and i think that -- i'm still relatively new in the game, but i've spent a lot of time over the past four months meeting with both industry representatives, the associations that represent them, as well as the ceos of each of the major airlines. i've been very encouraged with their openness and their response. they recognize some of these same challenges. i think there's a great deal of work we can do to tie some of these closer together. i think that that gives you a lot of grounds for -- we have the same objective in mind even if we approach it from different motivations and different requirements. so i'm encouraged that a number of airlines and the travel associations that support them have begun to do more to advertise the trusted traveler programs, like global entry and precheck. i think there's a lot we can do to simplify the application procedures and make them more common across the various programs the government offers.

i think you can never market that enough. but i do believe it really comes down to understanding that we're all in the same system together. we have different roles to play. but we can play those roles in a complementary fashion. the airlines have been working very hard to enforce the one plus one rule, meaning the one carry-on bag and one handbag or briefcase. their challenge is, well, it's not my business 0 address their business models, but i can tell you it's just a fact that a lot more stuff is arriving, it's packed more full of things, people have electronics in there. screeners have to be very aten ive. >> but you knew it had the potential to put more pressure on the screeners. >> i think that would have been the expectation. >> do we have a mechanism going forward?

>> absolutely.&eñ and the airlines have worked closely together. both sides have to be aware of the impact of the decisions they make. and i'm as interested in the decisions, in the business models of the airline industry and how it affects our business, because we support that business. >> and also picking up costs that we would normally expect to be part of their costs. >> and may indeed lead to slower throughput at checkpoints because we have to screen and clear these bags. >> would there be some kind of analysis that they are making more money by charging for checked bags but it's costing us more money either because it's putting more stress on the system, you're adding more people, they're working overtime, and do you have a rip with the revenue extreme going in there, should they compensate you for that? >> i would have to take that

back for action. i think certainly i would want to know what the impact is on me if it requires me to have additional resources, then i need to be aware of it. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair recognizes mr. russell from oklahoma. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you all for being here today and your dedication to trying to help secure our republic. administrator, thank you for your long and dedicated service to our republic. with regard to some of the issues on the screening partnership program, would you say that the partnerships have been better or worse performers than tsa, and what concerns do you have about that, if any? >> in my initial look at the difference or the potential differences between private sector screeners and the public, we haven't seen any significant differences in performance. assuming that they're trained

appropriately and the like. if i have any concerns at all, it's that we have a clear set of standards and expectations, and that those are consistently maintained across that program. but again, i don't see any evidence that there's any particular performance differences between the two. >> thank you. and with regard to the turnover, what percentage of new hires would you say turn over within one year or two years, just ballpark? >> you know, i just saw these numbers. i'll have to get you the exact number, but it's a fairly high turnover rate. it depends on. part-time is different than full-time.

in the full-time workforce, 10% i think is the number. in the part-time workforce it's been as high as about 25%. >> and you had mentioned some of the reasons before, but obviously that's got to be a drain on your experience to long time personnel, because they're constantly having to break in new employees, and you have the expense of train-up. so these are really dollars that are lost. how will you mitigate that in the future? >> that overarching discussion we had about connection to mission, connection to agency, as i think about what would make somebody decide this is not for them, aside from the odd individual that just says that's not what i thought i was signing up for, it's typically, the thing i thought i was going to do, is that what the agency actually expects me to do, am i connected to the mission, am i connected to the agency, do i see a future in the agency, are there opportunities for training, further advancement, and so forth. all of those are components of turnover, i think some of which

can be addressed, are beginning to be addressed by the establishment of a common training program and a sense of belonging to something larger than you. i think it continues with a clearly defined sense of progression in the organization and understanding of what your opportunities are, incentivising performance, understanding if i perform well, i'll get rewarded for it, and a feeling of engagement with my leadership. >> thank you. what concerns do you have with cargo screening? >> well, cargo, as you know, has been a concern for some time. there have been a number of procedures put in for that. the question is a recognition of the fact that this is a much larger system than just the checkpoint. even assuming you can get the checkpoint 100% right, there are many other potential vulnerabilities in the aviation area. cargo is coming in from foreign locations into the u.s.

that goes to the individuals actually packing the cargo container for shipment. it's an ongoing challenge, an ongoing threat, and one you can't take your eyes off at any point. >> i guess on the tsa pre program, a lot of issues have been addressed. i certainly understand the risk of having low risk travelers set aside for screening. you talked about stopping the managed inclusion were people are benefiting from the program but really have no vetting whatsoever. based on the needs and the shortfalls of the pre program, how much of that was from managed inclusion vice vetted passengers?

>> are you referring covert testing failures? >> yes. >> i think that it is the case that some of the -- without getting into details, as inspector general roth noted, some of the people coming through the system were diverted into it, and that may have contributed to some of the failures that we saw. i felt that the managed inclusion, as i said before, injected unacceptable risk into the system. i didn't know anything about these individuals. i thought that they were best put back into standard screening until such time as they presented themselves in a direct way for vetting to come into the program. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for your indulgence. >> the chair recognizes the gentlelady from new mexico. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you all very much for your testimony today. i'm a big supporter and proponent of evaluative testing

and review of large employee organizations, because it can be very difficult, and particularly when it's so broad-based, and it's a national organization, to really get at the heart of what is occurring on a day-to-day bases. and in my own state, they created undercover or anonymous organizations of long term care facilities. i think today the authority exists, but we have a statute that reconfirms that not only does the authority exist but it should be encouraged, and you should undertake these anonymous care evaluations. and i appreciate very much that your leadership recognized that this might be a way to either confirm the data that you have,

which at the time suggested that things were operating fairly well, and you might have some complaints or an anomaly, or you would have the opposite, right, which is exactly what occurred here, is that you've identified that you've got significant issues, and in the course of your responses to questions and certainly in your testimony, you've -- and i appreciate that -- have accepted that there is a culture problem in the organization that needs to be addressed, and you've got a ten-point plan. so i'm really interested in, even implementing that plan, it is very difficult, the most -- it's challenging to create in large organizations, i think, a kind of top to bottom, bottom to top culture shift, because i think too often people believe that it's a temporary investment, and then it's easier to kind of go back to the way that it was, particularly if you're doing random efforts at looking at one region or one area or one airport or one screening system versus another, it really depends on the leadership in that particular organization.

what have you learned from this experience that, a, we can help you with in terms of really having a sustainable culture change shift with the leadership and rank and file employees? and what can we take from that is use it for other government entities that we have the same issues, secret service, the veterans administration, several others in federal government, that i think could really use this kind of approach? >> thank you. there's a lot in that question, but i think it's really important, and you've hit on a number of the key concerns and thoughts that i've had with respect to this. you're absolutely right that it's challenging to do cultural change. but we have one great benefit. we have a really, really important mission. and it's a very defined and very specific mission. and so that's a huge rallying point to begin cultural change,

unlike an organization that might have, you know, a couple of hundred different things to do. so i like that. and it's a mission that people care passionately about. and you can tie them to it. i never forget that everybody in this workforce raised their hand and took an oath of office. you can activate that. that's one great advantage that you have. but it's not enough. and it's not enough for me to say i want cultural change, because no one individuals makes it happen. but it is important for me to say it because it has to start at the very top of the organization. the organization that raised their hand and took the oath has to believe that the person leading that organization took the same oath and cares about it. so you have to say that out loud. and then you have to build some institutional structures that actually support it. i mentioned a couple today. i think it's important that i do new hire training in a consistent, standardized, singular way. and i think that that will do great value in building culture over time. it's not immediate. >> i agree with that.

but then i hope you're going to -- and i think that's a great idea, but that the accountability balance with incentivising and creating long term shifts, having an immediate shift that people believe is really taking place is the hard part, i think. i'm interested to hear more about that. >> the other thing is, apparently for the first time ever i brought the entire -- what i term the leadership of tsa together, that is, both the senior leaders at the headquarters office here in the dc area, as well as all of the federal security directors, the regional directors, and then my regional directors who are posted in overseas locations together. that's about 175 people. for the first time in the history of tsa, we've done that. i spent two days with them. and it was two days of connection to culture. and during that two days we talked about how we collectively defined the culture of the organization. >> i'm out of time. i applaud your efforts and i

would, with the chair's discretion, just encourage you, balance accountability with incentivising and creating a clear operating system. because i don't believe it's sustainable unless you do. thank you very much for your leadership. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i thank the gentlelady. i recognize mr. palmer. >> i thank the chairman. we've had a lot of discussion about equipment technology and gotten into the personnel issue as well. the inspector general has stated that the tsa's problems come i think largely from a lack of training. mr. roth; is that correct? >> that is certainly one aspect of it. >> how do you plan to address the training issues? >> we did immediate address of the current results. we did what were called mission essentials training. we trained every single screener. and now we're in the process of doing the same for the leadership of the organization.

