overall accomplished quite a lot in two and a half years so i think we have a lot to be proud of. >> what are the biggest challenges that your successor at the nrc will face? >> well, as i said. the agency is not facing the future that five years ago people envisioned. five years ago, seven years ago the nuclear industry was really expecting to expand and that's what the information we were getting from them. we expanded as well to prepare for license applications and that started to fall apart as the recession hit, a number of other factors came into play so we have to ensure that we have the right agency for the times.

that means we need to have the right skill sets, the right resources and manage them appropriately and that's what we're in the process of figuring out. so the next chairman will have to continue making sure that that process gets complete and that the agency is really well equipped to deal with the future. >> and following on, what advice would you give to your replacement? >> get a top-notch staff. you can't do anything without a top-notch staff because you have way too much to do. and to rely a lot on the staff at the nrc overall. the staff are fantastic, they're -- they have a world of experience and they're the ones who will help you get things don done. >> did the white house influence your decision to step down?

>> absolutely not. skuk them. they were probably as surprised as everybody else. >> what do you think regulations specific to decommissioning reactors should look like? what do you think should be changed? >> well, i think there are a number of issues that need to be dealt with. first of all, as i said, reactors that are decommissioning are regulated under operating reactor regulations. now, when you take spent fuel out of the core of the reactor, you don't need to have a guard force surrounding that core. you need to adjust the security, you may need to adjust the emergency planning rules. so i think those issues are sort of first and foremost and that's where we're getting exemption requests from the plants currently decommissioning. i think there's a discussion

about the post-shutdown activities -- ps -- post-shut down -- post-shut down decommissioning activities report, the psdar. i've been trying to get away from acronyms. that's another thing for the next chairman, get rid of acronyms. we don't have teeth to approve or disapprove. whether we need that or not. i think there are a number of issues that we need to think about and consider going forward. >> so people think that building small modular reactors are the future. does this technology pose any advantages for licensing them. >> well, we'll see when we get some license applications. we're in the process of waiting for license applications. sound like the first one will come in 2016 but, again, we'll see. we had been expecting license

application this is past year and the industry walked back a bit on that so we'll see what happens. i think there's promise in small modular reactors but, again, the proof is in the pudding and i'll let these guys work through the details and they will find out if there are issues or not. >> a lot of questions about licensing. as a variety of advanced nuclear reactor designs receive venture capital support as well as press coverage, how will the nrc support the improvement of the licensing process for these design which is may not fit into the current formula? into the current framework. >> formula/framework. i think the question refers to generation four designs, non-light water designs. and i think we are prepared to

deal with those but i don't see any coming any time soon. the small modular reactor license applications which are much closer to completion are still not on our plate and i don't expect these advanced designs will be on the nrc's plate for many years. as as we working with the industry understand they're getting closer, the nrc will, of course, respond and be prepared to deal with them. >> what if anything can the nrc do do to help low-performing plants move out of heightened oversight? >> well we're working closely with low-performing plants and providing them a lot of feedback. again, i think this is something that the institute for nuclear power operation is focusing on

as well. because they also don't want to see plants stuck at the low performing level for years and years and years so we're working together to try to improve that. >> is the nrc staff ready to evaluate new technology like reactors cooled by sodium or lead? >> we just had the question on advanced reactors. so same answer. >> are there ways to safely reduce the cost of generating a nuclear plant to make them more kpetive with natural gas and wind power? >> again, i regulate the plants, i don't construct them or design them or build them. and i leave it to those people who are expert in that to answer that kind of question.

>> as a geologist, do you think fraiking is safe andbly or why not? >> well -- >> and let me give you a related question, how has the tra fraiking boom affected the nuclear power industry? >> well, i'll take the latter one first. i think a number of factors have affected the nuclear power industry economically. this is my point of view. but i think the demographic shift from the north to south and west haas reduced demand in the midwest. the 2008 recession which has hung on in the upper midwest persistently has also reduced demand and, of course, then, the low price of natural gas has not

