not what you think you joined the coast guard to do but she's been in the coast guard all of six months and i said well what you do in the coast guard and she says i facilitate the movement of over half 1,000,000,000,000 dollars of commerce so it can get down to the mississippi river. she doesn't talk about the bee sting, the fire ants, the snakes, she talks about what her mission is in a much grander scale. so i think if you talk to anyone scale. so i think if you talk to anyone of our folks out there, they connect themselves to something much bigger than themselves. if you look at the nasa model was back in the sixties, that seaman is no different than the janitor at nasa of what are you doing here. i'm putting a man on the moon. so they connect to a much bigger piece and you'll find that pretty much wherever you go in our service but i think as we have so much more information that's readily available for people as well. >> you also touched on resources, the resource picture for the coast guard looks may be better than normal, i don't want to overstate it, sure you would like more, but you make comments in the past using the job line about you needed a bigger boat,

saying we need a bigger coast guard, how do you feel about the resource picture now that the fy 17 budget request is in? you mention several of the new major investment strings underway. the growth of the structure and the readiness picture. what most challenges you at this point and executing all of that? >> i am immensely pleased with our acquisition budget. on the other side we have our operations in maine is, what our operations and maintenance, would cost to do operations and people from under that funding portfolio as well. were not keeping pace. in fact were fact were not even keeping pace with budget control funding levels. where funded below that level to sustainer operation so it's great that we're modernizing, the sustaining piece is still a bit of a challenge for me. that's work that i need to do in demonstrating how critical that is because let's face it, i've been to enough commissioning ceremonies now more than i have decommissioning ceremonies, that's a good thing, more births than funerals. it's a great gal event. but that's where the real platform kicks in because now you the next 40 years, it's not on wanting so i need to operate and maintain it for the next 40 years to improve the crew, the fuel you burn in the main as

that goes with all of that as well. so that's really good to be the next piece. so when you talk about jaws you can a needed bigger boat and a bigger coast guard. sedo back to 1988 and in almost every presidential election cycle since 1988 there has been a rather significant hurricane, we'll call it the perfect storms. in the height of a presidential presidential election cycle you now have a storm and let's face it it will invite scrutiny over how that response goes. no will have a hurricane and nothing else, i, i know the coast guard is ready for that. we just finished up an exercise last week in the pacific northwest called the cascadia rising. the cascadia subduction zone and with that you don't get that notice that you're gonna have a traveler, you can have a synonymy and and you can have tens of thousands of fatalities that impact critical infrastructure, but a five to two events at the same time then

as i would say i'm out, and that's the challenge that we are currently resource for relatively benign operating environment, but whether but whether you look at overseas threats and the natural disasters exasperating that as well, were gonna need a bigger coast guard going forward. >> you mentioned today in regard to the european migration crisis, i, i think the united states has pledged or said it would attempt to assist and provide a particular to provide a vessel to assist, does that impact you directly, you talk about the trade-off, how does that really manifest in terms of what the trade-off looks like. >> i'm please we've had a dialogue in fact it was now a confirmed in wearing a four star, he's in over ten in the coast guard to be the coast guard with greece and turkey, looking at their challenges and where there might be u.s. coast guard equities.

so we have those dialogues and there's no immediate request for us to disband our coast guard presence here and send those ships to the mediterranean, but we do bring a lot of subject matter expert in that its mass migration. so we've had those dialogues and we'll see will see if they actually manifest themselves into a request for u.s. coast guard augmentation because it's very vexing and quite honestly it's going to be a persistent problem as we now see sub sahara arguably migrants maybe not refugees that are now entering into this vesper that is flooding the european continent. >> and just to be clear, if you had to rush right away of their work request from the president to support a migration crisis with for instance one of your cutters, what would be the operational impact for you in the immediate? >> unfortunately i don't have a ghostly that is tied up

somewhere ready to be activated to support a contingency like this which would mean we would have to pull a resource away from doing frontline operations today and put that operation element at risk. we have a significant migration flow coming up from primarily from cuba but also from haiti as well. i was just two weeks ago we came across a rustic with 11 cuban migrants on it. right as we arrived all 11 of them drink a bottle of bleach. bleach. they passed it around among themselves. and suffering very ill effects we were able to stabilize them but that's the act of desperation that these migrants were expected to be medevac to u.s. hospital and therefore be feet dry. so they realize that the coast guard is there to stop them and will take these acts of desperation just to gain access to the united states. but if the coast guard is not there in the numbers that we are today than

it is a free pass. i think we need to be ready so we do reposition the coast guard that we need to be able to answer what are we doing to protect our maritime boundaries as well. sweat the end of the day, we can to both. >> let mass one more question and then open it to the audience. tell me a little bit about how you see the arctic environment evolving in terms of the actors and what their motivations might be and how the coast guard plays into that? >> my initial concern for the arctic is really the indigenous inhabitants of the arctic. i was up there last summer and the week before i arrived they had what we call a category one hurricane. normally there would be a sea ice barrier that would prevent any buildup of season any coastal erosion while the nearest ice was nearly 400 miles away. see can. so you can imagine that you have 18, 20-foot comber's washing in

on beryl alaska in the middle of a storm they're out there with earthmoving equipment moving equipment trying to establish a berm made out of soap so you don't have seawater inundating their only source of fresh water. they came and probably within twice the length of this room of losing their only source of fresh water. you're seeing that across the northern latitudes where we have these indigenous inhabitants and their seen their way of life change. these are nations onto themselves. so how do we reestablish those nations? i always look at the arctic as the canary in the coal mine for rising ocean temperatures and its impact. just to demonstrate that further i will take a delegation to greenland in august, will will head out to the largest glacier on greenland, the glacier which is moving at the rate of about e atlantic ocean. now i cannot fathom why it's doing that, but i concertedly observe what is happening and if

you are to look at a complete meltdown of the ice fields of greenland, you're talking about a 21-foot rise in sea level. it's likely to happen overnight, but if that does happen, what are we doing to prepare for a rise in sea level? we just rebuilt station sandy hook following hurricane sandy. we probably built it on shifting sand with the expectation that it will still be there and functioning 100 years from from now so i start looking long-term of my coastal infrastructure and where i'm going to invest coast guard, i better be be keeping climate change, rising sea level, very much at the

forefront as well. so the arctic is where a lot of this is taken place. but the first people to witness this are the indigenous inhabitants. >> let me open it up to the audience and see if we could take some questions. the microphone is coming, please identify yourself and your affiliation if you have one. >> i and megan myers, the coast guard reporter at anytime. i wanted to ask what are some of your egg's personnel wins over the last couple of years and what you have on the docket for the next couple? >> personnel? i'm very pleased with our leadership program that we have for all of our list of personnel and i give great credit to our chief petty officer of the coast guard so we have been the most junior level to most senior level in our listed workforce a leadership continuum going all the way up to e9 in the coast guard. we are still catching up in that regard when it comes to our officer leadership development programs and there is just a question of capacity. the area i am immensely pleased with is that we have a diversity inclusion strategic plan as well. so we are finally catching up to reflect the demographics of this nation within our workforce in the coast guard.

i've taken a personal effort, i've been out this last year to seven minority serving institutions, when i go there i there i don't go by myself. someone doesn't want to see some old guy like me, not why what i want to join the coast guard. so i bring in a very diverse delegation with me. we meet with the president of the universities with the faculty but then we also meet with the students. they get to see a diverse coast guard and the opportunities that are available to them so it has been a great return recruiting tool for us as well. to the point where as i've said before, if i was trying to get into the night states united states coast guard today which is still a complete meritocracy i would be standing outside that wall watching the corps of cadets parade on that field, but i'd be okay with the coast guard. everyone of those folks in that parade field are going to do

phenomenal in the coast guard. >> we have one more. >> hello my name is lindsay reiser and vice president of an ngo global peace service with usa. thank you for your report. my question is this, the state department has been explaining the complexity of its relations with russia. i would like you to say a little bit about the experience of the people who are working with russia over arctic issues, what are some of their issues, what is their negotiating style and if you talk about any other kind of encounters you have with the russian naval fleet or their equivalent to the coast guard that would be helpful as well. >> i will say this, i've spent probably a better part of three of three hours just one on one interacting with my russian counterpart, because when canada hosted the arctic coast guard for, the parliament would not allow russia at the table and sense russia didn't show up, nor did did norway, finland, sweden,

or denmark. so basically we never got off the launching head. but we talked to and they compartmentalize. they compartmentalize where you ukraine, crimea, and some of the military action and so this is the federal border service of the russian federation, their principle comes with me. so we can talk about the arctic and holistic terms, safety of safety of life at sea, all of us are challenged, if we see an aggressive offshore drilling campaign in the arctic, what is the technology that we can bring to bear to mitigate the effect of an oil spill and a very pristine environment. we also recognize that a lot of our scientific research, some of that has been compartmentalized as well. it would not beach or collective advantage, even if it is something as germane as fisheries, do we see fish stock start to move further north and