and that was designed specifically to talk about what were the nature of the failures, and then to talk about systemically why those failures existed and how they existed across the organization. now we have to go back and measure the effectiveness of that training and we'll do that going forward. that is a program we're putting into place on a routine bases now. we'll do quarterly essentials training, and we're look across the organization at all levels, what are the progressive levels of developmental training and repeated training that has to be

done to ensure that you identify problems before they become systemic, before you get into massive failures like we saw earlier. i think that time will tell as to how effective it is. i'm encouraged that some additional anecdotal results show significantly improved performance in those areas where we recently tested. >> is this your training for front line people? >> it's one aspect of that training. we used it to bring all of our trainers in during the month of july, to train them, and then pushed them out to on-the-job training for our workforce. what i would like to do at the federal law enforcement training center is really move our new hire academy full-time in 2016, then develop additional training communities in developmental training throughout someone's career in the tsa. >> you both can respond to this, but do you believe this basic training will help, will it get us to where we need to be? >> it will absolutely help, both in the session of mission and community that the administrator referenced, but also some of the very basics we found weren't being followed with respect to

checkpoint operations. so i'm a firm believer in training, and that is one of our recommendations. so we're gratified that the administrator is following through on that. >> and i agree, it is necessary and critical to both the development of an appropriate culture and enhancing knowledge to support security effectiveness. but it is not sufficient. the administrator mentioned the plan to follow up to make sure the training itself was getting desired results, and that is critical. >> mr. russell of oklahoma asked a question about cargo security. i want to ask about checked bags. are you aware of the leak that occurred earlier this year where all of the travel keys which tsa uses have been released to the public? >> i think you're referring to the photograph of a key that was published in a major newspaper. >> right. apparently they can reproduce those keys.

are you aware of that? >> i am, questions. >> can you provide the committee with any memorandum of understanding between your agency and the travel sentry regarding the master key program? could you do that for us? >> i'll see if we have one, yes, sir. >> and then my last question will be, how do you plan or will you be able to address this issue of baggage locks if these travel sentry keys have been compromised? >> those bags are still secure to go through the system, they go through screening and aviation. i don't see it as a threat to the aviation security system. but it's clearly a potential theft issue outside of the aviation environment. i think i need to see what the potential solution is from the travel sentry folks, and look to see what we can institute in the

future. clearly we have to address that as a problem. >> that's the context of my question. you have travelers who are not using locks because you use boltcutters. they want to know their luggage is secure. thank you, mr. chairman, i yield. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i would like to thank you for coming over here. i know it's a tough job. you know, it's got to be a difficult thing to work. i assume you can work there for 30 years and never catch somebody who has ill intent. you must sometimes wonder if what you're doing is worthwhile. you're also dealing with a public that doesn't consider this a wonderful thing, so you're dealing with people who aren't particularly happy to have you there. the first question i have in general, say, in the last five years, have you folks caught

anybody who you believe, not somebody that was accidentally slipping in a fingernail clipper or something, but somebody who really had bad intent in the last six or seven years, that you feel? >> within the entire system i would say yes. and remember that there is a security environment in which you enter when you first put your name into a reservation system. so i would say we have repeatedly identified people with connections to known terrorists over the years. >> i mean people who you believe at the airport, when i go through these things, if you guys didn't stop them, they were going to try to do a bad thing, not somebody who was on a terrorist watch list. somebody that you believe if you were not there, they would have done bad things. >> i believe we've had a few instances that we've been aware of. i hope that the vast majority are deterred from trying in the first place. >> right. that's the goal, right. you can forward to the committee later the examples where you really feel that you caught

somebody who would have done the horrible thing if you hadn't have caught them. >> yes, sir. >> second question, we had a hearing a while ago on this stuff. at least what i took out of it is that, you know, maybe dogs would be a better way to go about this, and there were slipups. have you done any work with dogs or used them as a trial? >> we actually have quite a few canine teams deployed through the aviation system. i noted in an earlier question, i'm in the process of moving some of those teams from what i consider to be smaller, lower risk airports to the large airports. i don't know the -- i think the exact number is somewhere around 112 teams currently. we've got another dozen or so teams coming on this coming here. i think dogs are a very important additional element of security in the system. they provide a lot of capability, both for cargo screening as well as for passenger screening. so i'm a big proponent of the

use of canine teams. >> could you see the day when we use more dogs and less people? >> i don't know that dogs will ever place the people component. >> not entirely. >> but i do see a day when we use more dogs going forward. >> do you see the day where rather than i go through there and see eight uniformed people, i see two uniformed people and a dog? do you see that day? >> i think there's a potential. but that really speaks to the larger question of how that checkpoint evolves over time. what i do see is a day when the checkpoint looks very different than how it looks today. we're still largely dealing with the same kind of checkpoint we've had for the past decade or more. and i think we're on the cusp of a very different checkpoint experience in the next five years. >> okay. a while back i knew a guy who worked for you and he felt it was a very top-heavy organization, at least the airport he worked at.

are you doing things over time to reduce the number of administrative staff as opposed to people doing the work? >> we have. we've come down about a total of 6,000 people in tsa since the spring of 2013. so in the past two years, three years almost, we've reduced the workforce by about 13%. i think we'll continue to do so. i've asked to hold steady for the coming year as we look at the impact of the elimination of managed inclusion. and i look to correct what i see to be systemic issues in the organization. and then we'll revisit the staffing standards following this year. but i do see that there are more efficiencies to be gained, always, in an organization. i think you have to look at that continuously. >> okay. what do you pay your people starting? what are the guys i see or the gals i see, what is the compensation they get? >> it various by location, because there's locality pay associated with it. it's roughly equivalent to the

incoming level for -- >> how much is it? >> somewhere around 28, $30,000. i'll get you the exact figure. >> do you have a hard time finding people or not? >> we're challenged, like any organization, to find a workforce. we've met our recruiting goals every year. but the turnover is higher tan i would like to see it be. >> is there any reason why somebody 60 to 65 couldn't do that job? are they discriminated against? >> not at all, we have a lot of people who are retirees who are working in the screening force. >> i ran into a guy this weekend who was on your whatever list, the trouble list, okay? he had been on it for quite a long period of time. he wasn't as mad about it as i would be. one time he walked through the thing and apparently the people ducked down and they called the police on him. he was somebody who if you just

looked at the guy you would think, what? he lives in a little town in wisconsin. it was like, really? how quickly does it take people to get off this list? when people make a mistake like this, how quickly -- >> it's a redress process that we partly managed. it's managed also by others in the law enforcement community. i'm not familiar with the specifics. if i can get the specifics on that, i can look at the specific case. there is a process, if you think you have been inaccurately placed on a list, there's a redress process. and it's a pretty fast redress process, as i understand it, although it's a process you have to go through. >> a long time for this guy. >> i'll certainly take action if you have the details for me. >> okay. thanks much. >> i thank the gentleman. ms. maloney. >> i thank the gentleman for calling this hearing. tsa relies on many different pieces of equipment to carry out its screening tasks.

for example, it uses advanced imaging technology, machines, walkthrough metal detectors, explosive trace detection machines, bottled liquid scanners and other pieces of equipment. in may of this year the ig's office issued a report that said tsa is not properly managing the maintains of its airport screening equipment. it says tsa relies on self-reported data provided by the maintenance contractors and does not validate the data to confirm that required prevent maintenance actions have been taken. tsa also does not validate the corrective maintenance data reported by its contractors. my question is to inspector general roth. if tsa has not been validating

the data reported by its contractors, can it be sure that all required maintenance has been performed and that its machines are operating correctly? >> no, they can't. and you accurately summarized what those reports are. it's the functional equivalent of giving the car to your mechanic but not checking to see whether or not they've changed the spark plugs. >> that's important. and ig roth, do any of the contractors responsible for the maintenance of tsa equipment have sole source contracts? is it competitively bid or is it a sole source contract? >> my understanding is it's competitively bid. but i think i need to get back to you. >> can you get back to me and the chairman and the ranking member. ig roth, have any contractors never been penalized for failing to perform any maintenance tests? >> i'm not aware of any, but again, let me take that back to be sure of the answer. >> what recommendations at your office make to tsa to improve maintenance of its equipment and what is the status of these

recommendations? >> we did make a number of recommendations with regard to the process that tsa uses to verify this maintenance. that is still in process. we typically allow them some time to be able to institute those changes. but again, i will get back to you with the specifics on that. >> and i would like to ask the administrator, are you confident that tsa now has the systems in place to hold its contractors accountable for providing proper maintenance of its equipment and are you confident tsa's equipment is being maintained and repaired properly? >> thanks for that question. first let me say i concur completely with the inspector general's findings. and i did find that we had --