contributed to the rosy picture there so i think all of these factors play a part. in terms of fracking, i am not an expert on this. i will hold forth from saying anything except to say it appears that fracking in some case does cause earthquakes. >> we're back to fukushima which, of course, was an overriding issue when you came in and still is. what incentive do nuclear plant operators have to ensure they spend what is needed to keep them safe from the type of catastrophic accident that occurred at fukushima? are you confident they will take appropriate measures to prevent such an accident? >> the incentive that nuclear plant operators have to ensure that this kind of accident won't happen is they don't want to lose that asset. and they don't want to deal with

the aftermath. and i think they are all on board with that. and they have been very responsive to the orders that we put out. i think we are ahead of quite a few countries in terms of getting that additional equipment on site at react norse safe structures. we will be completed. that will be completed by 2016 and many plants will be done before then. so we at the nrc and the industry have worked really hard to try to make that happen. as i said there's more to do and we have to keep our focus on that going forward but i think we're in a good place right now. >> fracking produces huge quantities of waste. given how it is stored, how

worrisome are the earthquakes that you mentioned? >> well, that was fast. [ laughter ] i thought we were here talking about nuclear not frack iing. i don't know. the answer to that, not being an expert on that so i will leave that to actual experts on frackin fracking. >> increasing the industry applications to staff include information published but only available for fees and purchase. do those cost deny public review of information sources, staff use and review of applications and requests. is there a mechanisms to make all documents used by staff and decision making available to the public? >> it depends on the particular situation. i don't think i can be more

specific than that. there's some material that is proprietary that we can't share. that's the way it is. so we make -- compared to many other federal agencies we make a lot of material available to the public and i have been trying to push for for making it as hard adds possible and i think under my tenure you have seen we have been as open as we can be. so we're trying. >> i anticipate your answer to this one but i would like to ask it in the interest that we keep our effort to ask as many as possible from the audience. regarding public participation, do you recommend the nrc make materials listed in the federal registry notice for public comment be made available to the public and elected officials for review? >> again, there are materials that we can share and there are few materials that we cannot

share. we make as many materials as possible available to the publi public. >> do you worry the nrc is becoming a satellite operation for senator harry reid. [ laughter ] >> again, i believe that is absolutely essential for the nuclear regulatory commission and other independent commissions to be just that, inspect. to be free from political influence and industry pressure. it's absolutely essential. wherever i travel overseas, whenever i give a speech that is always a main stay of what i say. because it doesn't work and there are some places -- i'm not going to talk about them now -- but some places where countries start stepping back on that. that's a problem and that's a concern to all of souse it's essential we remain independent.

>> is bill astendorf your favorite commissioner? [ laughter ] >> of course! >> i think i embarrassed him. i think that's the first time ever. >> one question before we go into the finale. are you saying, then, that harry reid is too influential? >> i'm not saying anything. i'm just saying that the nrc needs to be independent and is inspect, will remain that way. >> we are almost out of time but before asking the last question, we have a couple housekeeping matters to take care of. first of all, i'd like to remind you about our upcoming lunches and you're welcome to come back.

on this friday november 21 dr. anthony fauci, director of the institute of allergy and infectious diseases will focus on the ebola outbreak. on december 1, theresa sullivan president of the university of virginia will discuss trends in higher education. on december 5, barry betman, commissioner of the national hockey lead and ted leos any, ceo of monumental sports and entertainment will discuss the gret of the national hockey league and the 2015 winter classic. next i'd like to present our guests with the traditional national press cub mug. if i happen to walk by your office i would like to see it there. [ applause ] one last question. many dentists chargeds about $200 for a set of x-rays.

why can't the nrc regulate them? [ laughter ] >> thanks. >> thank you all for coming today. i'd like to thank the national press club staff including its journalism institute and broadcast center for organizing today's event. thank you again, we are adjourned. [ applause ] >> on the next "washington journal" we'll talk with daniel newhauser about the newly elected house republican leadership. and former national security agency deputy corrector colonel cedric leghton. "washington journal" begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span.