then do we see fishing fleets going north to attract those as well? what i would say say is it's measured comments but at the end of the day it's productive. we are now working on information exchange, obviously via the internet, we are all eight members of the arctic are at the principal level can interact with one another. so say you have an event up in the arctic, and maybe it is our icebreaker and for whatever reason we get buzzed by a russian aircraft. i can reach out to my counterpart and say what is up with this? the other service chiefs do not have that luxury and then you have to fill that void in the absence of transparency and it remains very opaque. so i would categorize the arctic among all of the arctic nations as transparent. they really gravitate towards a

coast guard let approach to the arctic versus a military lead, even though they recognize that we are an armed service we are unique as a coast guard but they recognize the coast guard aspect of diplomacy and working the arctic issue. >> the russians last week just floated a new icebreaker, you have in your budget to develop an icebreaker but it's want to take time, how should we in the audience think about this new icebreaker from the russians? >> we have to look at it ship counts. the russians russians have 41 and we have to. we start looking at that is mutually assured destruction and missile count. so the purpose of the arctic coast guard is how do we leverage the collective resources of all of the arctic coast guard's in the event of a contingency? we're also looking at and putting together what i call a heat mat. a heat map is using ais information which everyone has access to comments one of the concentrations of the

greatest human activity up in the arctic. in all likelihood it's probably where the greatest likelihood of where a mishap at sea as well. so we will do a tabletop exercise the sheer and we will do a full-scale exercise next year doing a math mass rescue at sea. work and i do one in august using gnome, we had norway and canada will participate in that as well. we will have have 250 role players as now displaced passengers. what we can't replicate is how do you replicate the 24 hour cycle during an episode. you use

who is in charge and recognizing that there's going to be a lot of scrutiny, you need to establish a relationship with survivors, all the nuances that go on tour response, two mini times we deal with it at tactical level and often lose sight of the fact that will only be dealing with national command authorities and on a global scale if you have a titanic like event in the modern era today. >> i'm going to group the final two questions because were running low on time. >> on the great lakes were very focused on the ice mission and so i have questions, with all the acquisitions going on in the 140 rehab program which were obviously a big fan of do you have the bench strength to continue to do that in the second question is to see the domestic isis developing your bench strength in your future icebreakers? . . . .

>> >> do we bring in another great lake icebreaker i cannot put it into my acquisition must -- budget today although immediately is the heavy icebreaker before we could address that. i will be in ottawa in july it has a memorandum of

agreement for some reason real have that capacity to provide assistance to the united states if they are deficient but we need to look at this within the next five tenures we buy some service life with a 40-foot icebreaker is but so as the water warms instead of being a straight line its meanders. it is the polar vortexes that screen across the great lakes and then have a severe winter with heavy icing slow

all say everything that will warm up with no ice left with the great lakes but then finally i will be up there in a couple weeks but appreciation for your role think for the question their role as an observer but also they will soon launch a second medium icebreaker it is the same issue with transparency. when i see where they're doing scientific research with the extended continental shelf long-term no tie nephew's us i am not disconcert so what is giant

-- china's strategy? klay can answer that question so that does cause me great concern. >> admiral they give some much for your time and your leadership. you make the coast guard sell like the most fascinating place in the world. [applause] opened the day's proceedings. >> celebrating 30 years of coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span 2. >> the democratic party's platform committee is holding a forum in phoenix to hear testimony on what should be included in the party's platform ahead of next month's democratic national convention. they meet friday at 1:00 p.m. eastern. you can see that leave on our companion network, c-span.

saturday, day two of the platform committee hearing in phoenix, starting at noon eastern on c-span. book tv has 48 hours of non-fiction books and authors every weekend. here are some programs coming up this weekend. on saturday night, from book expo america, the annual trade show in chicago, former nba player kareem abdul-jabbar discusses his book, "writings on the wall." on sunday, at 2:30, a round table discussion about donald trump's book, "art of the deal." carlos lizada, michael kruse and monica langley will comment. then at 9:00 p.m. eastern, foe as gurgeis talks about his book,

"isis: a history." he's interviewed as well. >> so the spectacular surge of isis was a direct result of the creeping sectarianism, the civil wars in almeshra, in the arab east, the vacuum that exists in iraq and other states and somehow the perception the arab spring, the peaceful action could change the existing order. >> go to book tv.org for the complete weekend schedule. national park service director jonathan jarvis testified before the house oversight committee recently about allegations of sexual harassment at a national seashore in florida. utah congressman jason chaffetz chairs the committee. >> good morning. the committee will come to order. without objection the chair has

authorized to declare a recess at any time. we'll have i hearing today about the oversight of the national park service. 2016 represents the 100th year since the park service was founded. should be a milestone, but we instead find an agency in crisis. we have a lot of good hard-working people, who do a good service for this nation. they serve, the public is attending the parks in record numbers, but we're still having problems. we should be working to increase the visitation and providing recreational opportunities to the american people. the mission of the national park service is to preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. but that does not work when you have so many multiple cases of serious long-standing employee misconduct that is distracting

the agency from its mission. there's no doubt that when you hire tens of thousands of people to work for the park service, there are going to be some bad apples. those bad apples are going to cause untold disruption and heart ache to a lot of people, but if they're not dealt with in a swift manner, if they're not dealt with appropriately, the problem becomes worse. that is the situation at least from my vantage point, that i see. during the last few months, the department of interior, inspector general has issued numerous reports, revealing that the park service is failing to protect employees from a rash of sexual harassment. employees are discouraged by management from reporting it, and even retaliated against. just yesterday the inspector general released yet another report of sexual harassment showing a pattern of this behavior in yet another park, the canaveral national seashore. across the country, harassment

at the grand canyon river district, it took a letter from 13 victims -- 13 victims -- directly to the secretary of interior before any action was taken. allegedly this behavior had been going on for about a decade. unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. the superintendent of the grand canyon himself, david unar aga had a history of inappropriate behavior. 2008, the inspector general determined that he unethically profited on the sale of land to a park concession ear who he oversaw. he was also found to have misleading statements related to the sale. his supervisor was then superintendent jarvis who decided that a letter of reprimand was enough of a punishment. just a letter. sold the land to three times the value for somebody doing business with the park service. when it was brought to light, director jarvis offered him a

cushy position and job in washington, d.c. over a decade they've field to meet the eeoc requirements. claims can take years on process and the service has consistently failed to maintain a functional program. in the case of grand canyon, it's taken two years for the claims of harassment. two years. we're seeing it's a culture that tolerates sexual harassment and retaliation. failures multiplied by the park services and director jarvis's inability to hold manageable accountable for these transgressions. perhaps most troubling is the service suffers from failure to maintain ethical standards at the highest levels. director jarvis is appearing from us today. he was removed due to his own

ethical failures. he failed to get a book deal approved by the ethics office, lied to the skreatd of the interior and afterwards, tried to cover up his tracks. when the person in charge isn't following the rules, we can't expect anybody at the agency as well. something needs to change and it needs to change fast. we can't keep continuing to turn a blind eye to misconduct or discourage employees from reporting this conduct. it erodes americans' faith in their government, destroys morale for the hard-working dedicated employees who abide by the rules and they shouldn't have to work in a hostile environment. when they don't sense that management has their back, take care of them, and that they will hold the management responsible, it creates a culture that is hostile, and it should not be tolerated. there are ethical problems, backlogs of projects, lack of plans to deal with the backlogs.

inconsistency enforcement of laws and rules are just some of the things that plague the park service and thus we're hearing the hearing today. appreciate the witnesses for being here. i bank the balance of my time. i recognize ranking member cummings for his opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. today's hearing involves a variety of allegations that the national park service, unfortunately, spanning several years. i want to thank our witnesses for being here today, including national park director jonathan jarvis, deputy inspector general mary kindle, whose office has issued many of the reports we will be discussing today. for example, the inspector general's office has identified an instance of contract steering at the denver service center,

the unauthorized purchase of automatic weapons at the mojave national preserve. and the improper use of government housing at yellowstone national park. as a result of the inspector general's work, we also learned that director jarvis violated federal ethics rules when he wrote and published a book without clearing it through the department's ethics office. although he does not appear to have benefitted financially, he showed contempt for the government's ethics rules when he told the inspector general's office that he probably would do the same thing again. that is amazing.