not that the maintenance wasn't being done but we had no way to verify that it was in fact appropriate and done. we put the processes in place to do so. we now have to measure whether those processes are adequate to do that. but i'm confident that certainly i get it, and that the person i have who is tasked for being responsible to ensure it happens understands the importance of having auditable trail to make sure it's done. >> i underscore, i know you feel the responsibility you have to the american people, we know that there are many who want to harm our citizens and that they try to do it for some reason through the airplanes, and they are continuing to break our system. because i check with the airlines in my area, and they have incidents where they're trying to break through. so having the oversight and the audit and making sure that this is happening is critically important. and i look forward to you getting back to the committee, inspector general roth, on the

answers that you needed to review more for us. i think they're important questions and i look forward to seeing what your response is. again, i thank you for your public service. thank you for being here today. i thank the chairman for calling the hearing. on a very important safety issue. i yield back. >> i thank the gentlelady. i'll finish with a round of summary questions. first of all, mr. administrator, in previous response to me, we discussed who poses a risk. and it's less than 1% of the travelers that are examined, of the 660 million. is that still your position? >> i couldn't put an exact number on it. but i would agree with you -- >> it has to be far less than -- you're probably dealing with 20 to 50,000 people on some sort of a watch list or no fly list that we're looking to not board, who may pose a risk. but we're spending about 95% of our resources, again, on folks

who pose no risk. you talked about where you're going. and i saw some of your report, and i was pleased to see that you're looking to the future. here is my boarding pass. i've been to europe last year, i was there twice, once in italy and once in germany. there was no tsa type screener at the entry point. i have pictures of it. i would be glad to show you. you go up and put your boarding pass on, and the style lets you through. if it doesn't let you through, there is a person who would subject you to additional screening. that's almost commonplace now in europe, in the domestic arena. maybe you saw that when you were there. >> i did, yes, sir. >> we have people going through this, some of the dumbest things i've ever seen. let me borrow your cellphone a second.

they go up and put your cellphone down, and they let you through. but then you've got another tsa, if you don't have it on your electronic device, then you have someone who take time and they go through and circle each thing. i mean, just things like that. and where we are not. can you name any countries other than bulgaria, romania, or poland, sort of in the more sophisticated countries, that have all federal screening? >> i'll get back to you. >> there are none. >> most european countries have private screening. >> there are none. israel -- but it's under federal supervision. i have never said do away with tsa. i've said change the role, change the resources to connecting the dots to security. that's what's going to get us. every time we've been successful

in stopping someone, it's connecting the dots. but again, you said it may be five years before we can get to this. this should be tomorrow. >> actually i think we'll get to that much faster. >> and we should be embedding the information here. i saw that in nuremberg, demonstrated in 2003, completely operational. it will stop people, they won't be able to board. the systems exist. we just keep falling further behind, adding more people. now you're saying you're training them, you're sending them back to basics, to a law enforcement training program? >> no, it's at the federal law enforcement training program. it's not a law enforcement training program. >> we have to make it clear. some of my colleagues don't even know that tsa screeners are not sworn personnel, right?

>> that's correct. >> they are not sworn personnel. they are screeners. >> that's correct. >> and again, you have this huge bureaucracy trying to recruit, and maybe you've gotten better, you know, i disclosed where we're hiring them off pizza box ads and above discount gas pump advertisements for screeners. that hopefully has stopped. but you can recruit all you want, you can train all you want. you have actually trained more people than you employ. and at this time, you actually train more people. they're gone. your turnover has been -- some places it's horrendous. and granted some markets are very difficult. but -- okay. so we've got equipment. and this is about equipment. i've heard -- and the ait failures to maintain, to operate, train people for it, advanced imaging technology. the deployment is a disaster. how many machines do we have? 700 and what? >> about 750 machines, currently. >> they're at how many airports?

>> 160. >> how many airports do you have, say over -- >> about 400. >> about 300, 290 airports that don't even have an ait machine. i'm mr. dumb terrorist, okay? where am i going to go to enter the system? ait is the best system we have, but it can be thwarted. you've made some refinements to it, but personnel are human beings, they're going to fail. i will bet the staff at dollar -- mike, i'll bet you a dollar, we'll do it next september, we'll do the same hearing, we'll have covert testing. maybe you'll improve slightly. but it will still be a disaster. it's been a disaster in every classified hearing i've sat in, the failure rate.

if it was publicly known, people would scream for some change. so again, i want to get you out of the personnel business, which is that huge -- again, they're not law enforcement, but screening team. again, you need to be in intelligence, and connecting the dots and security, setting the protocols, seeing who is not performing, getting rid of them if it's a private firm that's operating. okay. so here's our aits. we have 450 airports. we're at 160 locations. then you go to the locations. when they put them out, it was mind-boggling. how are you going to change that? it costs hundreds of thousands of dollars for the equipment. then it costs the airports and you a fortune to put them in place. you go to some concourses and

they've got two or three of them in one concourse. it was never intended for that. it's intended to be a secondary screening device. and then in other concourses, even at national, you go to one of our airports and some of the concourses have none. god bless you, you're trying to change a mess. but even the deployment of that important machine has been a disaster. when we spoke, i asked you about reducing some of the overhead. you've got thousands of people in overhead, 46,000 screeners. it was up to 15,000 we found within the 46 here in washington. at one time there were 4,000 making $103,000 on average just within 20 miles of where we're sitting. and some of those may be important responsibilities.

but again, paring that down. we have the public/private screening partnership. i know they perform a little bit better than you, because i've had that tested. they came back and told me, they said private screening under federal supervision, private screening under federal supervision performs statistically significantly better. i don't care how polite your agents are. it's nice to have them polite, you've impressed some of the members. what i care is if they are able to deter a terrorist from getting through. and they are not law enforcement personnel. they are screening personnel. you've got your whole -- billions of dollars, billions of dollars focused on people who don't pose a risk. so we need to get away from that model. a member of congress, mr.

wahlberg who testified, he's got an i.d. card. sometimes they don't even recognize a federal i.d., ask you for a driver's license. but i've had hearings here on driver's license. and i.d.'s that can and have been duplicated. that's one of the easiest things you can do. i can make a boarding pass that can get through any of your gates at national or anyplace else with just a little work on a computer. again, we've set up a system that is destined to fail. u'll be back here, there may be slight improvement, training some more folks, maybe a little bit better retention. back to the partnerships, in rochester, one of several dozen public/private partnerships, i

told you they had at one time 15 to 18 people, most of them between 60 and a hundred and some thousand dollars. i went to canada, looked at similar operations. they had one federal person. and i think you need a federal person, someone who's charged with intelligence, someone who's charged with conducting the oversight on a daily bases and making certain it works. is there any hope of getting a reduction of some of the people we don't need at these programs where we have the public/private partnership? >> as you know, we actually have reduced the number of oversight directly for the partnership. but the additional responsibilities at tsa has meant there's a surface inspection in transportation. a number of those people are involved in the surface inspections. >> is there anything that can't be done through exclusion in a contract? two, three, four people at an airport like rochester, not 15 or 16. again, and i know the game, you

pack it so it makes it look like it costs more or as much for private screening under federal supervision. we'll have a report that will be released soon and show some of the costs. at least it costs less under that. not that i'm trying to do it on the cheap. they're just more efficient. i support federal wages, no change in that. i support union membership. i put that in the bill, in the beginning bill. in fact in the private screening in san francisco, he had folks belonging to unions long before the motion recent sign-up of folks across the area. i have another question the chairman wants me to get in. will you let the committee know today or within the period we'll

keep the record open, we want a complete response on when you will finish and address all of the recommendations that the i.g. and gao have put forward. could you give us that today, do you think? or do you want to give it to us for the record? >> i'll give you a schedule for the record. what i will tell you is what i told both the inspector general and director grover, that is i'm committed to addressing all the remaining open recommendations as well as any that remain that are nonconcurs and getting those closed. >> if you can give the committee, in the next -- when are you going to leave this open, ten days, mr. -- ten days, without objection, so ordered.