>> president obama took to facebook on wednesday to preview his speech detailing the executive order he plans to issue on immigration enforcement. here's a look. >> hi, everybody. tomorrow night i'm going to be announcing fear the white house some steps that i can take to start fixing our broken immigration system and then on friday i'm going to be traveling to dell sol high school in las vegas where two years ago i laid out the principles for comprehensive immigration reform. everybody agrees that our immigration system is broken. unfortunately, washington has allowed the problem to fester for too long and so what i'm going to be laying south the things that i can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system work better even as i continue to work with congress and encourage them to get a bipartisan comprehensive bill that can solve the entire

problem. so tune in tomorrow night at 8:00 here from the white house where i'm going to be making this announcement and then del sol high school, i will see you on friday. thanks, everybody. >> thursday, president obama will announce executive action on immigration. we'll bring you his remarks live at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> her answer, i'll say to my good friend from north dakota, fwhouz. >> thank you, mr. speaker and i thank my good friend. >> i would say to my good friend from wisconsin that was part of the story. >> i thank my good friend from california. >> the domestic prosperity and global freedom act sponsored by my good friend cory gardner from colorado. >> this is actually has british lineage, it comes from parliament hundreds of years ago where if you've ever seen the proceedings of the house of common they say something similar, the right honorable gentleman which has a similar meaning. it's a thinly veiled approach to trying to be polite to somebody

that you don't really care for. and at least in the house of representatives where there are 435 members a lot of these men and women don't even know each other when they're saying "my good friend" it's disingenuous to use another phrase. in the case of the senate there's only 100, they probably know each other. they might not like each other anymore but at least there's a better chance of them being at least acquaintances if not actually good friend. >> >> journalist david mark on the world of political terminology sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q q&a. >> next, ahead of president obama's announcement of an executive order on immigration, a hearing on the influx of uncompanied immigrant children at the southern u.s. border. officials from the state department, the u.s. agency for international development and the inter-american foundation testified before the house foreign affairs subcommittee on the western hemisphere. this hearing is 90 minutes.

>> the quorum being present, the subcommittee will come to order. i'll start by recognizing myself and the ranking member who-to-present our opening statements. without objection the members of the subcommittee can submit their opening remarks for the record and i yield myself as much time as i macon sum to present my opening statement. good afternoon and welcome to this, the second hearing that i've convened on the humanitarian crisis that resulted from thousands of unaccompanied minors showing up at our southern border. i've been engaged on this issue from the beginning. not only as the chairman of the subcommittee but also as a member of the speaker's working group on the unaccompanied alien child crisis. i travelled with several of my colleagues to the region and saw first the insecurity and poverty that plagues the region. while the administration has cited drops in the total number of children traveling north since our first hearing on the topic back in june, the fact is

that the conditions in el salvador, honduras and guatemala continue to be very grave. i convened this second hearing because my colleagues and i are mindful of the high levels of gang violence and the lack of opportunity right here in our hemisphere. not only does it affect the lives of millions in central america, but affects the united states, too. as we've seen. indeed, the pursuit of peace and prosperity throughout the western hemisphere should be a key national security objective of the united states. as ronald reagan said in 1984, central america is a region of great importance to the united states and it is so close san salvador is closer to houston, texas, than houston is to washington, d.c. i've consistently been supportive of u.s. efforts to assist the region to build capacity to strengthen their respect i

respective police forces so they can better confront the high levels of criminality brought on by drug trafficking organizations. between 2005 and 2012, there was a 340% increase in murders of women and children in honduras. while el salvador maintains the world's highest rate of homicides against women and girls, guatemala ranks third. there is widespread mistrust of law enforcement and impunity rates as high as 95%. in addition to the need for stepping up capacity building for law enforcement all three of these northern triangle countries lack stable institutions and are plagued by corruption so u.s. efforts to improve governance and democratic values are imperative. the question remains, however, and this is why i've convened this second hearing, in this time of tight budgets are we evaluating each and every individual program that we fund metrix and determining what works and what doesn't work? i had asked during the last hearing for usaid to provide me

with specific program by program metrics and to this date have yet to receive that information in its entirety. i am aware of the vanderbilt study, a $3.5 million study to evaluate some of usaid's programs in the region. unfortunately, the study does not provide with us project-by-project evaluations and cost/benefit analysis. that may not be available right now. i've said this before, the u.s. taxpayer is very generous and wants to help the people of el salvador, guatemala and honduras find a path to peace and prosperity in their respective countries. however they also demand that we spend their hard earned taxpayer money wisely and achieve measurable results. as a result, we must acknowledge the previous programs in central america have failed. despite u.s. investments, these countries continue to flail and these failures ultimately

