what you were supposed to do which the other four figured out, is not appropriate. we don't have that material and we wanted it before the hearing. i had to get a subpoena to drag you here, and it's wrong. i've heard personally from multiple foia requesters that they wait and they wait and they wait. when they finally get a response, the request is either flatly denied or the pages are blacked out. we saw examples of that yesterday. so why is this necessary? there are some cases where you do have to redact material. i understand that. i appreciate that. but the lack of consistency is just stunning. the time that it takes is just unbelievable. the department of justice is the foia litigator and the provider of agency-wide guidance ought to be the model agency but we know it is not. the department of justice denied approximately 40% of its foia requests in the fiscal year 2014. 3% of requests were denied on

the basis of exemptions. 37% of requests were denied for other reasons. 5% of all requests were denied on the basis of claiming documents were, quote, not reasonabley described. dhs is drowning in foia requests and needs to make sure the right resources are put toward clearing these cases. the department of homeland security receives about one-third of all requests and is responsible for two-thirds of the federal backlog so it's particularly disappointing to see the program in the duplication report. the gao has said this is a terribly mismanaged, ill executed system so much so that there are highlights in the gao's report. my disappoint grew yesterday when the foia research center revealed that dhs has hired

contractors for the purpose of closing rather than completing cases. we would like to explore that. individuals requests records from homeland security might hear from contractors multiple times inquiring about whether or not they're still interested in their requests. that always cracks me up, right? citizen, person from the media goes out of their way to put in a foia request. so much time goes by that the government comes back to them and says, are you still interested? that takes time and resources. the state department is as bad if not worse than dhs on foia compliance. the agency has open cases dating back for decades decades. last year the state department failed to fully respond to more than 65% of its requests. the center for efficiency government graded 15 of the top foia agencies and gave the state department an f on processing. the agencies before the committee today need to bring

sunshine to their programs. the leadership has failed to make it a priority. and that makes the job of the witnesses before the committee much more difficult if not impossible. we know you have a tremendous amount of requests coming your direction. there are a lot of good people who work in your departments and agencies and we thank them for their services. not everything is bad. but it is our role and responsibility to understand how it really works, what you're up against, what you're dealing with in a very candid way so that we can help make it better and we can understand it. there undoubtedly have to be changes. my guess is you want to see some changes. we want to see some changes. we've heard from the people that are very critical. but you're the people right there on the front lines and you represent hundreds and literally thousands of people who are trying to do their job and deal with the tensions that come from

a political persuasion that have been in both the democrat and republican side of the aisle. you have career professionals have been there through lots of different organizations. we want to hear candidly from you what is working what is not working, but give us candid information so we can help better understand it. that's all we ask today. we thank you again for your presence and at this time i'll now recognize the ranking member, mr. cummings for his opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and i thank you for holding these very important hearings on the freedom of information act which is the corner stone of our nation's open government laws. thank you also to our agency witnesses for being with us today. you do have a critical responsibility. that is to make federal records available to the american public

as effectively and efficiently as possible. you're also charged with implementing the directive president obama issued on his first day in office. to implement a new presumption of openness that reverses the policy of withholding information embraced by the bush administration. your job is also extremely difficult and it's getting harder. you and by implication the president are being blamed for the increase in foia backlogs. as we heard at our hearing yesterday, foia backlogs have increased in part as a result of cuts to agency budgets and the dwindling number of foia personnel forced to process record numbers of incoming requests. we did not just only hear that.

mr. mcgraw of the "new york times" talked about a culture of unresponsiveness. and i hope that we will get to that and talk about that because i agree with the chairman. in order for us to get to the bottom of this we've got to have an honest assessment of what is going on. there were a number of witnesses that came before us yesterday that talked about a fear that people who are dealing with the foia requests, honoring them the way they should be because they're afraid to get in trouble. if that's the case, we need to hear about that. the number -- going back to personnel, the number of foia requests sky rocketed from 2009 to 2014. in 2009 when president obama took office there were about 558,000 requests submitted to the federal agencies. by 2014 that number rose to more

than 714,000, a surge of 28%. that's quite a surge. on the other hand, the total number of full-time agency foia personnel dropped to its lowest point since president obama took office. in 2009 the number of full-time foia staff and federal agencies is 4,000. in 2014 that number dropped to 3,838, a decrease of about 4%. it seems obvious that congress cannot continue to starve federal agencies for resources through budget cuts, staffing reductions sequestration and government shutdowns and then blame those agencies for not being able to do their jobs effectively. but again, i want to go back. i want to not only deal with the personnel issues but this whole culture that mr. mcgraw talked

about of unresponsiveness. i want to deal with that, too because i want the total picture so we can be effective and efficient in trying to remedy the situation. if we want foia to work we need to restore adequate funding staffing and training so agencies can handle the increasing work loads they will continue to face. that's another issue. is there an issue of training. it's one thing to have personnel. it's another thing to have personnel that are properly trained. but this is not what house republicans are doing right now, today. today, right now down the hall in the appropriations committee republicans are voting to withhold nearly $700 million. hello, $700 million from the state department's operational budget until it improves its document production processes.

the operational budget includes the salaries for all, for all of the state department's foia employees. let me say that again. today, with a record number of foia requests and a record low foia staffing the answer from the republicans is we withhold two-thirds of 1 billion, more than all state salaries combined. now in the world is this supposed to help? it simply doesn't make sense. we know there are problems with foia, we know there are delays. we know we must do better. but it's hard to imagine a more counter productive attack on a foia process. i also take issue with the claims that president obama has not been one of the most

aggressive and forward thinking presidents in the history in pressing for more open government. i've often said that he would never get credit for anything. if things go wrong, they blame him. if things go right he gets no credit. those who try to argue that president bush took the same kinds of unprecedented transparency actions as president obama must have amnesia. there simply is no comparison none. beyond the presumption of openness for foia the obama administration issued a national action plan to establish a consolidated foia portal and enhanced training for foia professionals. president obama did that. it established a foia advisory committee to improve implementation and increase proactive disclosures of government information. president obama did that. the administration implemented a new policy of disclosing white house visitor records.

president obama did that. it established ethicsdata.gov which posts travel reports and filings all in one place and has made enormous amounts of government information available through data.gov. that's right president obama did that. finally, i expect that some of my colleagues will continue their focus on former secretary of state hillary clinton and her e-mails, so let's review the facts. on december 5th 2014, secretary clinton provided more than 30,000 e-mails totaling about 55,000 pages to the state department. the department has those e-mails and is currently reviewing them to make them available to the public under foia. this is a sharp contrast to former secretary of state colin powell who admitted that he used a personal e-mail account for

official business all the time. unlike secretary clinton secretary powell did not, did not, preserve any of his official e-mails from his personal account, and he did not turn them over to the state department. i'm not naive. i understand the republican focus is on hillary clinton as she runs for president, but if we really want to review compliance with foia if we really want to review it and straighten it out and make it right and have the law foia law to do what they're supposed to do and if we really want to be most effective and efficient, we should not do so selectively by knowing facts based on political expediency. we're better than that. to conclude there's a major bipartisan step we can take to improve foia now. in february i joined with

representative isa. that's what i said i joined with former chairman isa on a bipartisan basis to introduce the foia oversight and implementation act. we passed it out of our committee unanimously several months ago and i hope we can move forward in a bipartisan way to pass this bill now. the chairman said yesterday to me that we're going to see what we can do to work that out. what we need from you are suggestions. maybe all of you are familiar with 653 and if there are things that you think we can do to improve that bill to make it so that it can be more effective and efficient and that you can do your jobs better, then we want to know it. ladies and gentlemen, we can go around and around and around in circles and we'll be talking about the same stuff ten years from now and the backlog will be even greater.