that he would do it again today, because he has, and i quote, always pushed the envelope, end of quote. you know, the chairman talked about morale, talked about the public's confidence in government. that kind of attitude is the very thing that leads to low morale. it leads to a lack of confidence by the public. and so, as a result, the director has now been stripped of his authority over ethics at the national park service and is undergoing mandatory ethics training himself right now. most troubling of all have been the reports from the inspector general's office that detail, and i quote -- and this is very

upsetting -- and i quote, a long pattern of sexual harassment and hostile work environment, end of quote, at the grand canyon river district. the grand canyon's former superintendent received a report in 2013, documenting multiple allegations of sexual harassment, but that report did not determine whether further investigations were warranted or whether disciplinary action should be pursued. a year later, 13 current and former employees sent their allegations of abusive behavior to the secretary of the interior. the secretary referred these allegations to the inspector general for investigation, and the inspector general's office identified 22 -- 22 -- other individuals who, and i quote,

reported experiencing or witnessing sexual harassment and hostile work environments, end of quote. the inspector general's office also found that previous reports of sexual harassment, and i quote, were not properly investigated or reported, end of quote. in addition, within the last few days, the inspector general's office issued a new report, detailing, and i quote, a pattern of sexual harassment, end of quote, against three female employees by law enforcement supervisor at the canaveral national seashore. these reports obviously raise very serious issues. women have the right to work anywhere, including our national

parks, without fear that they may be harassed by fellow employees, or ignored, or even retaliated against by managers when they report these abuses. the park service's equal employment opportunity program, the program directly responsible for handling complaints of harassment and retaliation does not meet some of the most basic standards of a model program. these reports demonstrate how critical it is that the senate pass my bill, the federal employee anti-discrimination act, which chairman chaffetz co-sponsored and passed the house by a vote of 403-0. finally, i want to highlight one more issue that needs urgent attention. that's the funding for the rehabilitation of the arlington memorial bridge, which was built

in 1932, across the potomac river, to connect the lincoln memorial and the arlington national cemetery. unfortunately, as inspection in february found that the bridge has second half deteriorated. if a complete overhaul does not begin by 2019, the bridge is slated to be shut down within five years. rehabilitating the bridge is estimated to cost $250 million, while the national park service's entire transportation budget for 2016 is $268 million, which is an issue that congress needs to address and i hope our witnesses here today will be able to discuss this as well. with that, mr. chairman, i anxiously look forward to the testimony. i yield back. >> thank the gentleman. we'll hold the record open for five legislative days for any member who'd like to submit a written statement. we'll recognize the witnesses starting with mr. john jarvis,

director of the national park service at the united states department of the interior. mary kindle from the united states department of the interior. we welcome you both. all witnesses are to be sworn before they testify. if you will rise and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? thank you. you may be seated and let the record reflect that each of the witnesses answered in the affirmative. we have your written statements, but we'd appreciate if you'd limit your oral statement to five minutes and your entire statement will be part of the record. director jarvis, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, members of the committee. i'm here today to discuss

oversight of the park service. the national park service manages many of your nationas iconic and most beloved landscapes, historic sites and numerous programs that offer the american public access to open space and preserve our history and culture purpose we're seeing record-breaking visitation, more than 300 million last year, and the results economic activity created by the park's top 16 billion. we're accomplishing all of this on an annual budget that is less than the city of austin, texas. we're commemorating our 100th anniversary this year and asking more of our employees than ever before, as we use this milestone to promote all the work we do to inspire more, younger audiences. the national parks are supported and loved by the public because they are well managed, protected and maintained by a professional workforce. employees who take great pride

in their work and hold themselves to high standards of conduct. but we are an organization of human beings, we make mistakes, individually and collectively. when we see improper situations, we can respond thoughtfully to implement changes and keep it from happening again. i would like to emphasize that the vast majority of the 22,000 employees conduct themselves with great integrity and passion for their work. this makes it all the more disappointing when we find mistakes and wrongdoing in our ranks. and sometimes those mistakes happen at the top. last year, i wrote a book to celebrate the national park service centennial. my goal was to inspire and engage more americans in our national parks. i wrote this book in my personal capacity, and directed that any book proceeds benefit the nps, through the non-profit publisher of eastern national and the -- i

donated and received no personal monetary benefit. that was never my goal. however, i wrote that without regard for my responsibility to follow established processes. as a result of my actions, i received formal reprimand and am actively participating in monthly ethics training. in addition, my duties have been removed and transferred. i was wrong to not seek ethics guidance. i am sorry that i failed initially to understand and even accept my mistake. i have apologized to all nps employees through my memo distributed to the field and i urge them all to learn from my mistake and to ask for ethics guidance when it's needed. i offer my apology to the american people. i was held accountable for my mistake.

holding employees accountable is essential to the national park service to uphold the public trust it enjoys. when mistakes and inappropriate actions are identified, we must follow due process and determine appropriate response. in some cases, the nps identifies misconduct and refrds the case to the office of the inspector general to investigate. we do that to ensure an impartial review. for instance, the nps referred a case involving the improper purchase of firearms and weapons to the oig. together they ensured that the situation was thoroughly investigated and those involved were held accountable. in other cases, reports to the inspector general come from others. the national park service is committed to cooperating with the office of the inspector general and takes its reports very seriously. one example is the recent report on sexual harassment at the grand canyon river district. the national park service leadership is extremely disappointed in the situation here and we are acting quickly and thoughtfully to change the conditions that allowed this to happen. we have zero tolerance for

sexual harassment. we are committed to fundamentally changing the culture that previously allowed such harassment to develop and occur. we take a comprehensive approach to addressing sexual harassment. we'll identify and fix the conditions that allow harassment to take place, build work environments where people are held with respect and dignity. the superintendent at the grand canyon retired and we'll be selecting a new superintendent soon. the national park service is learning from other large organizations of reduced sexual harassment, including the department of defense and the national oceanic and atmospheric administration. we will conduct a survey of employees to understand the prevalence of sexual harassment and use that information to inform at every level of the organization. we are committed to ensuring that every employee can work in

a safe and secure environment and they are treated with respect. thank you, mr. chairman. that concludes my oral statement and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> mrs. kindle, you're recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, ranking member cummings and members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to testify today about a series of reports the office of inspector general has issued regarding misconduct and mismanagement in the national park service. the office of inspector general serves a vital role as an independent objective body to investigate matters that ultimately violate public trust. the oig has a great deal of experience uncovering ethics and other violations by interior employees, high ranking officials and others whose positions of trust make their misconduct particularly detrimental to the operations of the department, the morale of its employees and the reputation of all federal employees. i remain convinced that as a

whole, those who engage in wrongdoing are in the minority. unfortunately, misconduct by those few receives notoriety and casts a shadow over the entire department. that shadow looms large, especially over nps, following our recent release of investigative reports, including those that substantiated sexual harassment at grand canyon and canaveral national seashore, ethics violations by director jarvis and misuse of using at yellowstone. our report from the grand canyon provided a glaring example of management failing to take action when employees reported wrongdoing. similarly after receiving investigative report on the chief rager of yellowstone national park violating the rules on the use of park housing, he was transferred to another park and named superintendent. a recent media article raised

concerns about the leadership at cape canaveral national seashore. the oig has issued four reports in four years on alleged misconduct and/or mismanagement at this park. three of the four reports substantiated allegations against the park's chief ranger, including violation of federal procurement rules, conduct unbecoming an nps law enforcement officer and sexual harassment. last week, we issued a report to nps about sexual harassment by the same chief ranger who continues to serve in that position, despite three substantiated allegations against him in less than two years. nps has not had time to respond to this most recent report. but with three other reports in four years, this is a profound example of a leadership problem that nps has failed to address at multiple levels. finally, the same superintendent has been at canaveral since 2010, was named as the subject in our 2012 report and was found

by the merit system's protection board to have committed reprisal against an nps whistle-blower for contacting the oig. yet we have no indication that nps has taken disciplinary action against her. the department does not do well in holding accountable those employees who engage in mismanagement or misconduct. we see too few examples of senior leaders making the difficult decision to impose meaningful corrective action and hold their employees accountable. often, management avoids discipline altogether and attempts to address misconduct by transferring or counselling an offending employee, which is viewed by other employees as condoning this behavior. nps, in particular, as a real opportunity to address employee misconduct and mismanagement more meaningfully. a pattern and practice of accountability must begin at the top. consistent messaging by senior leadership provides a clear message of what behavior is expected. we have encouraged leadership to

demonstrate more support for those who serve in gate keeper roles such as contracting officers and human resource personnel. but many such gate keepers feel undue pressure from managers to make things happen, regardless of rules and regulations. such as that recently detailed in our report concerning allegations that the now former director of the nps denver service center improperly directed a contract award. working with the chief of staff and office of the solicitor, we with have witnessed an increased effort to be more responsive and decisive in corrective actions regarding employee wrongdoing. we are encouraged by this at the department level, but we would like to see the same at the bureau level. taking prompt, appropriate, disciplinary action in response to oig reports of misconduct. this concludes my prepared testimony. i would be happy to answer any questions that members of the

committee would have. >> thank you. thank you both. i'll recognize myself for five minutes. director jarvis, i would agree with you that people do make mistakes, but a draw distinction between mistakes and deception, which i view as a whole nother category of problems. on november -- i'm sorry -- june 11th of 2015, you wrote a handwritten note to sally jewell, the secretary of the department of interior. it was four sentences long, barely two paragraphs. do you stand by that? was there anything wrong or deceptive about that hand-written note that you gave the secretary? >> so i wrote the note to let her know that i had published this book. it was her first, i think, awareness of the book. i said in that, that there were no ethics issues because i had written it on my own time.

i had asked eastern national -- or i said in the note that eastern national had requested it of me, which is -- eastern national does publish a lot of books for the national park service and that all benefits are going to the national park foundation. when i wrote that note, i thought i was following the ethics rules, with the exception that i had not asked permission to produce the book. >> why didn't you ask permission? >> i felt that the book would be subject to extensive review and probably would not get published in the centennial. >> so you made a conscious decision to not ask ethics, because you thought you wouldn't get the result that you ultimately wanted. so does eastern national request that you write the book, or did you request of eastern national that you write the book?

