respond, who gets the best marks and who gets the worst marks on your scoring? because i understand you score. >> right, we do an assessment every year. let me -- >> just who gets the best ones? i don't need -- i've got five minutes, who gets the best scores and who gets the worst scores? >> well, we have, if you look at the assessment, we have a range of milestones, over 20 some milestones, we rank and score on a bunch of things. >> how does the justice department score on those milestones? >> justice department scores quite well. >> would you suggest if you're seeing the milestones and you're scoring the milestones the that the testimony from all these other folks who if they set milestones they wouldn't give you high marks, how do you give yourself high marks? >> i actually for the past two years, congressman, have been working collaboratively to set the milestones, it's actually

been a joint effort. >> ms. atkinson gave us an example of foyer requests and it taking ten years her daughter was eight. she was 18 by the time the foyer request. would you say the that that is a great response? >> no of course not. >> would you say that that response is unique, that the there are none others like that throughout the foyer requests? >> of course not as well. >> so what part of violating the law and it gives particularry responses, what point of violating that law does the department of justice condone? >> i think that it's important, it's important to look at areas that need improvement in i. >> what part of the law. >> improving -- >> does the justice department

condone? >> we -- >> so you don't condone violating the law? >> of course not, of course not. >> so i would think that would be your answer. do you violate the law? >> of course not. >> so you never violated that law? >> we work hard very we work very hard at my office. >> i believe the that. >> to promote transparency and compliance with the law. >> i believe that. so the question under sworn testimony today is the justice department does the not violate, has never violated the foya law, is that your testimony? >> i think what you're asking me is do we ever respond to requests beyond 20 working days. >> is that the law? >> the law allows for extensions of time. >> have you ever gone beyond the law? >> so i wouldn't characterize it as going beyond the law because the law actually recognizes in many different aspects the foya recognizes the

reality, congressman the need for agencies to take more time to respond to certain requests. >> all right. is there anything in the law, so let me ask you, is there anything in the law that would ever give you waivers to the allow ten years to respond to the a foya request because i can't find it, can you show, direct me to where it would be ten years? >> sure sure, the way the timing provision is set out in the foya is it's in section 6. there is a basic response time of 20 days and you can ask for ten additional days and steps agencies can take if they need beyond the additional ten days. there is a series. >> can you show me where it's okay for ten years? >> do you believe it's in there

for ten years? >> what i know is in there is working more than ten days. >> recognize the gentlemen from virginia. >> thank you mr. chairman. ms. barr i must say i am reeling from the stunning revolution that you have no e-mails from two former secretaries of state who covered the entirety of the bush administration, and i want to make sure i understood your answers to mr. comings very clearly. you are the top foia official at the department of state, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> if i understand your sworn testimony, you're saying that as of right now, the state department has the not been able to identify any e-mails from secretary powell or secretary rice is the that correct? >> what i was saying is that the state department did not have any e-mails that were responsive

to the request. >> do you have other e-mails? >> i know that we have other e-mails for secretary rice. i'm not sure what we have in our collection for secretary powell my statements were based on what i understood to be a summery of how we had requested a number of former secretaries to come back -- >> ms. barr, my time is limited. my time is limited. i'm going to help you clarify your testimony. so are you saying you actually do have e-mails from secretary powell that -- >> i'm not sure if i have actual e-mails from secretary powell in general. is that what you're asking? >> i'm asking is there any evidence at all of any e-mails

from secretary powell on his official or personal e-mail accounts that you have access to as the head foia official as department of stay? >> i know that he did not provide any copies of e-mails of official records. >> really? for four long years -- >> please let me finish, okay? >> please do so in a concise fashion. i only have five minutes. >> yes, sir. >> go ahead. >> i don't have any e-mails that were responsive to the our request. >> you keep using that phrase. do you have e-mails from colin powell that you have access to. >> my personal knowledge of what we might have in general i'm not sure. >> you're not sure. do you arehave access -- >> the thought the question asked to me before was much more specific. >> do you have access -- since you're not sure about colin powell, which i still find stunning, there is no evidence