so i look forward to hearing what you all have to say. again, give us the good the bad and the ugly so we can now effectively address this issue. mr. chairman, i thank you for your indull ensindulgence. i yield back. >> i'll hold the record for five legislative days for any members who want to submit a written statement. let me introduce our witnesses. miss joyce bar is the chief foia officer with the department of state and has been involved in the process for the last four years. miss barr was confirmed as the assistant secretary for administration in december of 2011. as assistant secretary she is responsible for the day to day administration of a variety of functions relating to logistics privacy programs, the working capital fund as well as presidential travel. we appreciate you being here. ms. melanie pustay has been at the department of justice since

2007. has worked with fochlt ia for the last 12 years. the office sometimes referred to as oip is responsible for developing guidance for executive branch agencies on the freedom of information act. before becoming director, she served 8 years as the deputy director for oip. miss karen newman serves as the chief privacy officer and chief foia officer within the department of homeland security. ms. newman is responsible for evaluating department-wide program systems technology and rule making for potential privacy impact. she has extensive expertise in privacy law that help inform privacy development within the department and in collaboration with the rest of federal

government. she centralizes both foia and private policies to support implementation across the department. mr. brody serves as the chief foia officer in the department of treasury since january -- for the last -- which year did you become that? >> just this year. >> i wanted to make sure i had that right. he serves as the secretary of treasury on the development and execution of treasury's budget and strategic plans. in january 2014 president obama nominated him as the treasury's chief financial officer. ms. mary howard is the director of the governmental liaison and disclosure division in the united states department of treasury since january 2014.

she is responsible for managing a privacy program and ensuring that the privacy act the freedom of information act and the internal revenue codes known as 6103. ms. howard began her career at the irs in 1988 and has served in various roles throughout the agency and throughout her career. we appreciate you all being here. if you would please rise and raise your right hands. pursuant to committee rules, the witnesses are to be sworn before they testify. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? thank you. let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. as you take your seat, we ask that you would limit your testimony to five minutes. your full written statement will be made part of the record.

with that we will now start with ms. barr and you're now recognized for five minutes. >> good morning, thank you for the invitation to appear before you today. my name is joyce barr and i serve as the assistant secretary for administration as well as chief foia officer for the state department. i'm a career foreign service officer with over 35 years of experience serving around the world. thank you for your interest in and advocacy for improving transparency to the public. we share that goal at the department and work every day to achieve it. in addition to providing a range of support services around the world, the bureau of administration is also responsible for responding to requests under foia as well as managing and maintaining official department records. the state department is

committed to openness. it is critical to ensuring the public trust and to promoting public collaboration with the u.s. government. however, meeting our commitment to openness is very challenging. we have a large backlog of over 16,000 foia requests. we know this backlog is unacceptable and are working to reduce it. last year we achieved a nearly 23% reduction in our appeals backlog by streamlining case processing. we made progress. more is needed. the backlog is due to several factors. our case load increased over 300% since 2008. in fiscal year 2008 the department received fewer than 6,000 new foia requests, but in fiscal year 2014 we received nearly 20,000. since the beginning of this fiscal year we have already received over 15,000 new requests. second many of these cases are

increasingly complex. other national security agencies are exempt from release of some information under the foia. as a result requesters often come only to the department to request information on nip and all national security issues. the department is often the public's first and only destination for documents on these issues. these complex requests require multiple searches throughout many of our 285 missions across the globe. they involve the review of classified or highly sensitive materials and require coordination with other federal agencies. they can generate large amounts of material that must be reviewed by state and interagency subject matter experts across the federal government. we receive many complaints about

delays, but our goal is to do everything we can to complete each request as soon as possible. secretary kerry recently reinforced our commitment to transparency in his march 25th letter to our inspector general. in that letter he recognized the work that has already been done and noted the department is acting on a number of challenges to meet its preservation and transparency obligations. the secretary asked the inspector general to ensure we are doing everything we can to improve and to recommend concrete steps that we take to do so. i am here as the department senior foia official to assure you that we have committed to working cooperatively with the ig and his review and any recommendations that may follow. my testimony for the record includes information about related issues such as our foia website and the role we play in helping the public get access to

information from presidential libraries. again, the department of state to public access of information. mr. chairman i thank the committee for the opportunity today and am pleased to address questions that you or any other member may have on foia within the state department. >> thank you. make sure the microphone is on. >> we're good. good morning. good morning, chairman and ranking member cummings and members of the committee. i'm pleased to be here today to discuss the foia and the department of justices' ongoing efforts to encourage compliance with a very important law. there are several areas of success that i'd like to highlight today. despite receiving continued record high numbers of foia

requests and operating at the lowest staffing levels in the past six fiscal years, agencies have continued to find ways to improve their foia administration. 72 out of the 100 agencies subject to the foia ended the fiscal year with low backlogs of fewer than 100 requests. processing nearly 650,000 requests, the government also continued to maintain a high release rate of over 91%. agencies overall also continued to improve their processing times. for a number of years oip has encouraged agencies to focus on their simple track requests with the goal of processing those requests within an average of 20 working days. i'm very pleased to report that this past fiscal year the government's overall average was 20.5 days for those requests. there's also many other achievements that simply can't be captured by statistics. agencies continue to post a wide variety of information online,

in open form ats making releases of otherwise exempt information and using technology. the department of justice continued to work throughout the year to encourage and assist agencies in their compliance with the foia. i firmly believe that it's vital that foia professionals have a complete understanding of the law's legal requirements and the many policy considerations that contribute to successful foia administration. as a result, one of the primary ways my office encourages compliance is through the offering of a range of government-wide training programs and the issuance of policy guidance on foia. in 2014 alone my office provided training to thousands of individuals on a range of topics including comprehensive guidance on the proactive foia provision. that included strategies for identifying frequently requested records and encourages agencies

to post records before a receipt of a single request in accordance with the president's and the attorney general's foia directives. i'm pleased to highlight the substantial progress we've made on a number of initiatives to modernize the foia. first, in collaboration with the gsa, we've been working on the creation of a consolidated portal that will be added to the resources available on foia.gov. this service will allow the public to make a request from a single website and will include additional tools. second, oip has been working on the potential content of a core foia regulation. we formed an interagency task force to tackle this project. we've met with civil society organizations to get their input, and our team is actually now hard at work drafting language for this important new initiative. we look forward to our engagement with both civil society and our agency colleagues as we work forward on that project.

now, third, in an effort to improve internal best practices, we launch what we're calling a series of best practices workshops and we started there with a very important topic of improveing timely ness. these workshops provide a unique opportunity to apply strategies more broadly across the government. finally, this past march, i'm pleased that we completed our commitment to enhance foia training by making standard e-learning resources available to all federal employees. embracing attorney general holder's message that foia is everyone's responsibility, these new training resources target the entire spectrum of federal employees, from the newly arrived intern to the senior executive. these resources are available to all agency personnel anywhere in the world and at no cost. they address the many procedural and substantive requirements.

given how important all this is to the successful implementation of the foia i'm very proud that oip can proud these resources to all government officials across the world. in closing, in the face of many challenges this past fiscal year agencies have achieved successes in many areas. while we certainly believe there's more work to be done and we're continually looking for ways to improve the process we're proud of what we've done so far and we look forward to working with the committee as we jointly pursue the goal of improving access to information. thank you. >> thank you. ms. newman you're recognized for five minutes. >> good morning. my name is karen newman and i'm the chief privacy officer and foia officer at the department of homeland security. i'm pleased to be here today to discuss how dhs implements the

freedom of information act. dhs is composed of sev several components with unique authorities and categories of records. we operate our own foia offices staffed by profession als who respond directly to requesters seeking records. my office has duel responsibilities to protect privacy and promote transparency. every request deserves careful consideration to promote trains parnsy while protecting the privacy of individuals. we have significant challenges and we also have some -- we've done some good things. as you know dhs gets the largest number of foia requests of any federal agency and produces the largest number of responses. dhs received 40,000 requests in fiscal year 2014. in this 12-month period alone, we received an unprecedented,