we'll leave it open for ten days. no, i'm not finished, that was just leaving it open, making certain i comply with your wishes. but in any event, ten days. and we would like that made part of the official record. and as exact a date, because again, i'm going to hold a subcommittee hearing if we don't hold a full one with any year, give you a chance. you're here, and i love your attitude, i love your willingness to be open with the committee. you've inherited one of the most difficult tasks. you're the, what, sixth administrator. i've dealt with them all. i think you're one of the most capable that we've been fortunate to have. we need to look at rerighting the ship on this whole security thing, get you out of the business that gives you the headaches. i know you'll go back and say, mica is full of it, don't listen to him. but as long as you keep trying to manage a $46,000 hr department, you're going to have

problems with recruiting, with training, with retaining, with management. you'll never get it right, i assure you. not that it's your fault, you're dealing with human beings. then spending most your resources on people who do not pose a risk rather than the bad guys, connecting the dots, security, making certain you set the standards. then as the inspector general and director grover have said, that you bear down on those that are not meeting the standards that you have, you kick their butts out, you fire them, you terminate their contract. that's, i believe, your role. again, welcome. isn't this great? you want to reconsider? no. but you are a true hero to come

forward. i have the greatest respect for you and what you're going to try to do. i'm trying to get you to see, a year from now, what you're going to face when you come back here, and where we'll be. with that, thank you, and i want to yield to the ranking member, mr. cummings. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank all of you for your patience. i know it's been a long morning. i only have a few questions. the nation has one standard for merchant mariners and employees who need access to secure areas of ports. it's called an identification card. you said it was required by the maritime transportation security act. and each one is issued by the tsa. administrator, i'm curious, given your background with the

coast guard, which model do you think is better? should access for facilitates, secure areas, be issued by each facility, or issued by a national entity like gsa? >> i don't know if i have a good direct answer to that. by that i mean this. when you have a nationally-issued i.d. card, that creates a lot of challenge in managing it and issuing it. and it introduces some concerns with respect to its viability across a large organization. that said, i think that both systems can work effectively if the oversight is what it should be. i think, as i look at the badging environment in airports, airports would argue they like the fact that the badges are different because it means you can't move from one airport to the other and get access, you

have to have something that has your airport on it. i think we can do a lot more to ensure the security of those badges and ensure the accountability of those badges as we move forward. there was an awful lot of information that came out of what the aviation security advisory committee study told us about the way to manage and ensure the integrity of those badges going forward, as well as to look at the oversight of those. i think the inspector general has pointed out some important areas for us to consider. so i don't really know which approach is better. i think both approaches can work very effectively. but they need a lot of oversight no matter which way you take it. as you know, there have been some challenges in the program as well. >> are you confident that full implementation of your plans will ensure the tsa screening systems will pass future covert tests by the inspector general and the tsa's own covert teams?

>> well, testing will tell. but i'm confident that we're on the right track. i hope it means that we will see dramatic improvement in the future. i believe it will. but i don't believe that we can just declare it done and move forward. i think this is a continuous process and it's a continuous attention. this is one of these things that, as i said before, you can't just fix this and assume you've got it right. this is -- what it's allowed us to do is see that this is an ongoing attention that needs throughout the entire life of the organization. there is no fixing it. there is addressing the challenges, learning from what you've addressed, testing yourself, learning from those testing, and that continuous improvement as we go forward. so what i will tell you is certainly for the duration of my tenure, that i will never take my focus off continuing to test this system, elevating the processes and training that we put in place, the procedures, continuing to adjust them as we discover whether they work or

don't work, and then looking for how to distribute the best practices that we found across the whole system. and that includes looking at our international partners for anything they might be doing that can inform the way we do business, because this global system relies on global standards and global consistency. >> as you have heard gao state today, tsa has not always established performance measures that clearly align with its goals. how will you know if you have altered the pervasive cultural problems in tsa, and what performance metrics will confirm it? >> i take a look at the entire measurement system. i said, the way we're currently measuring isn't leading to an improvement in the system. there's a readiness component,

are they trained, do they know what the mission is, do they have the support of the leadership, is there ongoing attention to that. and then i'm going to look at their performance. then i have to test them. did that stuff work? did what i think about their readiness actually show itself in the performance? the system has to have the same sort of the measures. is the system ready? have we maintained it appropriately? can we verify this? is it meeting the standards before we deploy it that we expect it to meet and the other things that go into, does it work? how well does it perform when you plug it into the system? you have go back and you test that as well. you are testing the people, the processes and the technology. both its readiness and the production of the mission. and then it's a continuous process. right now i get a report on a weekly basis to me on those measures. we have a ways to go yet. we're putting -- we're getting the organization used to a new way of thinking. it's measuring effectiveness. it's focusing on the security

component and the effectiveness of that. it's defining that mission in a very clear way. and then looking to see what we're learning as we're studying it. so we have actually learned quite a bit already about system readiness both in the work force as well as in the technology. and it's leading to some things that we have to do to improve that on both scores. and it's also beginning to point the way towards how we're going to effectively measure performance. that will include working with the inspector general and the goa as we go forward. i see this as a very valuable partnership, even recognizing they have to be independent and they're skeptical, and i want them to stay that way, but they give me valuable information about how my system is working. >> let me say this. one of the things that i pushed with the coast guard, with the secret service and the baltimore city police is i have said that i want them to create an organization which is the elite

of the elite. in other words, a feeling that we are the best and that our standards are high and i believe that when you have -- when you get there, the people who are caught up in a culture of mediocrity will fall off. because they won't feel that they belong, period. you won't have to fire them. they will leave. some of them you may have to fire, but most of them will just back off. as i have heard the testimony today, one of the things that just gnaws at me is the idea that we have now an agency that's willing to accept the recommendations and director grover, i keep going back to some of the things you said about accepting the recommendations and then trying to do them. but we're still having those gaps. you know, as i was sitting here and i was listening to all this,

i was saying to myself, maybe it's not all the things you just said, but you have to add something else to it. see, i think that when we have recommendations and then your agency looks at them and says, yeah, we have to do that, we missed that, we got do that, it may go back to that whole idea of trying to impress or get it done, but not concentrating on why we're doing it, you know, why that's important. some kind of way i think to get to the elite of the elite, people have to have a full understanding of why it is and the fact that bad things can happen and perhaps if you are not on guard, they will. for some reason, i keep going back to katrina. i'm telling you i think about katrina almost every day. because it's one of those situations, director grover, where we claimed that we were ready. we couldn't even communicate across town. and like i said, when they said the rubber meets the road, we

didn't have a road. and our country is so much better than that. and so i think one thing is leadership. i think another is metrics. i'm hoping that our -- i will talk to chairman chaffetz. he has been open to accepting the model we used in the coast guard subcommittee where we constantly brought folks back so that we could actually see where we were going, because one of the things, as you have heard me say many times, a lot of times, agencies -- and i'm not saying you did this. but agencies will wait out a congress. there's no real accountability. going back to what you said, director grover, you have to have accountability. one of the best ways to have accountability is to set deadlines. come back and report. and it may be that you don't achieve every single thing you want to achieve. but hopefully, we can get in -- see our progress. by the way, i think when the agency sees its progress that,

again, helps them feel like the elite among the elite. finally, you know, i just -- i thank all of you for working together. and i thank you for having the attitude that you have. i think one of the biggest mistakes that we make is sometimes we act like the inspector general and director grover, that we're on different teams. but what you are saying is that we're all on the same team trying to lift up the american people and keep them safe. that's the team that we're on. that's our team. if i have a member of the team that can see things that i can't see and can bring them to my attention and help me become better and again become the elite of the elite, i think that's what we ought to be about. i thank you for having that kind of attitude. because that's what's going to get us where we've got to go. and i think that -- i go back to

what mr. gowdy said a little bit earlier. i have had nothing but good experiences with tsa, i mean everywhere i go. and i know that we've got some great men and women working for that organization. but at the same time, i know they're also -- they're human. so i think we have to constantly find those ways to keep the work exciting, to keep it refreshing their skills and reminding them of how important their job is and how we appreciate them. because i can tell you when you've got somebody -- when you've got hundreds of people every day trying to rush to a flight, some of them are upset, they have kids, the stroller, and all this, they have to be checked. i'm sure that's just an opportunity for people's frustrations to get out of hand. yet still, i have seen over and over again where tsa officers have just been very patient,

understanding and tried to do the right thing at all times and at the same time protect us. so again, i thank you all. we look forward to seeing you again. your testimony has been extremely meaningful. and i think it can lead us into effectiveness and efficiency. i've often said that there's nothing like having motion, commotion, and emotion and no results. we have to have results. i think we can get there. i think you all have given us a road map to get there. thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. i thank the members for participating today. we've gone through all the membership and you all have been most accommodating. i realize the task that you have, administrator, but i particularly want to thank the inspector general and also the director. you have an important role with your oversight. the committee conducts some oversight.

we rely on you. the goal here is to keep the american public safe, to make certain that we don't have another 9/11, and that we do the best that we can with the resources given to us by the taxpayers. with that being said, there being no further business before the committee, i will mention to the staff as said that we will be submitting to you all as witnesses additional questions in this interim time for response. so we want you to know those responses will also be made part of the record. there being no further business, this hearing of the government reform and oversight committee is adjourned. thank you. about whom will you next write? i thought there's only one

person besides wilberforce. i did write that book. i thought i'm going to be standing next to the president speaking to 3,500 of the most important people main the worldn this room here in d.c. who knows how i'll feel in the moment? i don't know. i had the idea that i might do that. i thought maybe i'll give him the books later. if i feel i can pull off the goofiness, i'll do it. >> eric mataksis on his book. >> i think it is important for everybody to take politics seriously and at least vote, but never make an idle of politics. there are people who have done that and they're sort of

worshipping at that -- they're worshipping that idol rather than the god who would cause them to care for the poor and injustices. and i think it's a fine line. it's something i talk about fairly often. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a." tonight on c-span 3 a senate confirmation hearing or several diplomatic posts, including the ambassadors to libya, oman, and tajikistan. >> the senate foreign relations committee recently considered several nominations to diplomatic posts, including the nominee to be ambassador to libya, peter bode.