of any but you're the not sure. what about secretary condoleezza rice? >> i know she used a state.gov account and i'm sure we have access to them but i thought the question was in the context of responsive material or -- >> what do you mean? >> because we had a request. >> and your testimony was there is no evidence of e-mails from her responsive to the requests. >> yes. >> none? >> we didn't provide any. >> what happened to them? >> the it's not responsive, we don't supply it but that doesn't mean that the e-mails, that the there are no e-mails period from her. >> but there are some e-mails from her? you're not sure about colin powell but you're sure about secretary rice. >> i know secretary rice used the state.gov account. >> which means they are

preserved somewhere. >> somewhere. >> have you ever seen one? >> no, not personally. >> i find that amazing as well. do the federal records act apply to secretaries powell and secretary rice? >> yes, it applies to all but again, federal records can be more than e-mail. >> i understand that. but let's stick with e-mails for a minute. >> okay. >> so is it in compliance with the federal records act to in fact wipe out e-mails whether they are on your personal acounsel or your official account? >> it is not, people are, we ask each employee to preserve official records and that's the responsibility for every employee. >> right. >> and we have to depend on individual employees to carry

out their responsibilities. >> so just to summarize, if i get, and please correct me if i get i wrong your testimony is you're unaware of surviving e-mails from secretary powell response -- >> i you said personally. >> i understand, you have a title. presumably, you would know if anybody knew but we'll use your phrase responsive to the request. in that lane there are no surviving e-mails from secretary colin powell the that you're aware of. >> that are responsive. >> with respect to secretary rice similarly, you're unaware of surviving e-mails from secretary rice responsive to the request? >> that is creek. >> there may be or in fact your guess is there are surviveing e-mails from her but they are outside that lane of responsive to the request? >> yes, sir. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll rick news mr. heist for five minutes.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. yesterday, as you well know, this committee heard testimony from several esteemed members of the press and outside groups who have experienced tremendous problems with foia requests and quite frankly, i was shocked and astonished by the testimony we heard yesterday. several comments stick to my mind, one in parparticular who used the phrase criminal obstruction to do with foia requests with the irss targeting of groups and an official told him if you scrutinize the government, the government will scrutinize you. moments ago ranking member cummings said all of you are making things sound rosey. we have a mess with potential criminal obstruction taking

place. ms. howard, is that what tom fitten described common practice with the irs? >> it's not my experience it's any practice thewithin the irs. i don't see an intent -- >> so you see no targeting take place. you would deny what came out nationally. >> out side my area of expertise. i can speak to the records production. >> if someone makes a foia request to the irs, is that personal potentially a tar he for retaliation? >> no, sir. >> okay. so you would deny that there has been any type of retaliation audits that type of thing from the irs because of people so-called skrud newsingiez scrutinizing. >> the way foia requests come

in, logged into a system and the folks that work the foia requests have access to the system and rest of the irs has no need for access -- >> that's not my question. my question is has the iirs participated? >> i have no direct knowledge of audit side of the house. that's not my area of expertise. >> but you have knowledge of foia side of things. >> and you're denying there would be any such retaliation. >> i have not shared any information with anybody that would be in a position to retaliate. >> okay. let me go further to a comment you said made a little bit earlier with the chairman regarding lois lerner are you saying and i just want to clarify your testimony here today, are you saying there was no special treatment that was

given to her for protection in spite of fact that you yourself said that her case was the tip of the iceberg? >> when i meant was the request for her e-mails was part of the request this committee and other investigators made for information on the issue. one of the things i do want to clarify -- >> please be quick. >> okay. is that the title governmental liaison in my title is not the liaison with congress but with state and other federal agencies, that's where my area of responsibility is in addition to foia. so a lot of the requests that would come from congress would not automatically land -- >> we're not talking able request from congress we're talking about foia request and the other request. we're trying to get to the bottom of what appears to be out right obstruction and getting a rosey picture that is not an accurate picture. i want to shift to ms. newman,