291,242 requests. as a result, we also have the largest backlog. since january 2009 dhs experienced a 182% increase in its number of foia requests. at the same time our foia professionals have significantly increased their output to meet this increased demand. in fiscal year 2014 these professionals processed 238,031 requests. the department of homeland security takes our obligation to promote transparency and further the values of open government embodied in the statute very seriously. nonetheless, we face serious challenges to connecting requesters with the records they seek. i'd like to briefly highlight some of the measures we've implemented to address these challenges, including to reduce our backlog. the government accountability

office was asked by congress to review the processing of foia requests. in november 2014, the report was published with four recommendations. we conquered with all four and are taking steps to address each one. for example, as recommended by gao, we are in the process of finalizing our foia regulation, including preparing to publish a federal register notice seeking comment. as also recommended we sought assistance from dojoip. quite a part from these recommendations i've initiated several new measures that are designed to improve foia operations in both the near term and the long term. first, in january this year, i requested a top to bottom independent review of six dhs component foia offices. that review is currently under way and is being conducted by

the office of government information services, also known as ogis. second, my office is establish is a short term blanket purchase agreement for foia support services. this contract will be utilized as needed by our component foia offices that require additional help. my goal here is really to empower the components to take quick action to manage backlog surges before they get out of control. third, my foia leadership team has met with colleagues at other agencies to learn about the types of records that can be made available through technology and other routine procedures that are currently sought through a foia request. fourth, my office continues to look for greater efficiencies from the use of technology. we offer each component foia office the ability to use a centralized foia tracking, processing and reporting case management system with

customizable features. we're also developing a mobile application that will enable the public to submit foia requests and check the status of these requests from a smartphone or mobile device. as a result of these measures, we are starting to see a slow but steady reduction in our backlog. yesterday i learned that as of may 2015 the dhs backlog was reduced by 10%, from 103,480 to 92,066 since the beginning of the fiscal year. despite the challenges we face, i'm pleased the administrative and technological infrastructure we have put in place is resulting in a trend in the right direction. we are working hard every day to provide access under the statute and there is room for considerable improvement. i look forward to working with you to improve foia at dhs and i

welcome your recommendations and look forward to taking your questions. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i'm the assistant secretary for management at the department of treasury and the designated department chief foia officer. as such i take compliance with foia seriously. although the nine treasury bureaus independent process foia requests directed to each bureau, my team is responsible for providing agency-wide guidance and training as well as monitoring treasury foia performance and proposing agency-wide policy and improvements. when i joined treasury six months ago i was pleased to discover that treasury team had already begun implementing new measures to improve performance and efficiency treasure-wide.

my team doubled the number of foia full time employees dedicated to foia. we used additional capacity in two critical ways. first we focused in closing treasury's oldest cases. second, we made significant changes to procedures and staffing used to improve efficiency and timeliness. we have more work to do but these initial measures are already producing results. for example, in fiscal year 2014 the treasury-wide foia backlog has decreased by 8%. we closed 13 of our oldest 20 cases agency-wide. we processed more foia requests in less time. treasury closed 73% of incoming cases requests within 20 days, a 3% increase over 2013. five of nine treasury bureaus closed more requests than they received during the fiscal year. four treasury bureaus ended the year with a zero backlog.

we also released more information overall. treasury released records in full or in part in response to 90% of cases in which responsive records were identified. today treasury is releasing more information and making tangible progress on reducing its pending foia inventory and closing its oldest cases compared to just 18 months ago. we also remain committed to making further strides. my team and i will continue to provide as much information as we can within the spirit and the letter of foia. i welcome your questions today. thank you. >> thank you. ms. howard you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. thank you for having me here today. i'm mary howard and i'm the director of irs's privacy governmental liaison and disclosure operations. i'm here today to testimony on the irs' policyies and procedures

in regarding and complying with requests for information under the freedom of information act. year year the irs processes thousands of foia requests most of which require labor intensive as much as of both paper and electronic records. despite this volume and complexity, the irs closes more than 80% of its cases in 30 business days or less. in fact, our average cycle time generally hovers right around 21 days. the irs follows a standard procedure for handling each foia request it receives. this involves analyzing the request to determine whether it can be processed under foia, determining the scope of the request and searching for responsive records reviewing material to decide what should be released or withheld and sending a response to the requester. over the last several years our foia operation has faced a number of challenges. for example, the size of an

average foia request and the volume of potentially responsive documents have mushroomed as more and more requests require searching e-mail and other electronic documents. broad requests can easily result in the irs needing to collect and redact thousands of documents in response to a single requester. another challenge involves personnel. we've managed to protect the overall staffing of the foia process in irs, experiencing only a slight decline over the last few fiscal years despite financial constraints and related hiring freezes. but a high turnover rate has created some difficulties. replacing our foia specialists involves not only hiring new workers but also training them to bring them up to the expert level required to handle complex foia requests. the cuts to our budget have had a negative impact on the timing of replacement hiring and the delivery of the training. the net result has been a

gradual loss of expertise in the foia area at irs over the past several years. the problem is expected to get worse. we estimate that more than 60% of our foia professionals will be eligible to retire over the next five years. another critical aspect of the irs' ability to adequately respond to foia requests involves the management of official records. here too the irs faces significant challenges. this is largely because we don't have systems that let us easily search and retrieve electronic records and e-mails unless they're part of the taxpayer's case records. we are unable to categorize, label and centrally store records including e-mail and i hope you'll ask me some questions so i can give you some more insight into that. without this capability, we must conduct an account by account search. this is extremely tedious and time consuming.

that's before we get to the actual review for the exemptions. additional funding would allow us to upgrade our infrastructure platforms and acquire more effective search capabilities. we could then respond to very large document requests far more quickly than we're able to now. let me turn now to the events of 2013. beginning that summer the irs was faced with an unprecedented number of foia requests related to the processing of applications for the 501 c 4 status. in all there were 154 requests. they were very voluminous and complex in nature. at the same time, four congressional committees the treasury inspector general and the department of justice were all requesting large amounts of documents from irs on the same issues. the irs created a special team to review and produce documents responsive to the six official investigations. this team redacted the documents required by 6103 of the internal

revenue code to ensure that federal text information was protected appropriately. because of his experience on conducting reviews and producing documents for litigation, the irs office of chief council performed the 6103 reviews in the document production. that was required for all requested documents except those going to the tax writing committees. while council was conducting this effort, disclosure staff was addressing and responding to their regular foia case work that flows in at a rate of 10,000 to 12,000 cases per year. the irs determined that responding to the investigations would take precedence over spopding to the request for information under foia and the irs has produced to congress more than 1 million pages of documents for those investigations. given that all foia documents need that 6103 review, we waited until we had fulfilled the request of the investigators until we went forward.

of the 154 cases i mentioned, foia cases 34 remain pending with the disclosure office. we regret that the process has taken this long, but given the extraordinary circumstances, we felt there was no other way we could respond appropriately to congress and the investigators. the irs remains committed to foia as we work through these challenges. so this concludes my statement and i look forward to responding to your questions. >> thank you. we'll now recognize the gentleman from michigan for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for the hearings over the past couple of days. as i've contemplated what i've heard from the three panels thus far on foia in the last two days, i'm just absolutely convinced that foia really isn't the problem. it's just the evidence and outcome of the problem.