contributed to the uac crisis along our border it is our responsibility and yours to ensure that going forward we have very serious buy in and political will from each of these three countries and every agency involved in administering programs needs to be accountable for the effectiveness of each specific program. the goal is to help empower these countries to improve governance and build prosperity so citizens can prosper there. unfortunately, the obama administration continues to incentivize the mass exodus of citizens from those countries by clanging immigration policy by decree. on friday, vice president biden announced an in-country refugee processing program as part of a strategy to deal with the unaccompanied minor crisis. at first glance, the idea is a good one. we've talked about the treacherous journey these children must make to get to our border. so offering those people who might qualify for refugee status the opportunity to apply in

their countries would be a good way to dissuade them from otherwise traveling up our southern border. upon closer inspection, however, it appears that this program is yet another example of president obama's flouting of immigration law. this newly announced program allows family members present in the united states under varying status including deferred action to petition for children and spouses in central america to be interviewed for refugee status. if they're ineligible the program allows for humanitarian paroles on a case-by-case basis. it's very important the state department's population of refugees and migration provided a witness answer to the many questions my colleagues and i have about this newly announced in-country processing. particularly to understand the criteria being applied to both refugee and parole eligibility. the answer to progresses

plaguing the region is not to further incentivize citizens of el salvador, guatemala and honduras to leave, rather we should double down on serious efforts to empower people of the region to achieve lasting peace and prosperity in their country. using this crisis to curry favor for political gain is wrong. that i believe that might be what the president is doing. i'm looking forward to hearing from our witnesses about what their specific agency or bureau is doing to address the crisis with the seriousness it deserves. assistant secretary jacobson, thank you for being with us today, ms. hogan, kaplan and wisner, i'm pleased you're hear as well. look forward to hearing how assistant programs can be hearing on economic development to help provide empowerment and to the citizens of central america anyway, i would like ton

comments to representative duncan. >> thafrnk you, chairman salmon. very timely hearing. i'm encouraged by el salvador and honduras working together. we saw on our southern border which saw 68,500 unaccompanied minors between last year and september 30 this year. 77% increase compared to fiscal year 2013. while there's a lot of good in the plan, i'm worried it doesn't consider corruption. that does not empower municipalities or the approach where three different countries with varying political wills. additionally, jean and vice president biden announced help

in central america. i'm interested in knowing what the administration strategy for central america latin-america and caribbean region in general is before we start increasing the flow of money. i'm deeply concerned and alarmed by this administration's attempt at back door amnesty through the uncountry recipe and program allowing parents and children to is a parent or spouse in the u.s. that is deferred child arrival. deferred action recipient or a refugee application. i look forward to digging deeper into that during question and answer period today. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you. i yield to the gentleman from florida. >> thanks, mr. chairman. thanks for coming. before i get into this, this is the first time this committee has met, i believe, since we were here at the very end of september for very important issue that you really led on

trying to get our marine back from mexico. i just wanted to, one, just publicly say how thankful we are that he's back. but two, to thank you for your leadership on this. i bugged you on the house floor numerous times. you know, i know you are frustrated about how long it was taking but you never let that deter you. even you stayed with it. you were traveling down there to meet with them. and i can tell you, my constituents in florida were really pumped when he came back. and a lot of that has to do with your hard work. so i just want -- >> would the gentleman yield -- >> i will. >> you want to say that after having met sergeant tam reeicci when he came home and following up with friends and families, i'm very, very worried about him. i mention this, and i would like to ask anyone out there, and the sound of our voice, to pray for

him and to offer your support because he's going to need all the help he can get. he was already diagnosed with ptsd in the seven months plus in prison only made it worse. and i'm very concerned about his well-being. he is a very troubled young man and he needs our thoughts and prayers. >> i yield back. >> and i agree wholeheartedly with that. and you know, our veterans when they come back with the post traumatic stress, it is very difficult to then be put in that situation where that condition is being exacerbated. we all need to keep him in our thoughts and prayers. because it is not going to be easy for him. but i just wanted to pub luckli thank you for your determination and i think this committee had a lot to do with that. i yield back. >> permitted to submit written statements to be included in the