in your testimony, you mentioned that your agency avoids foia requests that might be operation licensetive material, is that a correct -- >> no it's not. we don't avoid any foia requests but we do consider foia requests that may be seeking information that is operational licensetive. >> is operation licensey sensitive. >> it would incloud in -- include law enforcement national security issues and we when we get a request. >> so there would be no other case where information -- listen, we had testimony one after another after another and i don't know where you guys he some of your information, quite frankly. we had people saying the average wait is years to get foia responses. i wish i had more time, my time is running out. the foia request is absolutely

essential to government transparency and constitutional rule of law and the evidence is abun abundant this is being obstructed. this is an issue we got to get to root of and you folks are part of the problem. >> i recognize the gentleman from illinois ms. duckworth for five minutes. >> in september of 2012 the oigishoig ish issued a report on the foia program, office of information programs and services and the report states and i quote, the departments foia process is inefficient and ineffective, are you familiar with this report? >> yes i am. >> i know you had only been on job a few months before when it was issued but i wanted to ask

you aly l bit more about i, report focused on the office of information programs and services that office is within the burro of administration, i understand, and you serve as the assistant secretary for that burro, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> i would like to go through issuesed issues raised in the report. it said, i just want to quote the report, it says persistent neglect of fund mental leadership responsibilities and management practices had profound consequences, the oig team's observations, discusses with staff and responses to oig's questionnaires indicated an office with problematic moral, perceptions of favoritism micro management, practices and confused lines of authority. this really concerns me. i understand that you had only been on the job just six months so the this investigation probably took place before you

got there but how did you respond to those findings? >> well, i took those that oig report very, very seriously, i was within the first six months of my tenure and i immediately became involved in doing everything i could to address the issues. in addition to just devoting my perm time personal time to doing whatever i could to make sure employees received proper leadership training training, that there were clear lines of authority, he actually moved some people around. one part many of the problem is there were supervisors who were not physically located close to the employees that they were supervising in addition to that, a that time, i did have some positions that i was able to reallocate to that section.

we also had a number of vacancies and in fact at the beginning of that perpiod, we were able to hire a new director who made a huge difference in that section. i is something that i am always involved with any of my units but this report was like the first very negative report i had received on one of my units when i started, so i took it seriously. >> are you still dealing with the issues in the report? >> yes, we've closed most of the reckommendations recommendations, but some of recommendations the that involved other burros, we're still working on it but the this is something, you know, we have to do a quarterly report to ig, so it's something that i talked

to the senior management in that section about all the time. >> okay. the report found flaws in the department's records management. and it stated that the department's records management infrastructure is inefficient and ineffective and said failure to develop systems resulted in poor performance. is the state department overall taking steps to improve the record's management processes? >> yes we are. first of all we're participating in a government-wide working group that is dealing with records manage management, and i have been in a couple meetings and i can assure you that they are very passionate and involved people working very hard on this. in addition to that, as i mentioned earlier in my oral testimony, the secretary himself is very much committed to preservation and transparency and has asked the oig to look

into a number of issues and what we are doing on records management is one of those issues. >> thank you. i hope that the state dpepartment will continue to make this a top priority. foia is important and i'm sure you know that this, i'm sure this committee and myself personally will be following up to make sure the that process continues, thank you. i yield back mr. chairman. >> we recognize mr. carter for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman, mr. chairman, members of panel, in preparation for this hearing, i actually used my search engine on my computer to look up foia request and i was quite surprised and somewhat disappointed, i have to be honest with you that one of the results is what i hold in my hand and this is handout from the website of the minority

leader, the minority party leader in the senate, senator harry reid. i is a document that encourages deferred action, applicants to file foia requests, to file foia requests for records and immigration files so the lawful permanent residents here now can actually find out and be prepared when the parents of their child file for deferred status. i was shocked. it's quite impressive and offers tips as to what they should do to file the foia requests but clearly states in this handout, it clearly states that the united states citizenship and immigration services is not currently accepting any applications because of the court order that we're familiar with. yet, it still encourages them in this document to go ahead and file. it still encourages them to do

that. ms. newman, the foia backlog has more than doubled. why is the this? do you know why it's more than doubled? >> congressman, the foia backlog more than doubled in parabecause we've received an enormous increase in the request for fiscal year 2014. ice and usids are the recipients of most of these requests as many of these requests seek immigration related records. i can't -- >> so you do think that it's a result of people encouraging these app these applicants to file requests? >> i can't speak to that but the trigger servearch in request. >> you do admit they are related to immigration requests?