the increasing size of government and the control of government is the problem. it's an absolute fact that we have amongst the highest paid bureaucrats administering these programs and others in government anywhere in the world. we have the highest technology, at least amongst the highest technology of anyplace in the world to administer our bureaucracy. we have the largest number of bureaucrats in the world to administer our bureaucracy. with a size of government like this, why would we expect anything other than a huge, huge number of foia requests coming from an increasing number of american citizens who feel under attack from their own government. they're regulated. they're taxed. they're supervised.

they're overseen. almost more than any other free country in the world. so i look at our panel of witnesses and i say how in the world can you be expected to do your job in a way that satisfies not only congress but the people of the united states. they're going to ask more. they don't trust us. they're tired of being overrun. i'll get to my questions. also, with all due respect, if dollars, more dollars were the answer, then the war on poverty, the war on hunger, the war on pollution, the war on crime, the war on many other things would be ended. by the way fast and furious, benghazi irs-gate, would be taken care of. we would know the answers.

attorney general holder, former attorney general holder, wouldn't have been held in contempt of congress. lois lerner wouldn't have been held in contempt. foia isn't the main problem. liberty to man's transparency from a limited government to succeed, and we're not succeeding and addressing the concerns of our people. the government has grown and thus it is increasingly mistrusted and it will be musclewill be mistrusted from all sides of the aisle politically speaking. mr. chairman i again thank you for these hearings. it makes it clearer and clearer why we are in the battle with the budget. to reduce the government to the size that liberty can expand and not government. ms. newman, dhs has the largest

backlog of any federal agency. how does the duplicative process of requests contribute to backlog and i refer specifically to the relationship between uscis and ice? >> thank you. i appreciate that question. let me just say with respect to the backlog, any significant delays in processing requests don't meet my standards and i expect to see improvement. that goes for duplication as well. as you may be aware the gao studied that aspect of our operations and made some recommendations that we are implementing in a number of ways. uscis and ice receive a significant number of our foia requests, many of which are immigration related. there may be instances where one or more of those components holds files or holds records that are contained in the alien

file. we do not support unnecessary duplication and we have -- >> will the two agencies be put back together the arrangement that was in place before 2012 where they weren't duplicating? >> that's really not my decision to make. >> whose decision is it? >> i -- it's -- it's up to the members of congress who write the statute. i will tell you that we've implemented technology measures -- i don't understand that that's our responsibility. it worked before 2012, at least they worked in that nonduplicative arrangement. who is responsible? it's not congress. >> my focus as the chief foia officer on connecting requesters with their records and i have got to spend my time looking at the way the agency is constructed now what inefficiencies if any are preventing us from meeting our transparency mission -- >> so the answer is you're not going to do anything to put the

two component parts back together? >> i am focusing on connecting records -- connecting requesters with their records. >> mr. chairman my time is expired and i didn't get the answer. or i guess i did. >> now recognize the gentleman from massachusetts mr. lynch for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and the ranking member for your courtesy this morning and for holding this hearing. i want to thank the witnesses for your help in addressing this issue. ms. barr, there has been a lot of discussion up to now about secretary clinton and her use of personal e-mail for official business. it's my understanding from the documents that we have here that secretary rice, condoleezza rice did not use a personal e-mail account for -- a personal e-mail account for official business, is that right? >> yes, that's what i understand.

i understand that she used -- she has told us that she did not conduct a lot of official business over e-mail, but when she did, she used the state department account. >> how about secretary of state colin powell? in his autobiography he admits that he used his personal e-mail account for official business all the time. i have a great quote here. he says -- and this is a quote from secretary -- former secretary of state colin powell. quote, to compliment the official state department computer in my office i installed a laptop computer on a private line. my personal e-mail account on the laptop allowed me direct access to anyone online. i started shooting e-mails to my principle assistants to individual ambassadors and increasingly to my foreign minister. colleagues who like me were

trying to bring their ministries into the 160,000 mile per second speed of light. do we have e-mails from secretary powell? >> we do not. we did ask him if he had any official records. he noted when he came back to us that he started at what was then the beginning of the state department's e-mail age, but he did not have any records to return to us. >> there were some critical decisions made his speech before the u.n. about the existence of weapons of mass destruction. we don't have any e-mails regarding that decision and how those statements were made? >> i have no personal knowledge about that, sir. >> this is troubling because it

seems like in the case of secretary clinton the way people handle their e-mails at least it's been suggested that really determine her that's basically the statement that's being made today. and i'm just -- i'm puzzled because secretary rice did not perform in that manner. secretary colin powell did not perform in that matter. in that manner. i'm just wondering if we have a uniform standard here, it doesn't seem from the federal records act it requires people to not use personal e-mail. when we are . >> when we are dealing with the federal records act, of course we have to work with federal employees to maintain records. but when it comes to using non-government e-mail services

if people do that we ask that they capture those records by copying their official account. we are working very hard looking forward to make sure that people understand what their requirements are under the federal records act. if they're out and their blackberry stops working, to copy over to their accounts. but what is most important to us is that we have that collection now and we are processing it. >> i appreciate that. let me just say -- i only have a little bit of time left here. it's my understanding that former secretary clinton delivered about 55,000 pages in e-mails. >> that's correct. >> yeah. have any of the other secretaries of state during your time -- you been there awhile -- secretary rice secretary colin

powell? >> no. only from secretary clinton. >> all right. that's about my time. mr. chairman, i yield back. thank you. >> thank you. i'll now recognize myself for five minutes. miss howard, the white house on april 15th 2005, sent a directive out. it says to the president. that shall consult the white house council's office on all document requests that may involve documents with white house equities. he goes on and says this need to consult with the white house arises with respect to all types of document requests including congressional committee requests, geo requests, and foia requests. so my question to you miss howard what percentage -- when congress sends you a request for information, what percentage of that do you share with the white house? >> to the extent that i've been

involved in responses to congress or in responses to foia, we have never shared information with the white house. i became aware of this memo when we were asked for some information to actually to demonstrate how many times we had this interaction. it was a foia request. i was curious as to why we were getting a foia request since we don't have interaction with the white house on foias -- >> so you've never sent anything to the white house? >> i can't speak for the entire irs. i mean that would be a question for chief council or the commissioner. i can speak for the disclosure office and the foia process. we do not interact with the white house. >> so if you get a subpoena from me and the oversight committee you don't share that with the white house? >> the fact that it exists yeah, we may share the information we got the subpoena or the fact we're working on a subpoena. but the actual documents that are being produced for the subpoena --

>> yeah. >> we would produce those documents and redact them for 6103. again, that might involve chief council -- >> what percentage of those do you share with the white house? >> what percentage do i share with the white house would be zero. >> within the irs you do not share those to the best of your knowledge -- >> to the best of my knowledge the disclosure office does not consult the white house. >> the white house told you you're supposed to do it. the white house directed you to do that. are you telling us you didn't request with the white house direction? >> i'm towards the end of my career, i'll be honest with you. i was amazed to see the memo. it was shared with the council which is not me. i looked through the internal revenue manual which is how we operate foia and i never saw this. i never saw any evidence this was incorporated and i ignored it. >> when you respond to a letter

from congress or there's a response to a subpoena from congress, who sees that before we get it? >> my -- in most instances council would look at something like that. the chief of staff of the commissioner. but again, that's really a question for the commissioner in terms of what that process was like. >> lois lerner, requests from lois lerner, who did you have to get clearance from for that? we still don't have them. >> the 6103 redactions as i said in my testimony was done by the office of chief council. we may have redacted some of those documents for -- well you don't get the foia redactions. >> i'm asking what signatures do you need to see on there before you send it back to us? >> i'm not sure because i'm not the one doing the directing. >> but you're in charge.

who do you have to check off? >> with all due respect, that was not a process i was personally involved in nor was my disclosure operations -- >> you'd have to guess we would ask about lois lerner. >> which is why the commissioner thought that perhaps he might be the best to answer your questions. >> but you're the director. it's your job and role and responsibility. >> no, sir, my job is the foia program. >> your title, correct, director of privacy, governmental liaison and disclosure. that's your title. >> right. that is my title. >> and you're telling me you're not the director of the governmental lee yea son and disclosure part of that? >> no. >> why because it's lois lerner? >> no because it's unprecedented -- >> what's unprecedented about that? >> i think that lois lerner was the tip of the iceberg. >> really? >> i think that request included far more than just one person. >> so do we. so what makes you think it's the tip of the iceberg?