sufficient hearing record. withoutings the record will remain open for seven-days to allow materials, extraneous records to be included within the rules. i will introduce the panel now. first of all we have the honorable roberta jacobson. assistant secretary for western hemisphere of affairs at department of state. she has also served as senior coordinator for initiatives in the western hemisphere aep is deputy chief of mission at u.s. embassy in olympia, peru. and on a personal note, i've not found in my political and professional experience anybody that i enjoyed working with more than her. she is a professional in every way and has a big heart and big mind. and i'm so appreciative of all of the dwret work that you've done and i just want you to know there's a lot of goodwill emanating from committee members. we may differ on policy or

questions but never have a trust gap with you. i want you know that from the bottom of the heart. ms. hogan, another stellar individual we've been thrilled to be working with as acting administrate fort u.s. agency and bureau for latin-america and caribbean and serving as direct forthe fast team overseeing reconstruction efforts after the 2010 earthquake we thank you for being here. mr. robert kaplan, the president and ceo of the inner american foundation previously he worked at inner american development bank in the division for mexico central america dominican republic and haiti. we also have ms. weedener, deputy assistant secretary, and she is here in an advisory ka pass pipt we appreciate that. she is deputy assistant secretary in the bower row population migration in the state department. she worked at the pentagon in

african affairs division and cop sultant in the humanitarian assistance and in conflict programming. you all understand and know the lighting system. it'll be green until the last minute. and then it will go amber. and it will let you know that you've got a minute left. then when it goes red you're out of time and we would appreciate you conclude there. and then, we will have questions from members. so ms. jacobson, i'll recognize you first. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and let me start by associating myself with congressman deisn't aoses comments. i think for all of us who work to get sergeant tam ricci home, we greatly appreciate your leadership in this manner. i would like to thank you and members of the committee for being here today to talk about the u.s. strategy for engagement if central america. i know that many of you and you personally under chairman have been so involved in our efforts. the development a humane and effective response for the

children arriving at our southwest border. though we are encouraged that the numbers decreased recently, we cannot let up in efforts to protect vulnerable migrants and address the underlying factors that push them north. this year is noted more than 50,000 unaccompanied children left their homes in central america to make that journey. and the spike in migration is a warning sign that long standing challenges in central america remain very problematic. we must address the underlying factors compelling migrations or we are doomed to repeat that migration. but we believe the essential condition for finding a solution is present and that is political will in the region. last week the interamerican bachk hosted a conference on central america where biden and presidents from the see there northern triangle countries spoke about opportunities and challenges for growth. the president's publicly presented a plan called the alliance for prosperity. and it includes a clear assessment of the region's

challenges and specific steps that they themselves will take to resolve them. but they're message is a conference is simple. they will take those tough choices to address the challenges that they need our help. so over past 18 months, the u.s. government has taken a hard look at both our approach and our investment. while security is paramount we have broadened our vision on how to achieve it and have an interagency strategy that both aligns and supports the objectives for the alliance for prosperity. to achieve that vision in which all the citizens in central america choose to remain and thrive in those countries, we need to focus on prosperity, governance and security. prosperity agenda fosters integration of a regional market of 43 million people so that local businesses can become more competitive and the region attracted to international investors. economic growth and economic opportunity has to give young

peop people. economic growth and security are only sustainable when the rule of law and democratic institutions flourish and civil society aep media can play their right for world and anti-corruption is reduced. and the prosperity and government agendas are for the security agenda we must act on now. otherwise they will not bear fruit in the longer term. we are a long way from achieving those goals in central america and that was obvious last summer in the risks that thousands of children took, the risk of ever present rape, abuse, and death to fleet the dire country conditions in their home countries. mr. chairman, over the past few months we have seen important suction sayses. important messages campaigns about the dangers of those journeys has effectively countered false messages. increased focus on smuggling networks and honduras and yacgu

led to the arrest of children. apprehensions are down to levels not seen since january 2013. but we know that this must be sustained by increased commitments by both the administration and congress. and so yes, we have as one alternative offered at the direction of the white house a new program that will allow parents lawfully present in the united states from those three countries to petition for their children in el salvador, guatemala and honduras to come to the united states as refugees. those children not eligible for refugee status may be considered on a case by case basis for humanitarian parole. it is equally important we fund this strategy which could take as much as $5 billion over five years to fully implement. we believe again that there is reason for optimism about central america.