>> i am saying if i understand your question correctly, that a significant number of the requests received by the department are request for immigration records. >> fair enough. in your opening statement you said that the number of requests through dhs increased over 182%. >> since 2009. >> since president obama took office, that's correct. is that correct? >> since he issued his open government directive. >> so do you think since he issued his open government directive. >> 2009. >> so you think it's a result of the deferred action program? >> again i can't speak to the many events and activities out side of the department that may trigger a surge in foia requests. i can't speak to whether or not anyone is encouraging requests and whether those words of encouragement encouragement. >> ms. newman, are you familiar

with the g 6 39 form? >> i can't say i am. >> when did you take over in this department? >> at the end of fiscal year 2013. >> that form i believe was just introduced in your department in year, so i would think that you would be familiar with it. >> if you might remind me what that is. >> it has to do with the app applicants to help expedite that. do you know whether that those number, that form has been used the increase in the usage of the form? >> i personally don't have awareness of the specific form you're talking about. i would be happy to consult with my staff and get back with you. >> i hope you will. i would think you would have complete awareness of that being the director, if there was a new form implemented to expedite some foia requests coming

through. >> i'm not aware of specifics with respect to the processing of specific cases or specific types of cases. >> okay. can you get back with us on that and please provide for this not only that but what it's used for specifically because that's what i understand it's used for and if that form has been used and how much it's increased. >> i'd be happy to do so. >> thank you, appreciate that. i want to mention to you again mention to you, as well ms. new newman, i have a bill to address the backlog firefighter foia backlog requests. the majority of foia backlogs exist at dhs so this is something i hope you will look at and i hope it will be something to assist you and help you and help us to eliminate the backlog as best we can. >> thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman and i yield back. >> thank you. i'll recognize the gentleman from the virgin islands for five

minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. good morning witnesses, good morning to you-all and thank you for the information you're providing to us. one of the things the that i really wanted us to focus on is pie my colleagues here discussed there is a problem and everyone is aware there is problem, i don't think you sitting here are the problems. i think that the there are processes and directives and issues that have happened within your agencies that create these backlogs we're talking about and i would like to try and get to the root of what the what is the reason for this. we've talked about in some instances, ms. pustaayy, you have more requests and you highlighted in your testimony that the federal government receives 714,231 now foia requests in 2014 is that

correct? >> that's correct. >> in the beginning of fiscal year 2009, i understand that the there were 557,000. >> right. >> that's an increase of 28%. >> exactly. >> so that's one variable that become as problem for us which is the increase in the number of foia request. ambassador barr i understand the department of state has an increase in over 300% of foia requests, is that correct? >> yes since 2008. >> so that's one side of the equation, i think what we haven't talked about is the other side which is the amount of resources that you have and i would have hoped that you-all would have brought that to light in some of your testimonies so i wanted to dig into that aly ly little by, as well. in 2009 instructed agencies with sizable backlogs to reduce those by 10%. was that correct?

that a directive given to each one of you? yes? everyone issued that? ms. pus the urks srksuspustay, you said quote, we roughliest mate this three-week period could have resulted in 32,000 more foia requests being processed, right? >> that's correct. >> have you increased the resources you have to address the backlogs? >> well i can tell you that the challenges the that we've identified that agencies are facing with backlogs number one as you mentioned, the cedesteady increase in incoming requests and staffing has been at its lowest level this past fiscal year. it was lower than it's been for six years, so resources hiring freezes, government shut downs where requests can come in but nobody at the government can process them, they all impact. >> so ms. pustay with that