people heard from other diplomatic posts. this is just over an hour. committee meeting will come to order. i appreciate all of you here today. i would say this. we'll have opening statements and then we'll hear from each of you. senator murphy and i will have deep and probing questions. we have an interesting mix of

countries and of interest groups represented here. and certainly, i think we will use this opportunity, obviously, to learn more about the areas that you're going to and the challenges that you're going to face here, and i'm sure you'll have the opportunity to tell us what is on highest thing on your mind as you approach your assignment. so as always, we want to thank each and every one of you for your service to the united states. so with that, senator murphy. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. we're going to cover a pretty diverse array of issues from keeping the world safe from chemical weapons to national security interests in the near east and central asia to our investment strategy abroad. so, i will match your brevity, mr. chairman, and get straight to the statements from our witnesses today. look forward to hearing and to their confirmation process, thank you very much, senator risch. >> wise decision.

mr. morton, we'll start with you, and welcome to the committee. we'd like to hear what you have to say. >> thank you very much. chairman risch, ranking member murphy, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i'm honored to be considered by this committee for the position of executive vice president at the overseas private investment corporation. after spending most of my career in the private sector, i've had the privilege of serving in opec for the past five and a half years, first as vice president for policy, then chief of staff, and now as chief operating officer. the agency in its 250 professionals empl -- kp

government, delivering results for the american taxpayer, and for the citizens of the world's most challenging and often fastest growing emerging markets. as the u.s. government's development finance institution mobilize the capital for challenges. advancing u.s. foreign policy and national security objectives at the same time. simply put, opec represents a common sense solution for development for u.s. national security. it has an outsized impact on global development. by bringing the stabilizing and sustaining force of private investment to some of the world's most difficult areas and poorest peoples. over 40% last year were to projects in the world's poorest countries, like rwanda, cambodia, and haiti. over 40% went to africa. and also critical investment flows to projects in middle income countries where a majority of the world's poorest now reside. in support of u.s. national security, opec increased its lending operations to conflict

affected areas to over 50% during my time with the agency. and today, roughly one-third of opec's investments are in conflict affected or buffer countries, such as iraq, afghanistan, jordan, georgia, ukraine, and south sudan. investments made by the u.s. private sector in partnership with opec are critical components of building solid, economic foundations in vulnerable renals of foreign policy priority. in ukraine for example, we're working to support u.s. businesses investigating in the financial services sector. and in jordan, one of our strongest partners in the troubled region, we are proud that u.s. companies supported by opec investments and insurance are providing nearly one fifth of the country's power and water supply. finally, opec delivers strong results for u.s. taxpayers contributing positively to the function 150 account for 38 consecutive years. with 80% of global economic growth, expected to occur in e

emerging markets over the coming decades, opec helps u.s. companies gain footholds in fast-growing markets by crowding in private sector investment. and enabling america's entrepreneurs and business leaders to join the ranks of distinguished americans like my fellow nominees here today representing the best of u.s. values and ideals. mr. chairman, ranking member murphy, on any given day, opec has far more demand from american businesses than we can answer, far more shared development challenges than we can answer, and far more income and inquiries for investment support channels through u.s. embassies than we can answer. filling the role of executive vice president would allow us to respond to this demand in a more efficient and effective way at

an agency which continually delivers on its developmental mission. i thank you again for your consideration of my nomination, and i welcome the opportunity to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, mr. morton. my mistake, i should have invited you to introduce any guests you have here. >> i have my wife, my son, my daughter's on a camping trip today and couldn't be here -- >> she's the lucky one. >> and my boss, the president of opec, elizabeth littlefield is also sitting in the second row. >> thank you so much. we appreciate that. mr. ward, we'd like to hear from you and your nomination to the representative to the organization of chemical weapons, would you like to introduce people you have here with you today? >> i have no immediate family with me here today, i would like to introduce the former ambassador, dr. robert mclack, and also the brother i never had, robert cadillac who is the deputy staff director on the committee. i'm honored to have both here with me today. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, ranking member senator murphy, it is an honor to appear before you as

president barack obama's nominee to be the united states representative to the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons with the rank of ambassador. i greatly appreciate the trust and confidence president obama and secretary of state john kerry have shown in nominating me for this position. after decades of negotiation, the chemical weapons convention was signed in 1993, and the convention entered into force in 1997. since then, the international organization charged with implementing the convention, has established itself as an effective and respected international body. opcw inspectors have overseen and verified the destruction of chemical weapons in russia, the united states, albania, libya, syria, and other states parties. inspectors have conducted thousands of routine inspections in national military facilities and commercial enterprises around the world to ensure that states parties are abiding by their cwc obligations. in the fall of 2013, these efforts towards achieving a

world free of chemical weapons were acknowledged by the noble committee and the opcw was awarded the peace prize. despite the historic accomplishments of the convention and the opcw, chemical weapons continue to be a threat to international peace and security. the ongoing strife in syria is a stark and tragic reminder that such weapons are not relics of world war i or the cold war. on august 21st, 2013, the syrian government unleashed a barrage of rockets filled with the nerve agent sarin against opposition-controlled suburbs of damascus, killing an estimated 1400 civilians. many of them children. three weeks later, under international pressure, syria joined the chemical weapons convention. of great concern, there remains compelling evidence that syria continues to use chemical weapons against its own people. the fact-finding mission of the

opcw, an entity created to establish the facts surrounding agents of the use of toxic chemicals as a weapon in syria has concluded with a high degree of confidence that chlorine was used in april and may 2014 against opposition-controlled villages in northwest syria. the fact-finding mission is now investigating additional allegations of chemical weapons use in syria. in early august, the u.n. security council established the joint investigative mechanism for the purpose of identifying those individuals, entities, groups, or governments responsible for these chemical weapons attacks. of additional concern, an opcw technical team raised a host of issues calling into question whether syria has declared all of its stocks of chemical weapons and associated munitions. the united states shares these concerns. we have assessed that syria has not declared all of the elements

of its chemical weapons program, and may continue to retain some of its stocks of traditional chemical agents and munitions. in sum, syria continues to violate the most fundamental obligations of the cwc against possession and use of chemical weapons. if confirmed by the senate, i will make every effort to ensure that the people of syria no longer face the threat of chemical weapons at the hands of their government. mr. chairman, ranking member senator murphy, the ongoing chemical weapons crisis in syria as well as the allegations of the use of chemical weapons by non-state actors in both syria and iraq is a potent reminder of the essential role of chemical weapons convention and the opcw in promoting international peace and security. in years to come, the world will continue to look to the opcw as the repository of technical expertise. the opcw will face many

challenges in the years to come to achieve the promise of a world filled with chemical weapons. excuse me, free of chemical weapons. we must achieve universal membership. we must counter to the ongoing threat, we must prevent the reemergence of chemical weapons. if confirmed by the senate, i will work to ensure that the opcw achieves these goals and remains a force for promoting international peace. i welcome the opportunity to answer any questions you may have. >> that was very comprehensive, we appreciate that. thank you, mr. brody. you've been named to be ambassador to libya. could you please enlighten us please? >> if i could introduce -- >> please. >> the members of my family here today first. >> please. >> i'd like to introduce my

wife, who's a retired member of the foreign service, christopher, my dad, who is a retired ambassador, and unfortunately my daughter can't be here because she's accompanying her husband to our embassy in kuwait. >> thank you. a lot of service in your family. >> yes. chairman risch, ranking member murphy, members of the privilege to appear before you today as the president's nominee to be the next united states ambassador to libya. i am grateful for the trust placed in me by president obama and secretary kerry. if confirmed, i look forward to working closely with this committee and colleagues from across the u.s. government to promote a strong relationship between the united states and libya during this challenging moment in libyan history. four years after the uprising of the libyan people led to the fall of gaddafi, libyans continue to face enormous challenges as they work to establish national accord and build institutions that are inclusive and representative of all libyans. the libyan political dialogue

has required determination and compromise at every stage and the process of political reconciliation in libya will be a long journey. the recent october 8th announcement of proposed leadership for a government of national accord resulting from these libyan negotiations was a welcomed step in the process. we urge all parties to endorse the agreement as quickly as possible. the rise of isil groups, human smugglers, and dramatically reduced oil production demonstrate the immediate need for unified national libyan government that can effectively partner with the united states and the international community to begin the hard work of restoring peace and security in libya. over the course of my career, i have led inner agency teams in challenging environments, and i understand the difficulties and the opportunities ahead. my experience as the u.s. ambassador to nepal during and

after the tragic earthquake in april has assistant chief assistance in baghdad, and as deputy chief of mission in pakistan confirm my belief that strong interagency coordination and a cohesive country team are the foundations of successful united states missions overseas. mr. chairman, i make it a point to come to the hill when i am back to washington, and i believe that regular interaction, whether at post or in washington, is critical to our continued success. frank exchanges of accurate information that build trust are essential for the congress to make difficult resource and policy choices. if confirmed, i look forward to continuing this relationship. i have always been deeply conscious of the most important duty i have as chief.