the three threaders of the northern triangle have taken tough decision and are investing in their own national budget. we have a vision and plan and we want to work with you to help central america and help protect u.s. national security. thank you very much. >> we move to mr. kaplan. sorry, ms. hogan, sorry. >> ranking member, members of subcommittee. thank you for the opportunity to share how u.s. aid is respond together challenge of unaccompanied minors, migrating from central america to the u.s. lowereder. our response to this challenge is consistent with u.s. aid's mission to partner, end poverty and resilient democratic society while advancing our security and positive parity. in recognition of the gravity of the development challenges in central america and impact of those challenges could have on the united states, usa has

maintained funding levels in central america even in a constrained budget environment. in fact, we've shifted approximately $100 million over the last five years from the usa programs in south america to central america. however, as a recent spike of unaccompanied minors over the summer clearly demonstrates, more needs to be done. this is why the administration requested additional resources in the fy 2014 supplemental budget. we believe these additional resources will result in security and development gains that far exceed their cost, even in the short run. through the regional security initiative, we are supporting crime and violence prevention programs that expand opportunities for youth living in high crime neighborhoods and strengthening the institutions charged with administering justice and keeping people safe. usa's prevention strategy revolves around smart targeting.

both geographic and demographic. concentrating prevention efforts on high risk youth in high risk communities. i am pleased to report that we have independent evidence that our programs are working. the final results from a rig vows four-year impact evaluation carried out by vanderbilt university and el salvador, guatemala, honduras and panama show that. reporting crime is lower and citizens feel safer in the neighborhoods where we are working p. when compared to 2010 baseline, in the same target communities, the vanderbilt evaluation found that in guatemala, 60% fewer residents reported being aware of homicide. in honduras, 57% fewer reported being aware of extortion. and in el salvador, 36% fewer reported being aware of illegal drug sales in their neighborhoods. in short, where u.s. aid works, people see their communities

getting better. adoption, ownership and expansion by central american governments are more important than ever. president hernandez of honduras publicly committed to allocating 30% of funds collected through the country's security tax to support prevention programs like ours. in guatemala, the government has expanded u.s. aid successful 24-hour port model to additional communities. and the government of el salvador lodged its ambitions new national strategy for violence prevention in february to empower municipalities to lead prevention efforts. while insecurity is cited as primary driver for the migration of miners from the region, lack of jobs and economic opportunity at home is also a critical factor. usa's development program also seeks to improve educational opportunities and lively hoods for the poor and rural areas. these programs remain imminently relevant because they compliment

and amplify our youth and urban oriented crime prevention programmi programming. for example, a youth aid partnership unlocked $25 million to help spur job creation. as part of the feed the future in honduras, sustainabling ary cultural practice to the region to help livelihood even food security of 50,000 families. these kind of economic development programs align with our crime prevention to build a foundation for prosperity. and in so doing, relief the pressure on youth and their families to migrate north. usa continues to successfully utilize partnerships with the private sector to sustain our investment in central america. we have leveraged approximately 40 million in private sector resources to support at risk youth. in honduras we developed 41 partnerships to strength thej

keying ary kcultural value chains. we are also partnering with starbucks to help with the coffee outbreak. we recognize that our current levels of resources are insufficient to spur the large scale transformative change needed in the region. additional funding would enable us to significantly scale successful programs in the communities in greatest need and fully implement the u.s. government strategy for engagement with central america balance is the three interrel e interrelated objectives of prosperity and governance and security. thank you very much and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. mr. kaplan? >> chairman salmon, ranking members, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear today to testify on behalf of the interher can foundation. an assistanwe appreciate there