you're talking about decreases. >> right. >> your office of information policy during fiscal year 2014, there were 3,838 full-time foia staff devoted to the administration of foia throughout the government. we understand that that is a 9% decrease in the amount of full-time foia staff from year before, but does that figure sound correct? >> the it certainly is not the size of oip, we're about 43 people at oip. >> throughout government to handle foia request. >> definitely the staffing level across the government have decreased. >> how does that impact the processing of the foia requests? >> we're trying very hard to find ways to gain efficiencies in processing utilizing technology and that's a big factor that we've been a big area where we've been putting emphasis and there are

efficiencies to be gained with technology but at the end of day, you do need trained foia professionals who can analyze documents for disclosebility and so there is no substitute for personnel to handle requests. >> so it's your belief that having additional staff to process these back longs, as well as the additional foia requests would be the best way in which to handle these backlogs. >> i think having resources for both staff and technology together will be a very effective way. >> ms. newman, would you agree that would help your agency? >> in my case i don't want to get too far ahead of the inden penalty -- inwe denpe deninpen -- independent review. the value of staff resources with enhanced use of technology.

>> secretary barr, would you say that would assist you, as well? >> yes, i do believe it would a assist me but i think that, you know, within many agencies we are all trying to meet our priorities and. >> so the foia requests a priority? >> yes, it is a priority. >> what would be the best way to address that priority? >> i think we have to com to work with technology to see if we can gain additional efficiencies but i also see that the increasing request are also part of the american public's increasing interest in what we do and i don't expect that to away. >> how do you address i? with technology alone or staff

as well? >> we're all come paying with for resources. >> that's what you come to congress for is to ask us for those resources so you have an opportunity here to do that and i think you would avail yourself of that opportunity. >> yes, ma'am. >> i yield back my time. >> before you yield back, if you'll yield me a moment. >> of course mr. chairman, always, well not always but in this instance, yes. >> ms. pus urks srksuspustay, you said resources are down but if i heard you correct, can you please clarify from your perspective what subpoena hais happening? >> reinwe increased our resources to foia. in 2014 we had 151 full-time employees and that's a 21% increase over the prior two

years. >> so to say that personnel resources across the board glove-wide ms. pus the -- pustay are down my team doubled the number of full-time employees dedicated to foia. that's not a decrease increase quite dramatic. we appreciate the dedication you made. >> mr. chairman, if i could correct the characterization, when i give the figure about staffing, i'm giving an overall number. the number of requests overall has increased overall -- >> i understand the questionrequests but you were talking about personnel. they doubled the number of personnel. >> i'm giving the figure for overall. each agency reports in the annual foia report the number of foia staffing so it's easy to look which agencies increased

and decreased the exact numbers for them. >> you said they all decreased and he said they doubled. >> all staffing has decreased government figure overall. >> yeah, just real quick, i understand what you were saying about overall because i said i in my opening statement. >> thank you. >> and i just wanted to make sure we're clear, although, there are agencies that may have increased overall government and foia personnel decreased. >> absolutely. thank you. >> further yielding part of my point is it's in their best, some think it's in their best interest to just slow this down ride it out and others have given it more priority. we'll now recognize mr. cartwright. >> mr. chairman, in the wake of the edward snowden revelations,

obviously, there has been a debate and public outcry over what some are seeing as the government's overly aggressive reaches into people's personal lives. i don't think most people would question that the need for the government to retain secrecy is important, in my mind, though, there is still an important role for foia requests to shine a like on glove actions that might the not be in line with the core values the that make our country great, ms. newman, i want to ask you with decreased funding and a shrinking number of foia staff what has the effect been on the ability to hold judicial and executive branchs accountable? >> well, certainly with the backlog that has impacted the speed, the speed with which we

can respond to requests and fulfill those requests. i will say that dhs processed 238,031 requests up from 2013 so that's a 16% increase in the number of processed foia requests from the previous fiscal year. i would like to see greater improve mments to fulfill the values of transparency and shining a light on executive branch operations as you know that's embodied in the statute and our professionals are working hard to fulfill those requests and shine that light. >> wouldn't hurt to have more professionals doing this man and woman power work right? >> these are lean times for all federal agencies as you know. >> you are being very diplomatic