>> in terms of the way of the request was structured. >> what was so striking about it? it's pretty simple. in this electronic age we're asking for all of her e-mails in a certain frame. how hard is that? they should take about ten seconds, right? what's so hard about producing those documents? it's taken years. >> i cannot talk to the specific documents about lois lerner but what i can -- >> when the request came both in the letter and then in a subpoena, who does that go to? >> the commissioner. >> it doesn't go to you? >> no. not first. >> but when we send these documents over this doesn't land on your desk? >> it does not. >> does it land on any of your staff's desk? >> no. it landed on the desk of the commissioner and the chief council. >> so they are solely responsible for the full illfillment of that request and the subpoenas, correct? if it doesn't go to you, you're

the director of private governmental liaison and disclosure. and you're telling me that your department, your group doesn't get that because it came from congress, right? >> no no. because we made a business decision that because of the scope of that request we would set up a special project team. >> who decided that? i want some names here. mr. koskinen? >> i think it was before his time. so i guess the acting commissioner. it was before my time too so, you know whatever i tell you is just hearsay. but it was my understanding that the commissioner -- >> we expect a little bit more than that. >> again it was not -- it was not directed towards my desk. >> so it doesn't come through your office your department, your group, whatever you want to call it? >> we might be involved in it but so are the i.t. people. >> was the lois lerner case dealt with differently than anything else? you said it was unprecedented. i want to know why. >> well, i think because there was a lot of other 504 c-3 --

c-4 documents that were requested at the same time. >> so anything that had to deal with those documents the c-4 documents went a different direction than normally? >> it went into sort of a project team where we felt that -- >> so there's a special project team that's set up? >> there was at the time. i don't know if it's still functioning. >> why was there a special team set snup. >> because of the volume -- >> it had nothing to do with the volume, it had to do with the topic didn't it? >> i don't think so, no. in actuality looking back on it from my perspective it was a very positive thing for the disclosure office because we could do all of our regular foia work except for those particular topics. >> so, i mean, what you're telling me is anything that came in on this topic, c-4, not just lois lerner but c-4, went in a different route. there's only two political

appointees in all of the irs. the commissioner and the general council. those are the only two out of 90,000. and you're telling me those requests went a different route than normally anything else does. and it went to them, correct? that's exactly what you told me. >> i don't want to go on record as saying that i know specifically where requests went to. my understanding is that requests from congress are given a certain level of respect and concern so that they go to the commissioner's office first. and are parcelled out as to who's going to work them after that. >> do you know who the lead of that special project team was? >> i do not. >> all right. my time's expired. we'll now recognize mr. cummings. >> thank you very much. miss ms. neuman, you said there was room for improvement. can you tell us what those

improvements might be that you're talking about? because we got a -- i mean, i want to get to the bottom line and be effective and efficient. so tell me. >> as do i, congressman cummings. one of the things i did when i first came aboard was to try to understand where some of the bottle necks were in the department in terms of the component backlogs and understand what the reasons for those backlogs might be. in doing so, i did identify some of the systemic challenges and decided that we really do need to address in the long-term an independent comprehensive review of what these systemic challenges are what the reasons for the backlogs are, and then get some best practices in place for dealing with those. in the interim, i decided i could implement more immediate measures to address the challenges. for example -- >> i want to know what still

needs to be done to improve. i don't have a lot of time. >> sure. we -- i personally believe that we can deploy much more advanced technology throughout the department that can be used to address -- >> what is it going to take to make that happen? >> we're in the process of doing that already. we've rolled out a successful pilot intended to reduce the backlog and duplication that's been adopted thus far and other components are in line as well. >> how many components are there? >> well, there are 15 components to process foia requests. 11 have adopted -- >> you need four more, is that right? >> yes sir. >> when do you expect that to happen? >> i personally don't -- i'm not aware of the time frame. i would be happy to confer with my staff. >> i would appreciate if you confer and get back to me when that's going to happen.

i would also like for you -- because i don't have a lot of time i'm going to ask you all give us your recommendations. as i listen here y'all make everything sound so rosy. and i want to try to get the bottom line of what the problems are. we heard a lot of testimony yesterday. in all fairness to you, i think you were doing a lot of good things. but at the same time we have to balance that against what we have heard over the last day or so. ms. barr i want to ask you -- would you do that for me ms. neuman? >> yes i will. >> ms. barr i want to ask you some key questions. i want to follow up on what mr. lynch was talking about. i want to thank you for being here. for the past seven months there have been intense discussion about hillary clinton and her personal use of e-mail for official business. however, new documents which we received late last night raised

significant questions about the e-mail usage of former secretaries of state condoleezza rice and colin powell. the state department sent a letter to these former secretaries of state last fall requesting information about their use of personal e-mail for official business. on december 5th, 2014 secretary clinton and her attorneys responded by providing more than 30,000 e-mails totally 55,000 pages. they are currently reviewing them to make them available to the public under foia. is that correct? everything i just said? >> yes, sir. >> all right. neither secretary rice nor secretary powell provided any e-mails to the department in response to that request. is that correct?

>> yes, sir. >> not one. we know that secretary powell used a personal e-mail account for work because he wrote about this in his biography and mr. lynch talked about that. but unlike secretary clinton, secretary powell did not preserve any of these e-mails, is that correct? >> yes, he told us he did not have access to those anymore. >> so that means you didn't have access to them. >> no. >> last night the committee received new documents regarding former secretary of state condoleezza rice. in 2007 the watchdog groups citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington submitted a foia request seeking state department policies government use of secretary rice's e-mail accounts. also requested copies of e-mails from her official account as well as, quote, e-mail messages

that had been sent by the secretary of state from any private mail account and that pertained to official government business. end of quote. we received the state department's response to this inquiry last night. it states that although the government officials are still looking and i quote, no responsive material was found. end of quote. so ms. barr are you aware of any e-mails that have been identified from secretary rice's e-mail account? any? >> no, i'm not aware -- well i want to make sure i understand your question. are you asking me if i'm aware of any e-mails from her account that should be regarded as responsive material to this request? >> that's right. >> okay.

i'm not aware of any that are responsive to this particular request. >> all right. >> and we already know you don't have e-mails from secretary powell, is that right? >> yes. >> between the two of them, do you have e-mails? >> you mean personally? >> no no no. in response to your requests. you sent the requests. do you have any e-mails with regard to the request? >> no. >> so ms. barr, as you sit here today, can you tell us with certainty whether secretary rice even had an official state department e-mail account? >> yes it is my understanding that she had an official state department request -- >> account. >> account. sorry. but i would like to also say that e-mails are not the only way we capture records.