subcommittee's long standing support of our mission to help people in the region lep themselves. in poor communities we see the cost of too few jobs and lack of educational opportunities. in northern triangle of central america one quarter of the population consists on less than $2 a day. violence is crawling. a community safety is broken down. facing these threats families do not know where to turn. in this context the if invests carefully to help local citizens gain some control over their lives by carrying out initiatives this they themselves conceive. they demonstrate their commitment by contributing their own funds to the ef important providing about $1.30 for every dollar invested by the ief making the u.s. a minority poortener in the development

projects we support. today our active portfolio includes 81 projects representing $37 million in combined investment in our grantee partners. in the three northern triangle countries, we support initiatives in over 880 communities. our work is not limited to youth but 45% of our investment in the three countries benefits youth, young people directly. our work is having a real effect. 14,300 jobs have been created and the northern triangle alone 80% of our partners attract household income reported an increase on average plor than doubling household income in a year. and it has reduced the appeal of migration. at beginning of a funded project in el salvador, 83% of participants under 26 said they would consider migrating. by mid project the number is down to 22%. grantee partner this guatemala combined education about the risk of high gracing with a credit program and training for small farming businesses. by the end of the grant 7 the%

of the 730 young participants said they decided ton migrate.8 of the 730 young participants said they decided ton migrate. of the 730 young participants said they decided ton migrate.9 of the 730 young participants said they decided ton migrate.t of the 730 young participants said they decided ton migrate.hf the 730 young participants said they decided ton migrate.e% of the 730 young participants said they decided ton migrate.% of the 730 young participants said they decided ton migratnton mi . we have seen when disadvantaged youth come together on their own initiative, to start their own small businesses and exercise leadership, and team work for the benefit of their community, they are less likely to leave. why? because they become invested in the present and future of their home communities. 1 honduran teenager recently told us before participating in the program i wanted only to follow the american dream. now i believe that i can create my american dream here. the if does much plor than send dollars to the region. this is only part of the story. our whole approach is designed to strengthen the capabilities of our grantee partners so they can take on even bigger

challenges. fundamentally we want them to learn from each other and be leaders in their own communities. in the process, they create social and economic anchors at home and demonstrate their preference to stay. in fact, i am encouraged. because we see many opportunities at the grass roots level to address the causes of youth migration. the impact of a single thriving community, organized group of rural poor, may seem small but they become the safe havens and incubators of change that inspire others. if reached, if empowered, and if connected to each other, they are capable of generating the change so desperately needed in the region. they need a chance to become a citizen. fupdmentally they are the ones who will change their communities and countries. 45 years ago, a small congressional delegation of members of this committee paid a visit to central america. what they learned is not surprising. that true long lasting change depends on large part on thriving communities.

communities that provide not only social and economic opportunities for the most marginalized but are themselves foundations upon which democracies are built. one result from that trip is the creation of the interamerican foundation. which helped support the protagonists, not participants, in their own development. our work naturally compliments other u.s. efforts for improving prosperity, governance and security in central american countries. again, i thank the subcommittee for the opportunity to testify before you today on behalf of the if and our thousands of grass roots partners in the region. >> thank you. i'm going to go ahead and ask questions and yield to the ranking member. my first question, maybe it would be most appropriate for you, mr. secretary, or ms. wheezener, but according to the information, the administration will at least last friday, individuals residing in the u.s.

can petition for refugee status for their children even spouses living in central america. this is therefore a family reunification program resumably the priority three, p-3 category under 8cfr section 207, principle refugee admitted to the united states may request follow to joint benefits for his or her spouse and or unmarried children under the age of 21. if the family has become separated. my question is this, are the family members living in the u.s. who petition for these children refugees? are they refugees and if they have -- if they are, have they been deemed as such, have they been deemed refugees. if not, under what authority are the nonrefugees living in the united states under a whole host of statuses allow to petition refugee status for their family member? >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i am going to turn to ms.

wheezener who is much more dap at this because i think this is not the standard program you are describing. it is something quite different and it is not -- it is designed no focus on the children in country who are the ones that were trying to get out of such a difficult circumstance in this northern triangle countries without having them attempt this very dangerous journey and try and enter the country in the undocumented status as they did last year. katherine? >> sure. so to try to answer your question and please follow up if i missed part of it, but you asked if this is part of the p-3 program. it is not exactly part of the p-3 program based on people out of their country of origin already as refugees. you asked if the parents themselves in the united states would be considered refugees under this program. they are not.