pakistan has confirmed my belief -- mr. chairman, i make it a point to come to the hill when i am back in washington and i believe that regular interaction, whether at post, or in washington, is critical to our continued success. frank exchanges of accurate information that build trust are essential for the congress to make difficult resource and policy choices. if confirmed, i look forward to continuing this relationship. i have always been deeply conscious of the most important duty i have as chief of mission. ensuring the safety and security of all americans in libya, in particular those serving under my leadership. while our mission is no longer physically located in tripoli will be a task one if which confirmed i will be responsible and accountable. libya has the potential to play a vital role in regional security cooperation and trade over the long term. establishing a safe and secure environment must be the first step libyans take to move their country forward and continuing to support the establishment of a stable prosperous and democratic libya is consistent with the values and strategic interests of the united states. if confirmed, i will work with libyan partners to assist in the establishment of that environment. in closing, i want to note that anyone who represents the united states abroad has the unique responsibility. more often than not, we are the only nation that has the will, the values and the resources to solve problems and help others and to be a positive force for change in our challenged world. being nominated to serve as an ambassador representing our nation is, in itself, an

incredible honor. with the consent o haf the sena i look forward to assuming this responsibility again while serving as the next u.s. ambassador to libya. thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. bodi. mr. siever, you have the floor. please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. if i may, i'd like to introduce my family members who are here today. my wife, michelle hooter rafael and our son samuel and my son david and my daughter miriam. i am grateful for their support and their attendance at this hearing. >> thank you. >> chairman and ranking members of the committee, i am honored to appear before you as president obama's nominee to serve as ambassador to the

sultan of oman. i am deeply grateful that president obama and secretary kerry for the trust they have placed in me and if confirmed i look forward to working closely with you and other members of congress to advance the interests of the united states in oman. mr. chairman, i have spent much of my 34-year foreign service career working in the middle east. if confirmed as u.s. ambassador to oman, my highest priority is protecting our dedicated men and women in our mission and as well as all americans living in and visiting oman. i will work with our omani partners to ensure that american businesses realize the full benefits of the u.s.-oman free trade agreement. i will engage with a wide range of omani citizens, so that oman makes strides in establishing an independent civil society. rest assured, i will employ the full range of diplomatic tools to deepen our cooperation with oman on counterterrorism and

counterpiracy issues. in recent years, oman has demonstrated the value of its relationship to the united states by helping to facilitate the nuclear negotiations with iran, securing the release of american detainees in yemen and hikers held by iran, and by assisting the evacuation of american government personnel from yemen. overlooking the strait of hormuz, oman works with the united states navy to promote freedom of navigation in a region through which approximately 30% of sea borne global oil exports flow. the united states and oman have excellent security operation to ensure that the strait of hormuz remains open to international trade. since the implementation of the united states, oman free trade agreement in 2009 u.s. private

industry has received broad access to the rapidly developing omani market. united states held a billion dollar trade surplus with oman in 2014. if confirmed, i will work to ensure american private industry enjoys free access to an omani market eager to purchase american goods and services. sultan caboose has gradually increased the level of representation omani citizens hold in government. if confirmed, i will support the efforts of the people in government of oman to establish a more inclusive and transparent government and to strengthen civil society. finally, i would like to once more express my appreciation for this opportunity to appear before the committee today. if confirmed, i look forward to welcoming members of congress and congressional staff to oman. i have served in a number of war and conflict zones during my

career, and i can assure the committee i do not take lightly the responsibility an ambassador holds to protect the men and women serving in our country overseas. if confirmed, my highest priority will always be the safety and security of every american in oman, as well as the advancement of our national interests and i pledge to carry out these duties to the best of my ability. i welcome the opportunity to answer any questions you might have. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. sievers. ms. millard, you have been nominated to be ambassador to tajikistan. the floor is yours for introduction. >> in the interest of time, i will summarize my statement, but ask that the full statement be submitted for the record. >> certainly. >> and i would like to say of my five children, my oldest daughter charlotte and youngest son richard were unable to come today, but the other three are here with their spouses.

my daughter olivia and sasha and my son james, and we also have alex, age 4, who is my granddaughter here today. >> thank you so much. >> mr. chairman, ranking member murphy, it's a great honor and privilege to appear before you today as the united states ambassador designate to the republic of tajikistan. i deeply appreciate the opportunity to testify this afternoon and i'm humbled by the confidence president obama and secretary kerry have placed in me. if confirmed, i look forward to working with this committee and all members of congress to advance the interests of the united states in tajikistan. i'd like to recognize the members of my family without whom my 23-year career in the foreign service would not have been possible. above all, my husband vaughn who retired after serving in the theyvy -- navy for 30 years and

became my most enthusiast and steadfast teammate in our tours abroad. vaughn tragically died after a brief illness last year, but he knew this posting to tajikistan was a possibility and was excited at the prospect. our five children and six grandchildren are a testament to our partnership. throughout my career, i've focused on ensuring the security and safety of american citizens and advancing the interests and values of the united states and the american people. mr. chairman, if confirmed, i'll bring the same dedication to our embassy in tajikistan. tajikistan is a challenging post and a dynamic region. per capita, it is in the poorest quarter of countries in the world. it has the poorest 800-mile border are afghanistan and problems like illegal narcotics trade and terrorism and violent

extremism in the region are deeply concerning. if confirmed, i will work to strengthen our partnership with tajikistan to address these serious challenges. tajikistan, given its difficult neighborhood, must maintain its security and stability goals, which the united states strongly supports. but the security, stability, and prosperity that tajikistan seeks can only come with a strong commitment to improving human rights and governance, respect for the rule of law, and protection and promotion of its people's rights and freedoms. these are critical components of security and stability for any country. if confirmed, i will encourage the government to promote and protect the space for civil society and for international and domestic non-governmental organizes to register and function freely. being an american ambassador is not only a great honor but also a great responsibility.

if confirmed, i will endeavor to be a good steward of the american people's trust and property and a caring leader for my embassy colleagues. a faithful representative of our values and our interests. i'll also ensure that our mission continues to provide u.s. citizens residing in or visiting tajikistan the highest quality of services in our steadfast protection in times of need. communication and trust build the best relationships. this applies not only to our engagement with foreign governments and societies, but also to engagement with congress. if confirmed, i will always be available to this committee, its members and staff, to discuss and work with you in pursuit of our national interests in tajikistan. again, i thank you for this opportunity and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much, miss millard.

i'm going to go through and ask questions of each of you because i have individual questions and i think there's matters that you have in your mind that ared of interest to us and you can probably enlighten us on. i want to start, mr. morton, with you. you are undoubtedly aware of the fact that a number of us here in the senate wrote a letter raising concerns about conflict of interest on a director and are you familiar with a letter that i'm talking about or a response was made to it? >> i believe i am, sir, yes. >> what -- first of all, do you think that the concerns that we have -- we were concerned not only about a conflict of interest, but an apparent conflict of interest. you know, we as americans, as we go around the world, try to persuade people that the only way society can prosper is if, indeed, you get rid of corruption and you get rid of

any type of undue influence. for that matter the appearance of it. we were concerned not only about what appeared to be a conflict of interest and could have been a conflict of interest, but also the appearance of it. what are your thoughts on that? >> well, senator, thank you for the question. i believe when we looked into the matter that was raised by you and several other senators, we were -- we were very comfortable with the arrangement that opec had supported in this case and i believe that the director in question had recused himself of all relevant matters during the course of his time serving on the board. so we took a close look at it and felt that we had followed both process-related matters well, but also we had stayed on the proper side of the perception issue. i'd be happy to follow up in more detail with a further conversation if our response was not to your satisfaction.