we have cables memos, agendas. we have lots of other ways that we capture official records. so while in these two instances we did not have e-mails to respond to requests, we have other types of records that we maintain that are looked at to see if we have responsive materials when people ask us through the foia process. >> i appreciate that. now, right now i'm just talking about e-mails. >> okay. >> you don't have any e-mails from secretary powell? >> that are responsive to the request. >> yes ma'am. and you have none from secretary clinton. i'm sorry, secretary rice. >> that is true. that's correct. >> it's amazing. secretary powell and secretary rice served during critical times in this nation's history. during 9/11 attacks the war in afghanistan and the war in iraq. yet as far as we can tell state department officials don't have

their e-mails from this eight-year critical period. secretary powell has been straightforward about his failure to preserve his e-mails. but secretary rice has never spoken publicly about hers. in response to the state department's letter last fall, her representative responded by proclaiming and i quote secretary rice did not use a personal e-mail account for official business. end of quote. do you know if secretary rice's attorney conducted a thorough review of her personal e-mail account like secretary clinton's did? >> i am not personally familiar with what her attorney did to respond to that request sir. >> well, my time has run out. but these new revelations are startling. so i hope that we will look at that era just like we've been looking at the present era with regard to these e-mails. all right. >> thank the gentleman. recognize gentleman from north

carolina. mr. meadows. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. pustay, let me come to you. did you watch the testimony yesterday when we had several panels talking about foia requests? >> i didn't watch it but i was keeping up with it throughout the afternoon. >> so you are aware of their less than flattering testimony as it relates to your particular involvement with foia requests. maybe not yours personally, but the justice department. are you aware of that? it was less than flattering. >> i don't know if i'd agree with that -- i respectfully don't agree with that characterization. i understand, though -- let me say this. i understand that requesters have examples of things that are frustrating experiences. >> so what you're saying is that the testimony that we heard yesterday was just a few

examples of frustrating? because that's not what i got from that. and i would characterize it as less than flattering. so let me go -- i'm having a hard time reconciling your opening testimony with the testimony of a number of witnesses yesterday with regards to the department of justice and your responsiveness. because your opening testimony provided very glowing terms. so i guess my question for you is on scoring different agencies on how they 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, who -- i don't need -- i've got five minutes. who gets the best scores and who gets the worst scores? >> well, if you look at the assessment, you'll see we have a range of milestones -- over

20-some milestones. we rank on a bunch of things. >> how does the justice department score on those milestones? >> the justice department scores quite well on those milestones. >> okay. would you suggest if you're setting the milestones and you're scoring the milestones, 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 finish the past two years, congressman, have been working collaboratively with representatives from civil society to set the milestones. it's actually been a joint effort. >> okay. sop let me ask you this then. ms. atkinson gave us examples of foia requests. it took ten years. her daughter was 8. she was 18 by the time the foia request -- would you say that was a great response? >> of course not. >> would you say that response

is unique? that there are none others like that throughout all the foia requests? >> of course not as well. as we -- >> so what part of violating the foia law that is very clear and you know the foia law i would assume. it gives particular responses. what part of violating the foia law does the department of justice condone? >> i think it's important to look at areas that need improvement in foia. >> okay. so what part of the law does the justice department condone? >> we don't -- we -- >> so you don't condone violating the law. >> of course not. of course not. >> okay. so i would think that would be your answer. do you violate the law? >> of course not. >> so you never violated the foia law? >> we work very hard at my office. >> i believe that. so the question is in your sworn

testimony today does not violate -- has never violated the foia law. is that your testimony? >> i think what you're asking me is if we respond to requests beyond 20 works days. >> is that the law? >> the law allows for extensions of time. >> okay. so with -- 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 foia recognizes the reality, congressman, of the need for agencies to take more time to respond to certain requests that are -- >> is there anything in the law law -- so let me ask a different way. is there anything in the law that would ever give you waivers to allow ten years to respond to a foia request? because i can't find it. can you show -- direct me to

where it would be ten years? >> sure. the way the timing provision is set out in the foia is -- it's in section six. there's a basic response time of 20 works days. there's a provision to ask for ten additional days. >> right. >> and then there's a whole series of steps that agencies can take if they need beyond the additional ten days. there's a whole series of things -- >> so can you direct me to the actual paragraph and send that to me where it says it's okay for ten years? >> i'll send you the paragraph that says -- >> do you believe it's in there for ten years? >> what i know is in there is a provision that allows for an extension beyond 30 working days. >> i yield back. >> thank you. we would be interested if you send that to the committee and help articulate for us. that would be most helpful. now recognizing the gentleman from virginia mr. connolly. >> thank you. ms. barr i must say i am reeling from the stunning revelation 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. cummings 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 not been able to identify any e-mails from secretary powell or secretary rice. is 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 anyother e-mails? >> i know 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 summary of

how we had requested a number of former secretaries to come back to us with whether they had -- >> my time is limited. i want to be -- i'm going to help you clarify your testimony. so are you saying you do have e-mails from secretary powell? >> 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 at the department of state? >> i know he did not provide any copies of e-mails of official records. >> really? in four long years? >> please let me finish, okay? >> yes, but please so in a

timely fashion. i only have five minutes. >> yes, sir. >> go ahead. >> we don't have any e-mails that were responsive to our requests. >> you keep on using that phrase. do you have any e-mails from colin powell that -- >> because my personal knowledge of what we might have in general i'm not sure. >> you're not sure. do you have -- >> but i thought that the question that was 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's no evidence of any. but you're not sure. what about secretary condoleezza rice? >> we know that she used a state.gov account and i'm sure we have access to them. but i thought that the question was in the context of responsive material or what -- >> what do you mean by responsive material? >> because we had a request. >> and your testimony was there

is no evidence of extent e-mails from her responsive to the request. >> yes. >> none. >> we didn't provide any. >> so what happened to them? >> well, the -- if it's not responsive, we don't supply it. but that doesn't mean that the -- that 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 are sure about secretary rice? >> i know that secretary rice used the state.gov account. >> which means they're preserved somewhere. >> somewhere. >> have you ever seen one? >> no, not personally. >> hmm. i find that amazing as well. do the federal records act apply to both secretary 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 we mails for a minute. >> okay. >> so is it in compliant with the federal records act to, in fact, wipe out e-mails if they're in your personal account or official account? >> it is not. people are -- we ask each employee to preserve official records. and that's a responsibility for every employee. >> right. >> and we have to depend on individual employees to carry out their responsibilities. >> so i -- just to summarize, if i get -- and please correct me if i get it wrong. your testimony is you're unaware of any surviving e-mails from secretary powell responsive -- >> you said personally. >> i understand. but you have a title. presumably you'd know if anyone knew. >> oh. >> but we'll use your phrase,

responsive to the request. in that lane, there are no surviving e-mails from secretary colin powell that you're aware of. >> that are responsive to -- >> and with response to secretary rice similarly you're unaware of any surviveing e-mails from secretary rice responsive to the request. >> that is correct. >> there may be or in fact, your guess is there are surviving from her but they were outside response iive to the question. >> yes sir. >> now recognize the gentleman for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. yesterday as you well know each of you this council heard testimony from members of the press and outside groups who experienced tremendous problems with foia requests. i was shocked from the testimony we heard y ed. several comments stick to my mind. one from the president of judicial watch who used the

phrase criminal obstruction to describe the manner in which the irs has handled foia requests having to do with the irs' targeting of conservative groups. he also said that an agency official actually told him that if you scrutinize the government, the government will scrutinize you. moments ago, ranking member cummings said that all of you are making things sound rosy. we're not talking about a rosy situation here. 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 that it's any practice within the irs. i see no evidence of criminal wrong doing or of any intent to do anything that -- >> so you see no targeting take place?