>> the facts of the case are that i asked eastern national if they were interested in the book, and eastern national responded to say, let me ask you to write the book. >> and they had a multi million dollar contract with the park service, correct? >> no, they have no contract with the national park service. they are a cooperating association. >> well, the cooperation results in millions of dollars of business. here's my problem with what you wrote. it was not true. it was deceptive. and it was intended to make the appearance to the secretary of the interior that there was no ethical problem and that you were doing this at the request of eastern national, neither of which were true, correct? >> i think that it was incorrect. >> why should the secretary trust you? why should we trust you? >> because i have served as a public servant for 40 years, in leadership roles for 25 years,

with an impeccable record of service to the american people. >> i don't know that that -- i don't know that i -- i take issue with the idea that it's impeccable. when you give a handwritten note to the secretary of the interior, deceiving her on two key points. >> i apologized profusely. >> no, what you said when you were confronted by the inspector general. miss kindle, i want you to weigh into this. you have a transcription? or what was this interview with the director? we asked jarvis whether looking back he would have done anything differently, and he said, and then it's quoted here, was that because it's transcribed or was that a recording? >> a recording. >> when you asked about this by the inspector general, this is it what you said. would i have done the same thing? probably. i think i knew going into this there was a certain amount of risk. i've never been afraid of risk. i've gotten my ass in trouble

many, many times by the park service, by not necessarily getting permission, i've always pushed the envelope. and then you go on from there. that is your quote, correct? >> that is my quote. >> and now you're apologizing because we're essentially having a public hearing? >> no, i apologized a long time ago, long before this hearing. and i apologized directly to the secretary and to the leadership of the national park service. and that was a mistake. and i fully own it. >> and you lied to her, you deceived her and i think it's wholly inappropriate. and now we look at the situation that's happening in cape canaveral -- or the canaveral national seashore. this chief ranger, this is a fairly small park in the big scream of things, right, 50 or so employees? >> it's a small park. i don't know what the staffing size is. >> so ranger korer, how do you prow announyou

pronounce his name. >>? korea. >> three of the four i.g. reports have been highlighting this, and you, your office, the national park service is handing him out awards, safety awards. how does somebody who's getting on the one hand reprimands and highlights and sexual harassment problems -- again, there's only 50 people, and you got three documented sexual harassment issues, you go to the superintendent -- the superintendent had allegations of reprisal that were found by the merit systems protection board and resulted in a settlement. you had to go into a settlement with the national park service. those were -- those were -- and the person is still in the job. >> his commission has been removed, but he is still in a -- in a -- he's still a federal employee, but his responsibilities have been removed. >> this becomes more than just

an isolated incident where somebody makes a mistake. miss kindle, you've been looking at this. give us a perspective, first, if you would, on the note that was written by director jarvis to the secretary and then i want to ask you about canaveral. >> i would say that the note was -- >> sorry, move the microphone up a little tighter there. just pull it up. there you go. >> i would say that the note was not accurate and i agree with your characterization, that it was deceptive. your other question was? >> how severe is the situation at canaveral? how often do you have to go back and write three reports on the same topic? >> i would hope we would never have to write another report on any of those topics at that park again. >> has it been resolved? >> not to my knowledge. >> my time has expired. let me go to the ranking member, mr. cummings. >> thank you very much. miss kindle, you've identified

and i quote, evidence of a long-term pattern of sexual harassment and hostile work environment in the grand canyon river district. in addition, you issued a report just a few days ago finding that a law enforcement supervisor at the canaveral national seashore has, and i quote, shown a pattern of sexual harassment, end of quote, against three employees at the seashore. do you believe that these are isolated incidents, or are they indicative of more pervasive problems within the park service? >> i cannot take these two examples -- >> can you talk a little louder, please? >> certainly. i would not take these two examples and paint the entire park service with that same brush, but it does cause concern that there may be a more

pervasive problems when you have it at two different parks at this kind of level. >> so what else is your office doing to try to answer this critical question? because based on what you just said, it sounds like you have some questions yourself as to how pervasive it might be. and so what do you do to look beyond that? i assume that the i.g. would be interested in that. in other words, if you keep seeing these things come up, the chairman has mentioned various things, and i'm just curious, what do you do? >> well, by publishing our reports, we're hoping that there's some deterrent effect to that. i do know that the park service is making some effort to make a determination as to how pervasive -- >> is it -- are they moving fast enough? i guess that's the question. there's no reason why a woman should, any woman should be -- or man, should -- they're coming

to work, there are people watching this right now, from the park service, and they want to know that these issues are being resolved and i know that you do too. and so it seems like there is -- seems like there's a delay, and you used some words that were very interesting. you said they try to avoid disciplining altogether, something like that. and what that says is that -- it reminds me of an old boys' system. where you say, okay, give you a wink, and you can get away with it, we'll transfer you and keep you on the same level as a supervisor. i mean, can you help us with, the question is, are they moving fast enough? because it's not -- it doesn't give anybody any relief to know that this stuff just goes on and mr. jarvis will tell us that

he's doing things, but to be very frank with you, i don't think he's moving fast enough, but i want your opinion and what can be done better. >> quite frankly, i don't know what the status of what the park service has done or is doing right now. i agree with you, that people should in any environment be able to come to work free of sexual harassment and is hoping that the park service is taking the kind of action with the survey they're talking about, to understand the breadth of the problem and then to come up with some corrective action. >> mr. jarvis, the same question. what steps is the park service taking to determine how pervasive sexual harassment is at its facilities? >> so, let's start with the grand canyon. there were 18 specific actions that the inspector general recommended. they had due dates of mostly by the 1st of may. almost every one of those have been implemented. there's a second set that's coming forward. but they range from personnel to

change in field operations, to training to communication, and specifically to disciplinary actions on individuals that were either committed or omitted activities related to the canyon. so we are aggressively pursuing that at the canyon. >> whoa whoa whoa, staff tells me most of them have not been addressed. >> well -- >> the chairman has already made it clear that he has some concerns about your being able to tell the truth. so i want to remind you, you're under oath. and would you answer that question again? >> yes, sir. so i have a summary of actions in response to the inspector general's report as of may 23rd, 2016, prepared by our intermountain regional director. i cannot go into the details of the disciplinary actions in this forum, but i can tell you that

they are all under way. we've launched -- we've closed down the river district. all river trips are being done by third-party, private river rafters -- >> whoa, hey, hey. i want to help you answer my question. because i'm not trying to trip you up. director, how many of these action items have been fully completed as of today? you said there were 22, right? >> 18. >> 18. and how many, director, have been completed as of today? >> um, aide have to count up. can i count? >> yeah. go ahead. >> there are seven of the 18 that are completed. >> well, you just said the

majority of them were. isn't that what you said? did i miss something? >> seven are completed. there's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven that are actively under way but not finalized. the disciplinary actions take time to pursue, but they are actively under way. >> do you agree with that miss kindle? >> i know you said you don't know everything he's doing, but based on what he just said, do you agree that, with regard to the things that should have been done, that they -- that they should take all of this timie? >> because i don't know the detail, i can't opine on that. i do know that disciplinary takes time. i'm happy that the national park service is taking disciplinary action. my recollection is we only had three or four specific recommendations. so i'm not completely familiar with the 17 or 18 items that

he's talking about. >> my time has run out, but i want you to tell me what you've done, for the benefit of the entire committee. because i'mma tell you, i'm not sure you need to be in this position. but go ahead. >> so, service wide, i think the grand canyon is an indicator, as well as cape canaveral that we may have a significant problem of sexual harassment in the service in certain areas. i want to state up front, the vast majority of employees have a safe work environment. however, in discussions with the department of defense office of sexual assault prevention and response, we engaged their leadership with our leadership, to talk about this for over three hours, at our last national leadership council meeting, and general nichols, who leads that office, indicated that if you have this level of perivation in one place, it's an