>> well, i think probably a little more detail wouldn't hurt. i fully appreciate that the person in question recused himself from the actual vote on something, but the appearance is very difficult to shake under these circumstances, because obviously if you're a codirector with other directors, you have influence over them. you have access to them that others don't. and so i'd be interested -- you don't need to do this now and take the question for the record, but i'd appreciate some follow-up on it, because as i say, that really doesn't resolve the issue of the appearance versus the actual conflict. >> sir, i'd be happy to get back to you. i would say with a portfolio of 600 projects across 105 countries around the world, we are constantly looking at investments that have complex structures, boards of directors,

government structures that we do very, very careful due diligence on to avoid the very issue that you're raising here. so we take these issues quite seriously, and i'd be happy to follow up with you in more detail. >> thank you, mr. morton. mr. ward, you have a responsibility that is enormous really when you're dealing with the product or the material that you're dealing with. we're seeing some open source reporting that mustard gas is being used in syria. can you enlighten any of us on that realizing we're not in a classified setting, but is there anything you can kay in an open source sort of fashion about

that? >> we certainly have had concerns for years that isil has been seeking such weapons and there have been allegations and reports that they have actually used these types of weapons. it's something the u.s. is look at very seriously. because it involves isil, there is an intelligence dimension to all of this. something i can bring to the attention of the committee is that the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons its fact finding mission, one of the missions has focused on the allegations that such chemicals were used in august. and we expect by the end of this week for that fact-finding mission to issue a public report on the information it has acquired on this subject. it will not address the issue of attribution. the mandate of the group does not extend to assigning responsibility, but it will seek to either confirm or refute the allegations that these chemicals will be used, and i think you will find their report to be a very helpful, open source document. if you've seen the previous

report that was done by the fact-finding mission on the april/may 2014 incidents, it is hundreds of pages long, very detailed information based on interviews and the like. and i know that some of your staff colleagues have found it to be very helpful as an open-source document and hopefully, by the end of the this week that will be issued and be able to provide you with a much more open type of access that will not involve classified information. >> thank you, mr. ward. i think everyone is aware, because of the reporting of the use of chemical weapons in syria, after syria, what would be the next country you would be most concerned about? obviously, i think -- would you agree with me syria would be at the top of the list of concern in today's world? am i right or wrong on that? >> absolutely. this is a country that we believe has not fulfilled its

obligations to declare and destroy all of its chemical weapons, and there's mounting evidence that it's been using chemical weapons against its own citizens. >> so what country would you go to after that? is there anyone close to that or do you drop down the scale quite a ways? >> it's interesting. we have concerns about some countries when which are reported in our classified compliance report but, you know, use of chemical weapons by countries is something that really has not taken place since world war ii. the real intermediate threat of use versus the concerns about countries possessing chemical weapons is non-state actors. we wonder in a new era of chemical terrorism has come along and it will be interesting to see if these allegations that isil has been using chemical weapons turn out to be true, because we may be worrying much more about terrorists who, when they acquire a chemical weapon, immediately use it, versus countries of concern that acquire a chemical weapons

capability but it sits on the shelf and never becomes an immediate threat to the world community. senator, i worry most about non-state actors, and i hope we can put that genie back in the bottle and we're not seeing a new era of chemical terrorism. >> given the lack of moral turpitude of the people who are doing this in syria, i would say that i'm not very optimistic that -- that some type of moral obligation would drive their decision making. let me ask this. as far as -- you said no country had used it, no state actors had used it since world war ii. are you accepting syria, given the use near damascus?

>> actually, no, i am. let me correct myself. i'm forgetting the obvious example of the iran/iraq war and the allegations that iraq and then later iran exchanged large amounts of chemical weapons between 1980 and 1988. forgive my historical lapse. >> appreciate it. what -- do you feel -- does your organization feel like they have at least somewhat of a decent handle on how much chemical -- what is the quantity of chemical weapons that are left in syria after the supposed removal of the chemical weapons? >> they do not, mr. chairman. but they believe that the answers that the syrian government has provided about what happened to chemicals that they allegedly destroyed a few years ago, they just can't document anything and there are grave suspicions that they have not come clean about all of

their capabilities. we do believe the bulk of their program was declared, but there remain very serious suspicions that a residual chemical weapon capability has been maintained by syria and thankfully, the organization established a very dedicated group of experts to focus on this issue. just a few weeks ago, they reported that they have serious concerns about the veracity of syria's declaration with respect to chemical agents, to the munitions that would deliver them, and the facilities that were involved in research, development, and production. so the international organization has clearly identified a serious problem. unfortunately, they don't know where the hidden weapons are. but it's important that they put an international spotlight on it. the last thing any of us want, and most especially myself, is for syria to hold itself out as a member in good standing of the chemical weapons convention. they are not, senator.

>> we appreciate that. can you comment at all on the transfer? obviously, not voluntarily from the syrian government or to isis or isil or da'esh, whatever you want to call it. >> let me just say let us not think there was any deliberate transfer from the assad regime to isil. these are enemies. obviously, any acquisition that took place was not intended, but in a classified context i would be happy to provide more information, senator. >> mr. body, we all know that libya is attempting to form a government. can you enlighten us on the status of that? >> yes. mr. chairman, we have been making, with our international partners and our regional partners in the area, some progress over the last few weeks to establish a government of

national accord. we were very hopeful on october 8th as i mentioned in my statement that when the special representative of the u.n. announced the possible officers of the new government, that that would move forward quickly. it hasn't. but we are still hopeful that this is the direction it will take. we're not there yet. all of the regional partners, our international partners, there's still dialogue going on by my counterpart and special representatives out in the region doing outreach on this stuff. but our goal is that they will work towards establishing this government of national accord. we feel it's critical because without an inclusive government that brings in after the parties, as many parties as possible. we don't see that substantial progress can be made. >> what is your personal assessment of the prognosis of that? does it succeed? >> i think it has the potential to succeed, but it's going to be a very difficult road.

and like everything, it's going to be difficult reaching an agreement. my own sense senator, is that that will be easier than implementation, but that is why i'm going there. >> mr. sievers, regarding oman, you didn't mention or refer to, in your opening statement, succession of the sultan. could you talk about that for a minute and your concerns in that regard, if you have any? >> yes, senator. thank you very much. succession, obviously, is a very important question. the sultan has been in power since 1970. he has established most of the institutions that currently exist in oman. he is widely viewed as kind of the father of the modern omani state. and due to his health, there is certainly the potential that he could leave the scene in the near future. there is a mechanism in place.

there is something called the ruling family council that would meet if the position became vacant suddenly. and they are to select a successor because the sultan has no children of his own. should they fail to reach consensus on who that individual would be, there is a sealed letter from the sultan to the council that would be opened in the event that they do not reach agreement among themselves. so i think we are -- i'm pretty confident that they will manage this process, but i do acknowledge that it's untested and it could pose a challenge for them. >> thank you very much. >> you're welcome, sir. >> finally, miss millard, i

think one of the things for those of us who serve on foreign relations and the intelligence committee is the flow of fighters from tajikistan to isis. what can you tell us about that? and what is the prognosis of stemming that? >> mr. chairman, it is, indeed, a worrying phenomenon. the number the tajiks have given to us is about 600 as of now. if confirmed, i would be focusing on this important issue and to deepen our already robust relationship with the tajikistan government to address issues such as this one. >> do the tajiks have any

system in place to do anything about this? >> my understanding is that some of the recruitment is actually happening in russia. the guest workers, as you may know, many, many young tajiks actually are guest workers in russ russia, so the problem is most likely happening in russia. but as far as what the tajiks themselves are doing within tajikist tajikistan, i'll be looking into that and be smarter on that and if confirmed, i will get to that. >> thank you. senator murphy? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. as the father of a 7-year-old and a 3-year-old, let me remark on how remarkably well-behaved the youngsters are that are here with us. frankly, they will do more credit to the united states in these new roles than their parents, given their disposition. thank you all for being here today.

let me sort of go down the row in the same order to let everybody catch their breath. mr. morton, you and i had the chance to talk about this a little bit, but in open session. you know, i'm intrigued by the messages that we send as china stands up the aaib, providing new access to capital, new pathways to alliances and partnerships with countries all around the world, and we sit here today still with the inability to simply reauthorize the xm bank. tell us a little bit about what this new asian development bank means for the united states, what this new competition may mean for the work that you do and recommendations for how we should be thinking about it. it sort of bewilders me that we

don't understand that the military is not the only way that you project your power as a nation abroad, these days especially. your economic reach matters as much, if not more than your military reach. and you have limited resources, but tell us what we should be learning from what the chinese are doing. >> thank you for the question. you know, i think the creation of the aiib is only the latest in a longer series of developments that are occurred within the development finance arena over the last decade. when opec was carved out it was in the form of official development aid or grants. 7-1 grand foreign directs to investment and now the exact opposite. ten times more u.s. foreign direct investment flows out than does official development assistance. the interaction that the u.s. economy and the u.s. nation is

having with developing countries is very much driven now by the foreign direct investment and by the business ambassadors that our businesses and our companies are investing overseas. so even before you had the creation of the aaib, you had governments like germany, the netherlands, et cetera, significantly enhancing the ability of their development finance institutions to promote foreign direct investments overseas. now, i think the aib is certainly the latest and probably the most consequential of these developments and one i think we need to understand. we need to look at it carefully and understand. the amount of liquidity that china will be injecting into overseas markets will be -- is already significant and will continue to grow. i think there is a question of what, if any, u.s. response there might be. i will say when opec invests alongside u.s. companies in

overseas markets, we do so with a set of environmental, labor, social human rights standards that have been set by congress and that are far superior than those that are being promulgated currently by the kai -- chinese banks. i do really think we lead by example when we invest overseas. >> does that pose the risk of a race to the bottom? you have more entrants into these global capital markets that come with sort of political agendas rather than simply financial agendas the expectation they will get their money back with return. does that jeopardize the high standards that we have traditionally set? >> i mentioned over 40% of our portfolio was in africa and i spent more time in africa than any other agency on the