they are considered under the statuses under which they are here. so they are either here as lawful permanent residents or additional six statuses that are eligible to apply. so the refugee claim is a claim of the child themselves. the child facing the risk of persecution, either they experienced persecution or have one in the five protected grounds. race, religion, their nationality, their political opinion or their membership in a particular social group. so maybe another way to put it is that the eligibility to petition in this program is one category. and those are the parents and their statuses here in the united states. but in tosorder to be granted refugee status, the child has to show they are eligible for that status. >> so it is not the p-3 program? >> it is not the p-3 program.

>> if a minor spouse is not granted status, they will be considered for parole. what kind of visa will they then be entering the united states with? and how will we be able to ensure that they don't overstay if their two-year renewal is not approved? and finally the administration noticed the parolees would be able to attend school. would a minor be allowed to attend university in would they qualify for federal grants, state aid and what is the real difference between a refugee and parolee who can potentially apply for doca if parole status is not renewed. >> i can definitely talk about differences between the offer to refugees who settled and what is available it parolees. for details on the parole program, i have to refer you to the department of homeland secure whoit administers the po roll pro groom. when a refugee comes to the

united states under our settlement program, they are eligible for a range of benefits. which is settlement and replacement grant administered from the state department through reset elment agencies and also eligible for follow-on refugee benefits from heap health and human servicees. which is like enrolling in school, when they are of age, getting housing. these are children with parents so we are assuming their parents have homes and job. so it is more about getting them into school as refugees. there is no cost to apply to the program in either case. if you come as refugee your medical check is free and you will get a loan to take the flight to the united states which you then have to repay back later. parolees is a temporary -- sorry, one of the more important aspects of refugee reset elment is it is a path to relegalment status and permanent citizenship. that's one of the main

differences of parolees. as you noted, it often last two years and you have to apply for renewal. none of the benefits i just mentioned for reset elment are available to parolees either. in fact, if you're. eligible for refugee status and are considered for parole then your family has to submit an affidavit of support. which shows that they are able to support you here in the united states. >> and if it is not the p-3 program, what is it? what program is it? >> in country refugee processing which is allowed -- i mean, it is accounted for in the law. the -- both refugee status and parole discretion are in the immigration and nationality act. >> do you know what law it is under, so we can reference? >> we do.

we can get the specific citations. >> thank you. recognize the ranking member. >> first, let me apologize for being late. these days, we have a lot of things going on. you know, i'm upset about something that happens to us, this exodus happened. and i'm very concerned about the origin. of how this happened. and i would just say dwsh-i'll go back and forth. when this whole thing started, everyone is shocked about the kids and conditions and everything else. there is a meeting. we ask the ambassador from these countries to come to meeting to we can discuss how this whole thing started. can you believe we got one ambassador from the countries. and they sent staffers. meanwhile we have 13, 14, 15

congress members at this kmeeting and we have to now try to deal with staffers. to me, that shows me that maybe they were not as serious at trying to stop this.me, that sh they were not as serious at trying to stop this.with staffe. to me, that shows me that maybe they were not as serious at trying to stop this. to me, that just -- i just don't know if this whole stampede started as a rumor. and all those kids, all of a sudden, came across the border because of the rumors that started. but if 14 or 15 members of congress call for a meeting to try to help, because we were there -- this is the help, you don't accepted a staffer to the meeting. you try to deal with the situation and see how it can best be alleviated. so i am more concerned at the roots of why this happened.

then obviously we have to deal after they get here. i don't want to -- right now, there's a lull. obviously not as many kids coming over. but i don't want to see this being used as a release on the pressure cooker on somebody say all right we start this rumor so we get this rumors and you have a rush of kids coming over. i just don't, you know, i just don't know how you deal with that. >> if i could, the only thing i would say is that i think one of the things that last summer taught all of us, both here in the united states, but especially in these countries, was it was a wake-up call for some of the countries in terms of what they needed do at home. and what we've seen over the last five months is a real shift in the attention to some of the underlying