indicator you may have it in others. >> when was that meeting? >> it was in may. so we have launched a team effort in my office specifically on how we are going to address this service wide. the second is, one of the general's recommendations, we need to do a prevalence survey, we need to look across the entire system anonymously, to allow employees to report whether or not they have been, or are currently being subjected to sexual harassment or a hostile work environment. >> i yield to the chairman. >> just to quickly fll up on that, the superintendent at canaveral has been there since 2010, was named in the subject of a report to director jarvis in 2012, including allegations of reprisal that were found by the merit systems protection board to be accurate. they had to enter into a

settlement. you' what you're telling mr. cummings is not a candid response. it wasn't something that showed up on your desk weeks ago. this happened years ago. and you're saying the majority of this has been dealt with, but when it was brought to your attention and there were reprisals for the whistle-blowers, you did not deal with it. >> just one last thing. you just said you had this meeting in may, but keep in mind that the inspector general report goes back to november 16th 2015. why did it take so long? >> this was the first -- this was the first meeting of our national leadership council, where we could get all the senior leaders of the national park service to specifically address this. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> now recognize the gentleman from tennessee, mr. duncan for five minutes. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman, and there are very few people for whom i have higher

respect than i do for ranking member cummings. he has a very difficult task at times and usually trying to defend administration witnesses, but it should send a message to director jarvis and throughout the park service that mr. cummings did not defend mr. jarvis today, and instead pointed out several different types of problems that have occurred in the park service. i think that's very significant. i spent 22 years, up until about six years ago on the interior committee, and now i've served on this committee and another committee. but i heard years ago that there was a $4 billion backlog -- maintenance backlog, and then i heard it was $6 billion, and then i heard it was $9 billion, and now i get material here that says the maintenance backlog is

$12 billion. i have great respect also for people, for education, and people who get advanced degrees. but i think the park service needs to stop hiring so many ph.d.s and masters degrees and historians and environmental activists and so forth, and start hiring more laborers to chip away at this maintenance backlog, if it's not being exaggerated. i think we have at the park service, far too many chiefs and not nearly enough indians. but i also have been disturbed over the years by seeing that almost all or at least a great many of the federal contracts are awarded to companies that hire former high ranking and federal employees. we see that in the defense department. they hire all the retired admirals and generals.

it just seems to be throughout the federal government. but i was disturbed, for instance, when i read from the staff, that the interior department solicitor's office had concerns when the denver office of the park service originally attempted to, it says, quote, originally attempted to steer the award to -- of this big contract, to a construction firm mcdonald, bowyard, peg, even though their bid was much higher than others. they cancelled the solicitation and later hired the same company under a new solicitation created with the requirements that only that particular contractor can meet. director jarvis, do you have a system in place to question

contracts when they're not awarded to the -- when they're being awarded to the highest bidders instead of the low bidders? or do you have a system in place to question contracts -- or to prohibit contracts being awarded to companies that hire former employees of the park service? >> thank you for that question, congressman. we do have an audit program over our contracting officers, because they could lose their warrant for awarding contracts in some ways that you suggest. and we appreciate the audit and investigation by the inspector general that has revealed this case. this is new to us. and it is something we are going to pursue actively in term of both discipline and corrective action, in terms of ensuring this doesn't happen again. >> and on this book contract that you've been asked about, i

understand that you said it was -- that the proceeds were to be donated to charity. can you tell us how much has been donated to charity at this point? >> i do not know that, how much has been donated. >> the staff tells us that none has been donated to charity. >> the book sales -- let me clarify. the book is sold by eastern national, which is a cooperating association with the national park service, and it is required under its agreement to return to the national park service 12 to 17% of its annual profit. so that funding, whatever profit they get from the book, that can come back to the park service directly for projects, through the system. any decision for that can go to the national park foundation, but none of it comes to me. >> all right, my time is up. let me mention one other thing.

i represent about half the great smokey mountains national park. that park is being overrun by thousands, many thousands of feral hogs, and i know that many people are anti-hunting, or some in this administration don't like hunting, but we've got very serious problems that are going to lead to very serious disease problems, if many more thousands of these feral hogs are not gotten out of the great smokey mountains. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank the gentleman. we'll recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. cartwright for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i thank you for holding this hearing. miss kindle, i have some questions for you. i'm going to ask you to pull that microphone really close to your mouth. you're a low-talker and we need to hear you. i want to ask you about your office's investigation of the allegations a rirising from a february 2014 river trip that led to the discipline of two female grand canyon employees.

the women were accused of inappropriate dancing and the use of a novelty drinking straw. they received 14-day suspensions and their contracts for employment with the park service were not renewed after their terms expired. both of them alleged retaliation, but your investigation included that, we found insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegation of retaliation, unquote. have i read that correctly? >> yes, i believe you read it correctly. >> let's go over some of the facts in your report. is it true that one of the employees who complained about the two women was himself the subject of several prior complaints of sexual harassment? >> that's correct. >> did your investigation find that former grand canyon superintendent uberaga had any type of commonly known opinion about that person? >> i don't know about opinion.

i think he had some knowledge. >> okay, you want to share that with us? >> pardon me? >> would you share that with us, please. >> he had launched an investigation himself internally about the conduct that was complained about earlier -- sexual harassment kind of conduct. and that report never seemed to make its way to anyone who could actually do something. >> and your report also notes that the supervisor who conducted the internal investigation admitted that he did not feel responsible for determining whether the complaints against the two sexual harassment claims. he felt it wasn't part of his job and this supervisor did not even interview all of the people who were on that february 14 trip. but this supervisor's

investigation was used as the basis of disciplinary action against the two women, ms. kendall your investigation found that several grand canyon employees and managers, including the superintendent, agreed that the internal investigation of the allegations against the two women employee s s were insufficient and incomplete. am i correct in that? >> i believe that's correct. >> did you find evidence that men who had been accused of sexual harassment received less severe disciplinary action than that recommended against these two women? >> i believe we did. >> would you say that louder? >> i believe we did. >> ms. kendall, it's you our understanding from discussions with the office of personnel management that term employees have similar protections under the merit system as full-time employees. would it be unreasonable for somebody looking at the fact pattern here involving

discipline against these women to conclude that these women did indeed suffer retaliation for their claims of harassment? >> our office was unable to conclude that they did, but i think we were unable to go either way. >> all right. well, director jarvis, i want to invite your attention to this matter. i understand that the two women filed eeo complaints against the park service. are you aware of that? >> yes, i'm aware that they have filed. >> and what is the current stat you us of those complaints that the women filed? >> i'm not aware of those two specific. there were actually seven filings from women associated with the grand canyon and this incident. i believe several of them have been settled but i'm not aware of the details. >> my understanding is the national park service entered into settlement agreements with

both of these women last week. were you not aware of that, director jarvis? >> no. this is being managed out of our intermountain regional office by regional director so i'm not directly involved. >> and ms. kendall, were you aware of that settlement last week? >> i was not. >> well, i'm happy to help. i yield back, mr. chairman. yield to mr. cummings. >> just one question. wouldn't you want to know that? i mean, you've got a settlement, something that's controversial as this? i'm just curious. what kind of management is that? >> i do want to know -- >> you don't know it today? >> i don't know the specifics. i do not. >> did you know there were settlements? >> i knew the settlements were in negotiation, absolutely. >> but you didn't know the settlement took place. >> i did not hear that the settlements had been settled, no. >> thank you. >> i recognize the gentleman from michigan mr. wahlberg for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and

thanks to the panel. director jarvis, in december of 2011, you issued an mps memo establishing a ban on plastic water bottles, sales in the national parks. is it true that most if not all of the parks that have implemented the plastic bottled water ban still sell other plastic packaged beverages, soda, enhanced water, juice, et cetera? is that still the case? >> yes, sir. they still do. >> do you feel it is safe and healthy to ban the sale of bottled water? >> when the public are provided an ample opportunity to get that water from a variety of sources which we've built in, that's a requirement of the policy. they have to have filling stations throughout the park in order for them to refill

reusable bottles. >> can you say with absolute certainty that this ban on plastic water bottles has reduced the garbage in the national parks? >> yes, with certainty. absolutely. >> what analysis has been conducted? >> we collect data on our solid waste management. i don't have that in front of me, but i'd be glad to get back to you specifically on the reduction of waste in the waste stream. >> well, i'd like to see that on reduced waste. i'd like to see it on decreased disposal costs, information on that. i'd like to see it on increased recycling implementation. those are issues i'd like to see because frankly the question still remains. we get rid of the water in bottles, and the sales of those water bottles, but we don't get rid of the sale of pop in the same bottles, energy drinks in the same bottles, juices in the