but i have to move on, in his testimony, david mcgraw, says there are three areas of foia delays that need to be addressed. unresponsiveness, second agencies referring responses to other agencies and third, there are times where the information being requested is submitted by companies to regulators so the agency had to resolve private industry privacy concerns, congress is working on legislation to expedite the sharing of cyber threat between cyber companies and also within the government here in this committee, we passed out with approval hr 653, this committee reported it out with approval this year, ms. pustay would you comment on 653? are you familiar with that legislation? >> i'm not prepared to comment on any specific legislation

congressman. >> okay. >> i certainly can speak to some of concepts that you just mentioned. >> well, let's do that. do you have recommendation how they might be applied to increasing government transparency? >> i think one of the key things that we've been doing just to take an example, after meeting with civil society representatives during my tenure as director of oip i was, i have been very impacted by the fact that the basic conacceptsepcept of better communication can go a long way to making the process seem more understandable and flow more smoothly and prevent disputes from happening. so in that sense, it's been a focus of mine i have done two separate guidance articles on the importance of good customer services and making sure requesters understand what is happening with their request the that they have a point of contact at an agency. >> i don't mean to cut you off.

would you forward those to my office? >> absolutely. >> thank you. i want to conclude by following up on something mr. connolly from virginia was talking able talking about secretary of state condoleezza rice's e-mails and you were testifying your understanding was she used an official account to do e-mails although you had not ever seen one of those e-mails from her on that account or any other. my information is that secretary rice has not disclosed whether she used a personal e-mail account for official business. she has not disclosed whether she used a private e-mail account for official business and ms. barr, can you confirm or deny? do you know either way on that question? it's a yes or no. i have to hurry, yes or no?

do you know? >> secretary rice told us that she did not use personal e-mail for official business. >> well, i'm going to invite my dear friend from south carolina who i know is looking into the question of e-mails of secretaries of state to really devil delve into whether secretary condoleezza rice used private e-mail a accounts for personal business. >> recognize the gentleman from south carolina. >> ms. barr you previously testified that the former secretaries e-mail arrangement with herself was not acceptable. those were the words you used, not acceptable, what made it not acceptable to you?

>> i thought that i know that in my oral statement today i was talking about it. i think in my former testimony that was being asked the if i thought in general it was okay to use, if any employee would use a private e-mail account. >> in response to the a question when you testified before the senate and i'm sure the circumstances were was i okay to exclusively use personal e-mail with which to conduct public business and you used the phrase not acceptable. what makes i not acceptable? >> what we want to make sure that we do under the federal records act is to capture

official records so they are available to what we do and how we come to those decisions. we don't like for records to be separated from agency so we with were very pleased to have these records back in our position so that they are paraof our collection and that we can make them available to the public. >> do you recall why secretary clinton availed herself of a personal server and used exclusively personal e-mail? do you recall the explanation given or have you been given an explanation why she went that route? >> i can't speak to that authoritatively, my understanding is that the secretary said that she did i as a matter of convenience. >> and you know what -- >> i don't know that personally.

>> that's my understanding, too, in part because that's what she said. i guess my next question would be if it was solely for convenience, why not return the records the day you acceptseparated from the state department? >> i have no information. >> has she explained why she retained custody and control of the public records for almost two years after she separated? >> i'm not aware of the that, sir. >> do you know what prompted the former secretary to return those public records to the public domain? >> we sent a letter to secretary clinton, as well as to secretaries rice, powell and allbright and asked if they have records the that might have been generated on non-department systems that should be part of our official records. >> how were you able to compile

with foia requests in the that almost two-year interim between the time you wroete the letter and when she retained control of the public records? >> sir, e-mails are not the only records. >> right, but as part of the record, if you receive add foia request that would have included e-mails, how would you have been able to compile with the foia request given the fablg you had neither care custody or control of the records? >> we would still search all of our records and we would still look at things like cables, decision memos other types of documents the that we keep to provide a record. >> you would have given what you had but made no representation what you provided was complete because you didn't have the full public records. >> well, we always look at what