continent. not an agency or capital you can go to on the african continent where the government is not crying out for u.s. investment and u.s. standards and u.s. values and u.s. leadership. there is always a temptation i think for a race to the bottom but i think the countries that have come into contact with u.s. investors and u.s. capital understand the different standards that come with that and crave it. that really is a strong desire in embassy after embassy that we have spent time with for u.s. companies to be actively investing in these markets. >> tell us a little bit more about chlorine and the role of opcw in addressing these new reports of the use of that chemical inside syria. >> what is interesting is that the first major use ever in world war i of a kep -- chemical weapon was chlorine. in april of 1915 the germans released many cylinders filled with chlorine gas and went into no man's land, killing people in

the trenches and thereafter the powers developed much better chemicals than chlorine to use. mustard, louisite and later came nerve agents after world war ii. so chlorine, we all think of it as the thing associated with your pool. it's a cleansing agent. it's used around the world in order to sanitize water to turn it into drinking water. it's ubiquitous and all over syria for that purpose. syrians evidently decided to take chlorine canisters, wrap detonation cord around them, and turn them into improvised barrel bombs, which we believe were very likely rolled out of helicopters. there's strong evidence from the fact-finding mission report from april and may of 2014 that all of the witnesses who survived the attacks with the chlorine bombs, helicopters were overhead

whenever this happened. well, only the syrian government has helicopters. the opposition does not. and it's a very strong incriminating indicator. what happens, though, is, you know, when the bombs start to drop, people naturally go into the basement and the chlorine being heavier than air goes down into the basement. it hasn't killed in hundreds or thousands the way nerve agent can, but the systematic and repeated use, either the number of casualties is accumulating more and more over time. it's become a terror weapon to be used by the syrian government. >> so to your role, this is not on the list of -- educate me as to what your organization can do and what role you play. >> there's a list that goes with the treaty and that list of chemicals defines not what a chemical weapon is, but what types of facilities around the world will be subject to routine inspections. what happens is chlorine is so

ubiquitous the organization would spend an enormous amount of time just inspecting chlorine facilities around the world, so it is not on the list for inspection purposes. however, any country that uses a toxic weapon to kill people has violated the convention. the convention covers all toxic chemicals. the inspection regime of necessity and to narrow itself down to the most likely suspects and chlorine being a chemical that quickly became outdated is a kchemical weapon even in worl war i was not included on the list. in the case of syria, they have found a use for it once again, a very lethal one. >> mr. bodie, it's a common saying around here there aren't military solutions to many of the problems we face in the middle east and probably oversimplifies the fact there is

military components to most of these fights but our military action in libya is probably as good of an example of our failure to understand it was our military action that led to the fall of gadhafi that created this vacuum that still exists today. this is probably an unfair question to ask somebody who is not on the ground yet but you're studying your new post. what lessons have we learned about our military engagement in libya that, at the time, was not partnered with a political plan that was not realistically on the ground? is the lesson that we shouldn't get in the business of trying to use military power to depose brutal dictators, if we

don't have a military plan? is the lesson that you need to do more planning ahead of time? what should we be thinking about as the lessons coming out of our -- i think at this point, failed military intervention in libya. >> senator, i won't characterize your question as an unfair question but i think it's a question i've been asking myself in a different fashion and it's one that i think i'm going to be finding the answer out over the months to come. it does take me back, though, to what we are looking to do right now. i think one of the things that has happened post what happened four years ago is the lack of governance, the lack of rule of law, the lack of security. the sum total of all this has created a situation that is untenable and why i think it's so important that we continue our efforts on this government of national accord. until we can have some form of inclusive government and bring as many of the parties in libya together to get things back on a new normal, all of the problems will continue to exist. what i'd like to do is take that question and come back to you in

a few months after i'm on the ground and give you a much more realistic answer based on my experience there. >> i think that's fair. mr. sievers, talk to me about the potential role that oman plays in the syrian political process. this is a government that prides itself on trying to be a broker or at least put themselves in a position to be a broker. we have heard some optimistic testimony from the administration about a political process that's going to kick off at the end of this week. what role may oman be able to play as that continues? >> senator, i believe that there was a meeting a couple of days ago between the omani minister for foreign affairs and president assad. that was the first omani contact that i'm aware of at that level, so it does appear that they are stepping up their engagement.

they have not been, so far, a major player in regional efforts to -- to find a negotiated solution, but it does appear that they are now becoming more engaged as various elements of diplomacy come into play. so i think it's something that we need to engage with them on very intensively in the days ahead but it's a pretty new development. their role elsewhere has been to promote diplomatic solutions to regional crises when they have been able to do so. so that is their approach. >> do they have a position on whether assad has to go, has to stay, has to stay for an interim period of time? >> as far as i'm aware, they have not taken a public position yet on that.

but i think we should get a more detailed readout from the omanis about this meeting and hopefully we will know more about that. i'd be happy to arrange for a briefing for you on that once we have that information but i don't know at this time. >> miss millard, this is a really touching tribute to your husband and we are very sorry for your loss. i thought it was very interesting your response to the senator about the location of some of this recruitment and it speaks to the dependency that they have on russia, a country that has massive undeveloped economic capacity and natural resources and hydropower linking you to the guy at the other end of the table here. what is the opportunity for u.s. aid and u.s.-backed development

to try to bring this country to a point where it isn't so reliant on russia for the economic well-being of so many that travel across the border to bring home a paycheck for their family? >> thank you for the question. mr. senator, certainly the links that tajikistan has with its immediate neighbors and russia, we are there. that's a historic fact. that said, tajikistan -- a multi -- of foreign policy and that gives us an opportunity to work with them in a number of different areas and there are a lot of needs there. in our assistance program, we focus on a broad range of areas, including improving the investment climate, you know, food security, education, health, women, girls. so i think there are a lot of opportunities for us and i will be sort of taking an inventory

of what we are doing and see if there are more opportunities for us. >> i have a question for all three of you. i've been in this role on the foreign relations committee three years but i've had the chance to travel to a lot of posts around the world which are difficult places for foreign officers, especially young foreign officers to serve and that would be the category of all three of your posts. as you've served in a variety of leadership capacities, what have you learned about the ways in which you can create a -- mr. bodi, you're going to a place that everyone gets assigned will think twice about, given the history. what have you learned about the way in which you can create a positive working environment, culture for your employees, despite the fact that it's pretty tough territory?

>> if i can answer first, senator. one of the things i've learned, senator, is the tougher the post, usually the higher the morale is and it speaks to the dedication of my colleagues, particularly my young colleagues in the foreign service. but young colleagues are new colleagues and they need nurturing and mentoring. i find for every moment i spend mentoring the payoff to both the mission, post, and to the state department at large is so large it's just something we all have to do. it's something even as an ambassador, normally, in a post this falls to the deputy chief of mission has the responsibility for this and in nepal i spent an hour every two weeks after our country team meeting with all of my untenured officers and specialists talking about a leadership issue and talking about a life experience, just trying to teach them the lesson that this is how i did it and here is the mistake i made. you're going to make different mistakes but at least you have

the benefit of mine. i found they are like sponges and they soak it up. the other thing, sir, we are blessed with, i think all of us would agree we are in one of the best careers and jobs in the world and most people in the foreign service, once they realize the interesting work they get to do, that is a motivation itself and it's our job as leaders to keep that spark going and to give them real responsibility and get them out there. >> senator, if i may, these are really tough questions, particularly in areas of the world where posts are often going unaccompanied. people can't plan very well. they go into a post expecting one set of circumstances and then it changes and families are evacuated. i think the state department is investing enormous efforts in helping people cope with these situations. but it's very tough. it varies considerably from place-to-place.

i feel fortunate that oman is where we have families and we have an excellent american school and good morale by all indications that i've received, but that, obviously, maintaining that is something that has to be a very, very high priority. i agree with my colleague, ambassador bodde, we are attracting excellent people to the foreign service in all of our agencies and i've also worked very closely with colleagues in the military and in other agencies and across the board, i think people feel a sense of commitment to american values and to representing the united states abroad and to promoting american interests. but they want to hear from us, from those of us in leadership position, how we see things and where we see things going. they want a certain amount of transparency about the

challenges that we face, and so it's incumbent upon us as leaders to share that information with them on a regular basis. and to try to address their questions as often and as accurately as we can. sometimes there are things that we can't talk about, but most of it can be shared and i think that pays a great deal of benefit. >> mr. senator, both of my colleagues have mentioned a number of things that have been certainly high on my agenda, such as mentorship, leadership. i would like to add in an isolated difficult post, i think people-to-people contacts can be tremendously rewarding for everyone at the embassy, from the most junior person to feel that they can get out and perhaps give a presentation on some aspect of american life for american culture. and these kind of presentations can be tremendously rewarding