bottles as well. my concern is that, i mean, we know that we need water. i've hiked enough of the national parks all across this nation to know that that's important. and the fact of the cost of putting in water filling stations leads me to concern that there are contractual issue that's we ought to be concerned with as opposed to simply letting the sales take place to people who need the water. and, again, i'm not certain that the time that the necessary studies have been done to show that we've had an impact other than stopping the sale of water bottles, water in water bottles, in the state parks, for whatever -- national parks, for whatever reason that may be. i think there certainly ought too be questions that are raised

about that subsequent to the needs of our visitors as well as contracting issues. let me go to another issue. an inspector general's report found that yellowstone's chief ranger breached the terms of an occupancy agreement with nps by failing to live full time as agreed in the contract in an apartment on yellowstone's grounds. why is it important that chief ranger of yellowstone live in the park and not somewhere off the grounds? >> so in many of our national parks we have what's known as required occupancy so a certain portion of park housing were constructed by the federal government and provided, though the employees pay rent, so that there can be quick response for emergency situations, fire, emergency medical, and the chief ranger leads that effort at

yellowsto yellowstone. >> so there's a potential of a loss of security, safety to park visitors as well as staff without the head ranger living on site. >> according to the superintendent, the chief ranger lived in a private quarters that still allowed him to have rapid response. it was right on the park boundary but outside the park. >> i understand that he didn't rent out but he ayou lllowed ou visitors to live in that apartment instead of himself. is that true? >> that is correct. >> let me ask, what kind of discipline or reprimand did the ranger receive? >> he did receive specific discipli discipline. again, i can't talk about individual discipline in a public forum, but i'd be glad to come to your office and talk to you specifically about it. but he was disciplined in this case. >> is he still in the same place? >> he is not. he is a superintendent at

devil's tower, which was a demotion. >> thank you. i yield back. >> director jarvis, you are not inhibited in your ability to give an answer about specific discipline on a case that's asked in this forum. you're holding back and not providing an answer to mr. wahlberg, there's no incouple rance here. if we ask you a question, we need you to answer it. if you know the answer to that question, i need you to answer it. >> chairman, i have been told by my solicitors and i would ask that they -- that specific disciplinary actions are privacy act issues. >> we will follow up for the record with you on that to make sure mr. wahlberg that you get the answer to that question. now recognize ms. kelly of illinois for five minutes. >> director jarvisor, first and foremost, i just want to say thank you for all the help with

pullman. i really, really appreciate it. we've talked about 18 action items dealing with grand canyon. why has the implementation of some of these action items been delayed? >> i don't believe that any of these actions have been delayed. in the disciplinary aspect of taking specific discipline on employees, that is a slow process. there are laws established by the congress that are specific to federal employees. title 5, the merit system promotion board, the douglas factors all have to be applied in the disciplinary pieces. so that's why they have not yet been totally executed but are absolutely in process. but they all have to be reviewed at a variety of levels before we can actually take the disciplinary action. all the others, there are no delays in the other actions.

>> what about some of your self-imposed deadlines? have you met those? >> i believe we have, yes. >> while all of these action items are important, several are particularly critical to ensure that the perpetrators of sexual harassment are not able to harass anyone else at the national park. one action item states and i quote, the oig report highlights that the majority of the incidents described by the complaintant involve four employees of the river district at grand canyon. one of those four individuals remains an employee. in light of the oig report, it is appropriate to take appropriate disciplinary or personnel action to remove this individual from specific work environment of the river district. what is the status of the fourth individual? >> the fourth individual still is an employee of the national park service at the grand canyon but has no involvement whatsoever with river district operations and is in no position

to continue any harassment. he is just being held in a position with his rights as a federal employees and will be be subject to discipline. >> so that's why he's still there, because you're just following a process? >> but he's been removed from any role that he might play on the -- >> besides being removed, has any disciplinary action been taken yet? >> i'm sorry? >> i know he was removed and put into another position. but has any disciplinary action been taken yet? >> not yet, no. we're still working on that. >> director jarvis, another action item involved contracting out for, quote, logistical report for river trip involving park staff. has this item been completed? >> yes. so the regional director for the intermountain region has taken very specific actions at the park, one of which was essentially elimination of the river district, and commercial

river rafters are now providing the river access for the kind of activities that the rangers were doing before. >> so how will contracting out the staff of river trips ensure this won't happen again in? >> we are meeting and providing training to those commercial operators who have been providing serves on the river. they are all under contract with the national park service to provide these services and we can hold them accountable through those contracts. >> and how can we be ensured that the employees that did perpetrate this not be hired again? >> well, i can assure you they will not be hired again. this will be retained as a part of their record, and the disciplinary actions will become part of their official files. >> even if they come through contractors, you can ensure that? >> there actually has been

discussion about that specifically so we're talking specifically to the contractors that they cannot hire these individuals. >> the inspector general also found that the grand canyon engaged in individual as a volunteer or previously worked at the park and resigned after being suspended for sexual misconduct during a river trip. what are you doing to ensure that boatmen who engage in harassment who have left the park service employment cannot be rehired by or volunteer in any national park? >> well, again, i think it's up -- to float the river requires a permit from the national park service, whether they are volunteer, they are contractor, other federal agency. i think now that we are very, very aware of that, the river trip creates the potential for this kind of harassment, we are actively engaged in training,

oversight, regular communications and post-trip evaluations so that folks that are coming off of these trips are interviewed within seven days to determine whether or not there were any issues. >> thank you. and i'm out of time. i yield back. >> will recognize the gentleman from florida mr. mica for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair man. director jarvis, you have 22,000 employees, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> and i'm told you have over 400 sites that you manage and trust for the american people. i don't have a national park in my district anymore. i did have st. augustine. i have to tell the members and mr. jarvis that we have -- well, at least my experience has been we have some incredibly

dedicated, hardworking individuals with the park service who day in and day out and weekends sometimes 24/7 do a wonderful be job. and we appreciate their service, and they're doing it sometimes with limited resources and with a great crew of volunteers, too. so we have a list that's a pretty tough indictment of people who abused their responsibili responsibility, and i think you started to tell some of the problem. i've sat through -- today we have the national park service. we've had epa. we had irs. we've had secret service. we've had jsa. the list goes on and on. and we hear the same thing. you just said that you have a process that you must go through for discipline. it's almost impossible to fire a

federal employee. i don't know if you'd agree with that, but it's very, very difficult, isn't it, director jarvis? >> yes, sir, i would agree with that very much so. i've done it a few times in my -- >> but it's very, very difficult. i chaired civil service for four years of. i found it almost impossible. that's part of the problem we face. civil service was set up as a protection against political manipulation or misuse of authority over legitimate working civil servants. and it's gone far beyond that in providing cover for people who don't do a good job, and it puts barriers in the way. you could probably go through these cases and sicite awful th compliance that you had to do the due diligence by title 5, by other regulations, by other laws that constrain you from taking

immediate action. is that correct? >> yes, sir, that is correct. >> it's hard. sometimes we can't get agency directors to come forward. but do you have any suggestions for anything that might speed up or improve the process to get rid of these poor performance or malfeasance employees? >> specifically, no, but i would certainly appreciate the willingness of the committee to work with us on some reform in this area because i do think it is a significant problem for us to be able to deal effectively. if we do not follow the rules throughout the process, there's a high likelihood that the individual can be reinstated. >> but again, we hear this. you're not the only agency with these personnel problems. ms. kendall, you have manage -- do you see a lack of management?

or do you see a similar pattern that we described or both with what you have observed with some of these cases? >> i would say both, sir. i perhaps disagree somewhat with you in terms of difficulty by which to remove employees. i think the failure comes in the unwillingness to take progressive discipline and document. >> i like that. progressive discipline. maybe i'll have a new liberal approach to getting rid of people who have poor performance. i actually gave a certificate in transportation. i called for the firing of metro incompetent personnel and then the you new director came to the second meeting. he fired 20 people the day before. i presented him with a certificate of appreciation because i never hear of anybody firing poor performers. he did it. but you say it's a lack of

progressive -- >> progressive discipline and documentation. >> maybe i could do an act for progressive discipline and documentation. but you think that could be something that we could do to get a better handle on this. >> i think it's something that good managers do do if they've got both problem employees in terms of -- >> maybe an executive order to that effect might help. thank you. i yield back. >> thank the gentleman. now recognize the gentle woman from the virgin islands for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, everyone. thank you first, director jarvis, for the work that the park is doing. i had a meeting with you and some other members about the reports and books that you've been putting out regarding reconstructi reconstruction, the underground railroad, and for the work that you have for opening the parks to young people, the fourth grade initiative. that's very important i think in the communities that the park is enlisted to be around.