we have, sir. >> you can't get i if you don't have it, which raises the next question i have i was listening to my friend from maryland and my friend from virginia make note of the fact that former secretary did return e-mails, what guarantee can you give my fellow citizens what you have now is complete public record? have you been through all of her records to determine what is public and what is private? >> we are processing them now and no we have not completed. >> you're processing what was originally on the server or what she proed viededvided to you. >> we're processing what she provided to us. >> do you know what mechanism she would have gone through to determine what was public record or private or mixed use? do you know what made that initial determination? >> she told us theshe she erred on the side of

inclusion. >> did she tell you she personally reviewed the e-mails or retained counsel to do so. >> i'm not aware if whether she personally did i or retained counsels. >> thank you for answering my questions, i'm over time and suffice to say i have a number of additional questions in this area. >> just for a moment -- >> i'm out of time but if i'm not, i'm not. >> just one question, ms. barr what e-mails are you processing for secretary powell and secretary rice? you said you're processing e-mails. >> for clinton. >> i mean yeah but what e-mails are you processing for secretary powell -- listen to me -- secretary powell any? >> no. >> are you processing for secretary rice? >> no.

>> all right, thank you. i yield back. >> i recognize the gentleman from the district of colombia, ms. norton for five minutes. >> i understand ms. barr, while we have the secretary clinton's we don't have any from secretary powell because he didn't save his, is that right? >> yes, ma'am. >> thank you. now, when we he a chronic problem like the this that keeps coming back, we often set up an officer or another department or another part of the government to help us out so i noticed that of course, notice indeed in fact in hr 653 there is creation of a chief foia officer counsel. it could be run joinltly by the doj and office of glove ib for

information, this is for ms. pustay because your office would be task to run the information services. do you support the notion of a chief foia officer's counsel? >> i'm not prepared to answer any specific questions able a specific legislative proposal but what i can tell you is that chief foia officers who are designated high level officials, designated by law with foia as it currently kpilsexists really hold the key to helping improve foia across the government and we do a lot to work with chief foia officers because the idea there is the that you want a high level official in every agency who has authority and responsibility to make as you were that the foia operations have sufficient staffing, have

sufficient attention, have the resources that they need to operate and gearing off that important role that a chief foia officer plays starting in 2009 with the attorney general holder's foia guidelines we have the chief foia report and every year we ask, we at oip at the department of justice, we ask chief foia officers to report on the steps they have taken to improve compliance and address a range of issues use of technology proactive disclosures, timeliness in responding to the a request and every year we have been changing the met tricks that we ask and the questions that we ask of those chief foia officers because as we see foia processes improve or as we see steps taken to approve foia, we want to keep agencies to do more and better, so we with, it's an evolving

process for us. so i think that we have a lot of good mechanisms in place right now that take advantage of the position of the chief foia officer. >> well, let me turn to the chief foia officers. how do each of you feel about the notion of a chief foia's counsel. would it be beneficial to you in any way? >> it's an interesting idea. i would have to give that some thoug thought and after doingm , so, i would be happy to share my thoughts with you. >> have you given any thought to that mr., you seem to be the ones that ought to be consulted about that. >> yes, ma'am, i have the not given thought to this as of now but i'm happy to take that back. >> well, i think the committee would benefit from your advice and counsel particularly since

there is a subcommittee hearing here on government operations had a foia hearing and heard from frederick sadler. he had previously served as a foia officer add a food and drug administration and let me read what he said. i would seem appropriate to require agency representation at the highest level possible when the individual is also the most knowledgeable. past experience has shown that not every chief foia officer has the skill set since this is by definition not necessarily that individual's specialty. ms. barr i'll start with you, do you agree with mr. sadler's comment?