you would deny what has come out pretty nationally -- >> outside of my area of expertise. i can only speak to the records production. >> if someone makes a foia request to the irs is that person potentially now a target for retaliation? >> no, sir. >> okay. so you would deny that there's been any type of retaliation audits, that type of thing from the irs because of people so-called scrutinizing? >> i'm simply saying in my experience the way in which foia requests come in they're logged into a system. the folks who work the foia requests have access to that system. the rest of the irs has no need to have access to that system. so i'm not sure -- >> that's not my question. my question is has the irs participated in retaliation in audits because people are requesting foia information or what may be seen as scrutiny of the irs. >> i have no direct knowledge of the audit side of the house.

that's not my area of expertise or familiarity. but -- >> but you do have knowledge of the foia side of things. >> i do. >> and you're denying there would be any such retaliation. >> i have not shared any information with anyone who would be in a position to retaliate. >> okay. let me go further to a comment you said made a little bit earlier in discussion with the chairman regarding lois lerner. are you saying and i just want to clarify your testimony here today, are you saying that there was no special treatment that was given to her for protection in spite of the fact that you yourself said that her case was the tip of the iceberg? >> what i meant was that the request for her e-mails was just part of the request that this committee and other investigators made for information on the c-4 issue. one of the things i do want to clarify -- >> please be quick. >> okay. the title governmental liaison

in my title really is not the liaison with congress. it's liaison with state and other federal agencies and the data exchanges we do with them. 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 on my -- >> we're not talking about requests from congress. we're talking about foia requests. we're trying to get to the bottom of what appears to be outright obstruction. we're getting a rosy picture that quite frankly is not a good picture. ms. neuman i want to go over to you. you say your agency avoids foia requests that might be orpgs operationally material. >> we do consider foia requests that may be operationally sensitive -- >> is operationally sensitive does that include anything that

your agency would not want the public to know or see? >> no. it would include information about law enforcement investigatory techniques for example. national security issues. when we get a request -- >> so there would be no other case where information is denied. listen, we had testimony one after the other. i don't know where you guys get some of your information, quite frankly. we had people all over the board saying the average wait is years to get foia responses. i wish i had more time. my time is running out. but we are -- the foia request is essential to government transparency and the constitutional rule of law. and the evidence is abundant that it is at least being avoided if not totally obstructed. and this is an issue we've got to get to the bottom of get to the root of. and you folks here are part of the problem. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you. i now recognize the gentlewoman from illinois ms. duckworth for five minutes.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. barr in september of 2012 the oig for the state department issued a report on the department's foia program. i'm looking at it now. it's inspection of the administration global information services office of information programs and services. and the report states and i quote, the department's foia process is inefficient and ineffective. are you familiar with this report? >> yes i am. >> i know you've only been on the job just a few months when it was issued, but i want to ask you a little more about it. it focused on the department of program and services. that office is within the bureau of administration, i understand. and you serve as the assistant secretary for that bureau. is that correct? >> yes, that is correct. >> i'd like to go through some of the issues raised in the report. it's said about the office of information programs and

services -- i just want to quote the report. neglect of relationship responsibilities has had profound consequences. the oig's team has seen the responses to oig's questionnaires indicated an office with problematic morale favoritism, micromanagement practices. this concerns me. i understand you'd only been on the job only six months. so 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. it was within the first six months of my tenure. i immediately became involved in everything i could to address the issues. in addition to just devoting my personal time to doing whatever

i could to make sure that employees received proper leadership training that there were more clear lines of authority. we actually moved some people around. one part of the problem was that there were supervisors who were not physically located close to the employees that they were supervising. in addition to that, at 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 period when the report was being released, we were able to hire a new director who made a huge difference in that section. it is something that i am always involved with with any of my units. but this report was like the

first very negative report i'd received on one of my units when i started. so i took it very seriously. >> would you say this is an ongoing process for you? are you still dealing with the issues in the report of -- >> yes. we've closed most of the recommendations, but some of the recommendations that involved other bureaus, we are still working on it. but this is something -- you know, we have to do a quarterly report to the ig. so it's something that i talk to the senior management in that section about all the time. >> the report also found flaws in the department's records management. and it stated that the department's records management infrastructure is inefficient and ineffective. it also said that failure to implement electronics systems has resulted in poor performance. is the state department overall taking steps to improve its

records manager processes? >> yes, we are. first of all, we are participating in a government-wide working group that is dealing with records management. and i have been in a couple of those meetings myself and i can assure you there 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. well, i hope the state department will continue to make these priorities a top goal for the agency. foia is certainly critical to americans to demand the accountability they deserve from their government. and i'm sure you know that this -- i'm sure this committee and myself will be following up

to make sure that process continues. thank you. i yield back mr. chairman. >> thank the gentlelady and would now recognize mr. carter for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman members of the panel, in preparation for this hearing i actually used my search engine on my computer to look up foia requests. 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 a handout from the website of the minority leader the minority party leader in the senate senator harry reid. it is a document that encourages deferred action applicants to file foia requests. to file foia request for criminal records and immigration files so the lawful permanent residents who are here now can actually find out and be prepared when their parents or

their children file for deferred status. i was really shocked. and it's quite impressive. it offers tips as to what they should do to file the foia request. but it clearly states on this handout that the united states citizenship and immigration services is not currently accepting any applications because of the court order we are all familiar with. yes it still encourages them in this document to go ahead and file. it still encourages them to do that. ms. neuman i want to ask you. in the last fiscal year the backlog has more than doubled. why is this? do you know why it's more than doubled? >> congressman, the foia backlog has more than doubled in part because we've received an enormous increase in the number of requests for fiscal year

2014. i.c.e. and usdia iss are the recipients of many of these requests. i can't -- >> so you do think that it's a result of people encourages these applicants to file foia requests? >> no, sir i don't. i can't speak to the many events that take place outside of dhs but i do -- that trigger surges in requests. we do focus on trying to fulfill them. >> but you do admit the requests have been related to immigration request? >> i am saying if i understand your question correctly, that a significant number of the requests received by the department are requests for immigration records. >> okay. fair enough. okay. in your opening statement you said the number of requests through dhs has increased over 182%. since -- >> 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 is a result of the deferred action program? >> again, i can't speak to the many events and activities outside 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 might -- >> ms. neuman, are you familiar with the g-639 form? >> i can't say that i am off the top of my head. >> okay. when did you take over in this department? >> at the end of fiscal year 2013. >> okay. the g-639 form i believe, was just entered -- introduced in your department this year. so i would think that you would be familiar with it. >> and if you might remind me what that is. >> well, it has to do with the applicants that it was created

for the foia requests from those who were seeking information on daka and dapa to help expedite that. do you know whether those number -- that form has been used -- the increase in the usage of that form? >> i don't have awareness of the specific form you're talking about. i would be happy to consult with my staff and get back to you. >> i hope you will. i would think that you would have complete awareness of that being the director. if there was a new form implemented in order to expedite some of the foia requests that are coming through. >> i'm not aware of specifics with respect to the processing of specific cases or specific types of cases. >> well, can you get back with us on that? >> absolutely. >> and please provide for this not only that but what it's used for specifically. 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. i appreciate that. i want to mention to you again -- or mention to you, ms.