one of the concerns that i have and i think that is an underlying issue with the park is not just the misconduct of its employees but the misconduct from the employees' perspective is really related to a disregard i think for individuals that are not in senior management potentially or not even necessarily part of the park service itself. in the virgin islands as you know the park plays an int will gr integral role in our community. it takes up large masses of land, particularly on the island of st. john, the entire buck island, the water way surrounding the virgin islands abut or are incorporated by the national park service. and so the relationship that we have with the park is very, very important, and one of the things that i hear continually from my constituents is a pervasive disregard and notable disconnect

between the park and its local employees as well as the local government and, in fact, the people of the virgin islands. ayin and i wanted to talk with you about that. i've had some very substantive conversations with the regional director stan austin. i think that he's making headways in some of this regard. but i can't miss an opportunity with you being here to address some of these and maybe you can speak as well to this. first of all, the national park receives funding for youth conservation corp, ycc, which is a source of income for the children in those communities, is an opportunity for young people to learn about the park, and potentially train them to be excited about careers that involve the national park. and this would then create a relationship between the park and its local people. and another reason why this is so important is because of the enabling legislation here in congress that created the virgin

islands national parks. and one of the main components of that that i continually hear from our constituents is language that says that the secretary, meaning secretary of the interior, is authorized and directed to the maximum extent feasible to employ and train residents of the virgin islands to develop, maintain, and administer the virgin islands national parks. i don't know if you're aware of this particular piece of language. are you aware of it, director jarvis? >> yes but not how it's been implemented. but i am aware of it. >> and reading that particular language, how do you, to the extent feasible, employ individuals and direct them to develop, maintain and administer the virgin islands national park if individuals that are from the virgin islands who are not part of the closed national park system can't apply for employment within the national

parks? >> well, fortunately, congress has given us a couple of new hiring authorities, most recently, that give us a much greater ability to do direct hire at the local level into permanent employment. for a long time, it has been very difficult for local hires to sort of break into federal service. but recently office of personnel management, the public land corps legislation has allowed us that young people working as seasonals for the national park service, which is a fairly easy bar to get in because we hire about 8,000 seasonals a year, or if you serve in a youth conservation corps position like a public land corps, you can obtain essentially career stat you us, noncompetitive status. >> that's an interesting point that you raise about the youth

conservation corps because the virgin islands has used that in the past. and on the island of st. croix it's an active engagement but on st. john where the relationship with the park is much more intrinsic and much more involved there has not been an active youth conservation corps, although they have received the funding for it for a number of years. they he have stopped in fact utilizing this for the local kid that's are there on the island of st. john. what's the reason for that? >> i think's a mistake. and i have talked to regional director austin specifically about it. and, you know, congresswoman, it's an issue in san juan, puerto rico. it's an issue as you mentioned in the virgin islands. it's an issue in alaska with native alaskans. it's also an issue in the west in working with young people. >> excuse me. if you would allow my indulgence, mr. chair marnman.

you i don't care it's a mistake. it's a mistake that has had very severe consequences to people on st. john. on the island of the st. croix, you're employing -- on st. john you have hired no one for a number of years on the island of st. john. where this park is very important. that then affects the individuals who are at the park. the superintendent on st. john as well has had changes made on to the national park in terms of access to land, construction plans, closure of fishing boundaries without community input and proper notification of the people of st. john or the local government as well. is this a mistake as well? and why are the people of the virgin islands being subjected to these continued mistakes by the park? >> it is something that we are addressing very specifically. and i apologize that to you. it is not our intent to disregard in any way, shape or

form the people of st. onor any of the islands. we think that they know the islands better than we do. they know the resources. they know the history. they've lived it. and we need them to be a part of the national park service and this is something that we are addressing aggressively through the southeast region. >> mr. chairman, just so you're aware and i would love to hold the record open, when i talked about lack of access to private properties, since 1989, with hurricane hugo from 1989 individuals living on the island of st. john have not had access to their own private property because that access is landlocked by the national parks. and repeated requests by our local legislature, our government and individuals have not afforded them the ability to even visit the land that they live on because they have not the parks, the management of the park, the superintendent, have not thought it's a priority to

allow them to have public access to that. >> you have a great deal of sympathy prosecute from me. we have similar issues out west. we recognize the gentleman from arizona for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman. director jarvis, my state of arizona is no stranger to national parks. in fact, we're talking about one today. we're the home of 22 national park units including monuments, historical sites, parks and more. as a result of the outsized impact national parks and mon sumts have on the land management economy and everyday lives of my constituents in arizona, the seemingly careless nature ever the national park service management of the deferred maintenance backlog really troubles me. it is reported that the growing tally of backlog infrastructure needs within the park service such as roads, bridges, visitors centers and campgrounds which need significant maintenance or repair has reached nearly $11.5 billion. is that number correct? >> yes, sir, that is correct. >> so one of the most

significant projects in the backlog is the arlington memorial bridge just a few steps away from the national park service headquarters right here in washington, d.c. that bridge is in need of a $250 million overhaul, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> yet national park service officials who knew how dire the situation was dropped the ball and nearly lost out on significant department of transportation funding assistance because they couldn't get their application paperwork on time. that's flat embarrassing. now, the national park service can't even manage what it has in its own front yard in washington, d.c., yet it expects the american people to trust it can manage hundreds of acres stretches across the american continent. on top of this, $11.5 billion heap of mismanagement and neglect, the administration continues to pile on millions of more acres of land through the national monument declaration using the antiquities act. certain special interest acts have pushed the president to move 1.7 million acres in

northern arizona out of successful management agreements by other federal, station t state and private ent 'tis and into the park service as the grand canyon national monument. their intentions are clear. they want this designation in order to prevent hunting, mining, timber harvesting on this swath of land even if it means heaping more acres on to the queue of mismanaged acres. director jarvis do you think it's wise to add millions of acres to the -- successfully overseen by other state and federal agencies? >> i think that the park service in its history has always grown both by act of congress and by the act of the president. i am a fiscal conservative, an i do not like taking on new responsibilities to the national park service that impact our financial house. >> well then let's get specific. is the administration currently

working on an undesignated new national monument in arizona? >> that is a power of the white house. that is not -- >> let's get down to the dirties here. let's be even more specific. you have been approached in regards to the grand canyon watershed national monument by the administration? >> not byadministration. advocates have approached me, yes. >> any other areas in arizona? >> no, not that i remember. >> let me be more specific. how about the snoren and southeastern western arizona? >> no. >> how did sedona/. >> no, sir. >> my office currently has i foia request regarding this proposal and the coordination between land agencies and environmental groups. will that request collaborate the information you shared here today? >> it will for the national park service. i cannot speak for the rest of the department. >> director jarvis, you and your agency mismanaged funding opportunities already right in front of you. you can't even maintain the infrastructure in your own

backyard. the arlington memorial bridge is only 2,000 feet long and it's falling apart. you should not be handed over millions more ache irs via the antiquities act to lock up in your management. you may think that the national park has the capacity to control even more public land, but i have a list of 11.5 billion reasons why you are wrong. now, you said you were a conservative in that regard. you know, going back to the gentle lady from the virgin islands, doesn't your appropriation process show a lack of leadership by making sure that the proper processes are appropriated and funded? >> no, sir. we make a request every year for appropriations to meet our needs and we get about half of what's -- >> no, no. let's go back. the gentle lady actually said the money actually went to those areas and they go to the west. why aren't they being appropriated to the proper protocols and having the proper oversight? >> well, i'm not aware specifically -- we're talking about ycc money versus

maintenance backlog funding? sir, we have an $11 billion backlog in maintenance because we only get about half annually what we need to keep up. >> are you telling me there's no inadequacies within your process of oversight and adjudication of thosen monies? >> we are putting every dollar we have as a priority into our maintenance backlog, including our roads and bridges through the federal transportation bill. but we did not receive adequate funding in the federal transportation bill to address the backlogs of even one bridge, arlington bridge. >> i thank the gentleman. >> thank the gentleman. now recognize the jept gentle w from the district of columbia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i do appreciate this hearing. i do want to say especially considering that i'm a former chair of the equal employment

opportunity commission, it distresses me to hear that the park service has what appears to be a systemic problem of sexual harassment. it does seem to me it calls for action at the highest level, not simply to process complaints and make sure they are handled fairly. and i hope you will take that as your mission. it's interesting that my colleague asked about the arlington national bridge. i was certainly going to ask you about that. then chastises you for not funding. i mean, how can congress really do this? the park service -- the bridge, the arlington memorial bridge, that is used to go to arlington cemetery. it is also the gateway from the south. that bridge alone needs to be rebuilt. the cost will be 2$250 million.