comment? >> i think i would depend on how that person, you know, each agency organizes this issue differently. for the state dp i'm the chief foia officer, but i also have a lot of other responsibilities so i have a dpeputy assist tan secretary who is an expert in the issues and i consult closely with that person. >> what about exchange of ideas across agency lines? do you believe sharing of information about agency experience and their ideas and own best practices, what they have done right or wrong would improve the implantation of foia, would the foia officers have a view on that? >> i can certainly tell you that we definitely think that's in incredibly important. we have what i mentioned the

crowuation of a best practices workshop series where the whole idea is to identify a top pick and as i mentioned, our very first top pick is improving timeliness and identify agencies that have achieved success in that area and then have them come and speak to the a gathering of anyone, every interested agency employee7%m share their best practices so that we can leverage success across the government. then what we've done at oip is take that further in that we are, we created a dedicated web page on the website where connected to the best practices workshop series where we list the best practices that came out of each of the sessions we've also issued guidance in relation to the best practices, so it's something that we've been doing already for a full year now and we feel that it's been very successful and it's a very important way to have agencies be able to capitalize on the

good things and the invasions that one another is doing. >> we'll now recognize the gentleman from north carolina for five minutes. >> thank you. i would like to yield my time to the gentleman from north carolina. >> i appreciate you talking with me earlier, i want to pick back up where we were. i was seeking some level of assurance from you to the extent you could give one what was produced to the state department did in fact represent the full universal of what would be public record and i have no interest in private documents. i could careless. i'm interested in making sure the whole public universal is complete, so what assurance can you give the public that state department has everything that would be considered a public record from her tenure as secretary of state? >> she has assured us that she gave us everything she had and

like we do with other federal employees, we have to depend on them to provide that information to us so i have documents and, you know, we've acre cementcepted her assurance that she's given us everything she had that should be part of our official records. >> well, you mentioned other federal employees which got me wondering and i wrote down a list of some other cabinet level folks that i have worked with in my time here. attorney general holder, did he have his own server? >> are you asking me? >> i'm asking whoever can answer it. >> attorney general holder used official doj account. >> he did. how about new attorney general lynch? does she have a personal server. >> same, as well. she's using an official doj

acounsel. >> what about president obama, if you pursue theory of convenience, i can't imagine a busier person on the globe than president obama. did he have his own personal server? ms. barr? >> i have no knowledge. >> well well, reason i'm asking is because you said the that you're doing it the exact same way as any public official and my point is because of this arrange m that former secretary had with themself, you're not in a position to do the same you would with any public official because vice president biden and obama don't have the their personal attorneys going through the e-mails to decide what to return and not. i assume in your position as an apologizely kill non-political unbias position. am i correct? >> yes, sir. >> i believe the department of

state has an insect torepector general, am i right? >> i asked them to look into system of issues. we are co-rare cooperating with them. >> do you know who nominated the kerr renl current inspector general? >> i don't have that information at my fingertips but i can get back to you. >> you don't have to. it was president obama. do you know who controlled the senate when he was confirmed? do you know what the vote was? it was unanimous. >> i knew you were going to give me that information. laugh [ laughter ] >> it was unanimous. i do know the answer to those two. he was unanimously confirmed by a senate controlled by the democrats which makes me think that he, like you is a neutral detached separating what should

be in the public domain from what should be personal why not let the inspector general look at all the records just to make absolutely sure and that way we're not in a position of having to take someone's lawyer's word for it. why not do that? >> well with, it was my understanding, you're talking about the e-mail collection not the entire process? >> no, i'm talking about you had been put in the position of having to take a lawyer's word that you have all the public records, and perhaps it's just the being a lawyer i'm just wondering with a role to public instead of former secretary hiring an attorney to do i why can't the attorney that works for us why can't the inspector general do it?

>> so you're asking me why can't the inspector general make the determination of whether we received all of e-mails? >> yes. >> i really can't speakculate. >> i'm out of time. hopefully we can he more time and we can speculate together. >> i recognize mr. duncan for five minutes. >> mr. chairman thank you for having these hearings. this is very very important and i would simply say that the record the testimony the record on these foia request is simply horrendous. we heard yesterday cheryl the atkinson say foia is a pointless, useless shadow of its former self-and testify erer self and said i took ten or 11 years to get a request she

submitted submitted. another witness said that the pentagon, told him it would take 15 years to give him one and they said they would if he agreed to never file another foia request and the court ruled in his favor captioning performed by vitac