neuman, i have a bill i'm introducing to address the backlog of foia requests at dhs. as you know the majority of foia request backlogs exist at dhs. majority throughout the government. so this is something i hope you will look at. i hope it will be something to assist you and help you and help us to eliminate this backlog as best we can. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'll yield back. >> thank you. and now recognize the gentlewoman from the virgin islands. ms. plaskett for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. good morning, witnesses. good morning to you all. thank you for the information that you're providing to us. one of the things that i really wanted us to focus on is my colleagues here discussed that there is a problem. and everyone is aware that there's a problem. i don't think that you sitting here are the problems. i think that there are processes and directives and issues that

have happened within your agencies that create these backlogs that we're talking about. and i'd really like to get to the root of what is the reason for this. we've talked about in some instances ms. pustay is the director of information policy. that agencies are receiving more and more foia requests. correct? and you highlighted in your testimony that the federal government received 714,231 new foia requests in fiscal year 2014. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> in the beginning of fiscal year 2009 i understand that there were 557,000. >> right. >> that's an increase of 28%. >> exactly. >> so that's one variable that becomes a problem for us which is the increase in the number of foia requests. ambassador barr, you spoke as well and i understand that 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 really 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 a little bit as well. so in 2009 the open government directive instructed the agencies with sizable foia backlogs to try to reduce those by 10%. was that a directive given to each one of you? >> yes. >> yes? was everyone issued that? and ms. pustay you mentioned that the government shutdown in your testimony and you said quote, we roughly estimate that this three-week period could have resulted in 32,000 more foia requests being processed. right? >> that's correct. >> what are the resources --

have you increased the resources you have to help the backlogs? >> i can tell you the charges we are facing with backlogs number one as you already have mentioned is the steady increase in incoming requests. secondly staffing is -- 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 shutdowns where requests can come in but there's no one that can process them. they all impact -- >> so ms. pustay with that you're talking about the 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 the year before. does that figure sound correct?

>> well, it's certainly not the size of oip. we're about 43 people at oip. i think you're talking about -- >> throughout government. to handle foia requests. >> yes. definitely the staff levels across the government have decreased. >> and how does that impact the processing of these foia requests? >> we are trying very hard to find ways to gain efficiencies and processes. that's a big factor that we've been -- a big area we've been putting a lot of emphasis. and there are efficiencies to be gained with technology. but at the end of the day you do need training foia professionals who can analyze documents for disclosability. so there is just no substitute for personnel to actually handle requests. >> so it's your belief that having additional staff to process these backlogs as well as the additional foia requests that come in would be the best

way in which to handle these backlogs. >> i think having resources for both staff and technology would be a very effective way. >> ms. neuman, do you agree that would help your agency? >> in my case, i don't want to get too far ahead of the independent review i mentioned, we are also deploying technology. because doing so does create efficiencies. but i can't dispute at this point the value of staff resources along with the enhanced use of technology. >> and secretary barr ambassador barr, would you say that would assist you as well? >> yes, i do believe it would assist me. but i think that, you know, within many agencies we are trying to meet our priorities and -- >> are foia requests a priority?

>> yes it is a priority. >> so what would be the best way to address that priority? >> i think we have to continue 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 abate any time -- >> so how do you address it? technology alone or staff as well? >> some staff as well. but i know we are all competing with -- for resources. >> well 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 would 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. >> let's get through the question first and then we'll

see. ms. pustay, you said across government that resources are down. if i heard you correct, mr. fontenot, can you clarify from your perspective what's happening? you wrote in your testimony something different than that? >> yes. treasury treasurywide over the past several years we've increased our resources related to foia. specifically we have -- at the end of 2014 we had 151 full-time equivalent employees working in foia. that's a 21% increase over the prior two years. >> so to say that personnel resources across the board governmentwide are down is not accurate. in fact, mr. fontenot wrote in his testimony beginning in 2013 my team doubled the number of full-time employees dedicated to foia. that's not a decrease. it's an increase quite dramatic actually. we appreciate the dedication and commitment you've made mr.

fontenot. >> mr. chairman if i could correct the characterization. when i'm giving the figure about staffing being decreased i'm giving an overall number. the number of requests overall has increased overall -- >> i understand the requests. but you were talking about personnel. and to deal with those and some agencies have prioritized it more than others because they doubled the number of personnel at the department of treasury. >> i'm giving the number for overall. each agency reports in their foia report the number of foia staffing. it's easy to look on foia.gov to see which agencies increased and decreased in exact numbers. >> you said they all decreased. and he said he doubled it. >> my statement -- and i'm sorry it's misunderstood is that overall it has decreased. that's what i'm talking about. >> just real quick, i understand what you were saying about overall because i said it 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 with regard to foia personnel has decreased. >> absolutely. thank you. >> and further yielding, part of my point is some think it's in their best interest to just slow this thing down, just ride it out. and others have given it more priority. but anyway, we'll continue the discussion. we'll recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania mr. cartwright. >> thank you, mr. chairman. in the wake of the edward snowden revelations, obviously there's 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 maintain secrecy to protect our national security is important. in my mind, there's a role for

foia requests to shine a light on government actions that might not be in line with the core values that make our country great. ms. neuman, i want to ask you, with decreased funding and a shrinking number of foia staff what has the effect been on the public's ability to maintain that visibility and that transparency and to hold judicial legislative and executive branches accountable? >> well certainly with the backlog, that has impacted the speed with which we can respond to requests and fulfill those requests. i will say that dhs processed 238,031 requests, up from 204,000 in fiscal year 2013. that's a 16% increase in the number of processed foia requests from the previous fiscal year. is it where i would like to see it?

no, of course not. i would like to see greater improvements precisely 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 very hard to fulfill those requests and shine that light. >> it wouldn't hurt to have more professionals doing this man and woman power work, right? >> let me answer this way. these are lean times for all federal agencies, as you know. >> you're being very diplomatic but i have to move on. in his testimony david mccraw says there are three primary areas of foia delays that need to be addressed. first a culture of unresponsiveness, second agencies deferring responses to other agencies, and third that there are times when the information being requested has been submitted by companies to regulators so the agency has had

to resolve private industry privacy concerns. congress has been working to expedite the sharing of cyber threat information. not just between private companies but also within the government. now, here in this committee we have passed out of this committee 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. i certainly can speak to some of the concepts that you just mentioned. >> well, let's do that. do you have recommendations on how these efforts might be applied to increasing government transparency? >> well, 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

had been very impacted by the fact that the basic concept of better communication can really go a long way to making 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 delve into whether secretary condoleezza rice used private e-mail accounts for personal business.

with that, i yield back. >> recognize the gentleman from south carolina. mr. gowdy. >> 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. our backlogs are not acceptable. but i think in my former testimony that was being asked 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. i'm not asking about the backlog. i'm asking about the exclusive use of private e-mail to conduct public business. what makes it 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 be history of what we do and how we come to those decisions. we don't like for records to be separated from agency, so we were very pleased to have these records back in our possession so they're part of 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 she did that as a matter of convenience. 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 separated 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 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 wrote 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 received a 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. of what we do agendas. >> 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. >> right you can't give it 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 clinton 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 provided 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 the that she erred on the side of inclusion. >> did she tell you she personally reviewed the e-mails or did she retain 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. perhaps at some point i'll be able to ask them. >> 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 columbia. 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 get a chronic problem like 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 -- of course noticed, indeed in fact in hr 653, there is the creation of a chief foia officer counsel. it could be run jointly by the doj office of government information. this question is for ms. pustay. because your office would be tasked to run the office of government and information service. do you support the notion of a chief foia officer's counsel? >> i'm not prepared to answer any specific questions about a specific legislative proposal. but what i can tell you is that chief foia officers who are designated high level officials,

within even agency. do you recognized by law with foia as it currently existed 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 you want a high level official in every agency who has an authority and responsibility to make sure there is sufficient staffing and attention and have the resources they need to operate. gearing off that 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