everybody in this region is trying to get that money, $250 million, and yet the park service has appropriated by this congress in the fast act, the last bill, $268 million for 4,500 miles of unpaved road, 1400 bridges and i haven't exhausted the list. it is time the congress stops beating up on agencies when the congress itself is at the root of the problem. you put $268 million in for the entire country and then you beat the park service about the head and shoulders for not keeping the memorial bridge up. my goodness it takes a lot of nerve not to look at ourselves and see where the problem also

is. the arlington memorial bridge was not a case of mismanagement. it's a case of no funds to rebuild it. now, mr. jarvis, the federal highway administration says it's going to close this bridge that leads to the arlington cemetery within five years if it's not rebuilt. do you think it will last five years? it gives you five years to rebuild the bridge. you've already shut down some traffic on the bridge. how much longer does this bridge -- is it one of the older of the busiest bridges in your inventory? >> we have a lot of old bridges throughout our inventory, but this is the most expensive and most complicated and highest use

bridge in the national park system so it is our number one priority. it was our number one priority in the reauthorization to the transportation bill in terms of request for funds for these kinds of high-profile project that's are in serious condition. based on the federal highway administration's engineering assessment which was being done regularly, the bridge is subject to eminent closure in 2021, but we did do some emergency stabilization on it with federal highway so it will last to -- >> director jarvis, with a lot of work with the senators from this region, we were able to get an application in. will that fully fund the bridge? and if not, where will the money come from? >> so we are -- thank you. it was the district of columbia

that co-signed our application that was a requirement, and that was really what all of the effort was, was to get either the commonwealth of virginia or the district of columbia -- >> and mind you, this is a virginia bridge. but go ahead. >> i'll let you debate that with the virginia congressman. >> senator warner was very helpful. >> you were all very helpful and ultimately we did get an application if and we are currently discussing with the federal highways administration a schedule for repair to this bridge that we'll -- >> where will the -- how much funds -- there's an application in to the park service. what will that fund? and will that take care of it? and if not, where will the rest come from? >> i do not know how much the federal highways is willing to put up for this bridge. there are various scenarios based on how much they can put up annually. there's a lot of applications out there for this money. all across the country.

with a lot of bridges, as you know, the infrastructure in our nation has a lot of challenges. so there's a lot of competition. but i do think we have a very strong commitment from the federal highways administration to work with you us to come up with a schedule that will repair the bridge and minimize the impact to traffic. but i don't have the hard numbers yet. they haven't made the decision. >> i want you to get this committee, mr. jarvis, the latest numbers on the funds, where they will come from and whether there will be any shortfall. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. now recognize the gentleman from georgia mr. hies, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think it's clear that the national park service certainly under the direction and action of director jarvis is desperately in need of some oversight. being a member of the natural resources subcommittee on oversight and investigations, we actually had a hearing last

month on this very subject, and i want to thank ms. kendall for being a part of that and for being back here today. director jarvis, in your testimony you stated that you were held accountable for the book deal where you wrote it without approval from the ethics office and your punishment, as i understand it, is monthly ethics training for the remainder of your duration. is that correct? >> yes, sir. that's one component. >> okay, personally i don't think that goes far enough, but that's not going to be the point of my questions here. you stated that you've been held accountable for the book debacle, but we also have seen in the hearing today other problems throughout the national park service, in yellowstone, in the canaveral sea shore, in grand canyon river district, sexual harassment and other

issues. and these individuals were allowed to retire or they were transferred. you stated the need for people to be held accountable for their actions. do you believe that these people have been held accountable for their actions? >> i believe we are following the regulations related to federal employees and we are applying appropriate discipline. if they are eligible to retire, then they can do that at their -- >> so you think it's appropriate discipline. >> yes, sir, i do. >> okay. ms. kendall, let me ask you. do you think it's appropriate discipline? >> it's hard to say whether it's appropriate. i think it's more the appearance. i would use as an example the chief ranger who was then demoted, as i understand it, in terms of grade but took the position of superintendent which by appearances anyway seems to look like it was more promotion than demotion. >> all right, yeah. we've got people who -- i mean,

egregious behavior, sexual harassment, for example. would you say that this is a pattern in the national park service? >> i don't have the data to say it's a pattern, but it certainly is a concern. >> back to you, mr. jarvis. when we hear that employees who engage in misconduct or mismanagement are not held accountable and that is precisely what we hear, when we hear that, it sounds like leadership actually condones misbehavior at the park service. how do you think this affects morale? >> well, actually, i think the fact that i am being disciplined sends a message that no one is exempt in this agency. and i think that employees are being disciplined. appropriate action in accordance with the rules and regulations that govern federal employees are being applied poey eied app throughout the system.

>> discipline and punishment is one thing. hand slapping is another. i would hardly call what's taking place as discipline. ms. kendall, back to you. in recent cases of misconduct that you've investigated, how many people have been fired? >> i'm not aware of any that have been fired, sir. >> all right. so they are retired perhaps but not fired. >> perhaps. >> perhaps. but you're not aware of any who have been fired. director jarvis, do you find this disturbing? >> i find that it's -- it is the system in which we live. firing a federal employee is very, very difficult. >> that's not my question. is it disturbing that people who are engaged in this type of misbehavior, is it disturbing that they're not being fired? >> their behavior is scored marrily disturbing to me, but i am a federal employee, and i understand the rules and regulations that apply to them. and frankly, i don't have the

power in most cases to fire these employees. >> all right. you still didn't answer my question. it's disturbing to us, too,s t behavior. but it's also disturbing that they're not being fired. real quickly, is there, ms. kendall, are you aware of nps employees who are afraid to report misconduct? >> i'm not specifically aware of precise nps employees that are afraid of reporting misconduct, but i do believe that across the park service and throughout the department there is some fear by employees to report misconduct. >> why would people be fearful, director jarvis? and i'll close with this. >> well, i think that it's -- i don't believe it's fear. i believe they don't think action will be taken. and i think that what you're seeing today with these reports -- and i appreciate the reports from the office of the inspector general and the actions that we're going to take and are taking, we are going to see more reporting.

actually, i think we're going to get more people to be willing to step up because they're seeing management actually taking action. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> will the gentleman yield before he yields back? >> be happy to yield. >> mr. uberunga, what happened to him? did you discipline him? >> he was going to be subject to discipline. we were preparing a disciplinary actionor for mr. uberaga for his omission of action based on the reporting in 2013. in consultation with the regional director for the intermountain region who is his line supervisor and the dip director for operations here in washington who is the line supervisor for the intermountain region,s the three of us unanimously agreed that grand canyon needed new leadership

immediately, at that mr. uberaga was incapable even though he has performed well in other issues, he was incapable of leading the change we needed at the grand cany canyon. so, as you a senior executive, he is subject to being transferred, and i told him ways transferring him out of the grand canyon immediately, and he chose to retire. >> so you did offer him a position, another position. >> i did gentleman yields back. will now recognize the gentle woman from new jersey for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i really don't know where to begin here because the picture that seems to be be painted from the discussion and from the questions and answers is that this a dysfunctional organization with very little accountability and not very good leadership. i'm going to ask you a couple of

questions regarding the park service as an employer. what percentage of women and minorities do you have employed in the park service? you have 22,000 employees i think you said. what percentage of them are minorities and what percentage of them are women? >> i don't have that data in front of me. i'd be glad to get it to you. i would say in terms of women -- i'm just roughing it here, i don't know specifically off the top of my head -- we're probably 55% male/45% women. and i think in terms of representative minorities we are significantly low. we do not represent the demographic of the nation, and i will be glad to get you the hard statistics, though. >> so you're the director, is that your title? what is your title exactly? >> director. >> and under you are there a series of deputy directors or

assistant directors? >> there are two deputies, both of them women. >> and under them? >> there are seven regional directors that serve in the fie field. and then we have associate direct rz heors here in washingr specific programs. >> are you familiar with the requirements of eeoc in terms of the development of a plan and the responsibility and accountability for the implementation of that plan? >> yes, ma'am. >> who in your -- >> i am very familiar with the recommendations of oc in terms of a model program and how to implement it. >> who in your organization is responsible for that? >> our associate director of human resources. >> and to whom does that person report? >> to the deputy director for operations. >> so is that in violation of the guidance from eeoc? is that not supposed to be a

function that reports directly to the director? >> the eeoc model program definitely recommends that the eo office report directly to the director. >> so why is that not the case with you? >> well, when i came on in 2009, it was actually buried three levels below that. we moved it up to directly report, but i agree with you that i think that it should be moved to report directly to the director ever the national park service, and that's an action we're going to take. >> what kind of training and management development do your -- does your staff generally andrew teenly get? how do they get informed about the laws? how do they get informed about creating culture that would discourage sexual harassment or any other kind of discrimination? what is it that's done proactively, routinely and sustainably that would help create a better climate there?

>> so when i came on in 2009, i actually created the first program for relevancy, diversity and inclusion in the history of the national park service. i specifically gathered individuals through the organization that represent the diversity of our nation creating the allies for inclusion, and they have been working directly with the leadership of the national park service to help us create an inclusive workforce, one that reflects the diversity of the nation and has a work environment that is supportive of diversity, that being ethnic diversity, sexual orientation, women, young people, you know, the whole range. and so we use that information both to communicate -- i've done a number of web chats, specific videos out to the field on eo, on