for that treaty to succeed, the establishment of effective domestic legal frameworks easily central, not least, in the area of enforcement. one of the unique challenges in the world of cyber security is the problem of attribution. when you see an attack, very often, in fact, those being attacked don't even know they are attacked until much later. once they finally identified the fact they have been attacked, it is very often virtually impossible, if not actually impossible, to know where the attack came from for truth attribution. this makes it difficult to provide proper legal law enforcement, and even proper defense. even with all of these complexities, the u.s. is moving forward in weighing the creation of an ambassador-level position

to negotiate cyber security matters at that u.n. and ensure the country has consistent international policy in these areas, and we are very supportive of that direction. both the u.s. state department and congress are considering creation of such a role following the attacks earlier this year on google and numerous other high-tech companies. the proposals include a plan to develop policies time foreign aid to countries willingness and ability to fight cyber crime originating from within its borders. however, as i said, the attribution problem makes that somehow -- somewhat problematic. it is not always clear where an attack is actually being launched from. symantec has also been supportive of the bill, international cyber crime reporting and cooperation act, a disk by senators kirsten globe ran an orrin hatch, this expert -- to curtail financial health

and programs for countries seen as havens for cyber criminals. it would -- global assessment from abroad and work with other countries to crack down on their own cyber criminals. make no mistake about it, government and its agencies cannot do it alone. government must work in partnership with the private sector. and if we want our digital economy to thrive, it is incumbent on us to protect all aspects of it. from enterprise infrastructure, to the information created, transmit, and stored per minute. most importantly -- and i think this is one of the trends we're seeing emerge -- is it is not so much about the infrastructure. it is more and more about the information in the digital interaction and relationships that underpin all of our businesses and operations. so, cyber security is shifting from what used to be an exclusive focus on protecting

infrastructure, to more and more of a focus on protecting information and protecting the interactions, the relationships, that take place through the internet. cyber crime is a complex issue. as i said, it is one that will not be solved by protect pc or secure the network mentality. technology is a critical aspect and the critical part of the solution. but we need to debunk the myth that juts securing a network or a device, just pure technological solutions, can solve tomorrow's challenges. we live increasingly in the world where all kinds of devices connected to the internet. many of you in the audience probably use your pc less and less often to access information or communicate, because you are using your smartphone, your pta, ipad, or perhaps even other devices in your home to do that. the world is becoming much more

heterogeneous. it is a world full of more and more diversity and operating systems and networks and databases and applications. so, it would be impossible for any single company or a single agency, narrowly focused on one aspect of the problem, to provide a solution to this cyber security problem. that's why we have to join together in a public-private partnership to address this global cyber security threats. it is critical we restore confidence. all of us need to take responsibility for delivering security to our customers, constituencies, and the public at large. we need to join together to create a trusted online community. we must change public policy so that individual's most important information is protected. building this trusted community will go a long way toward restoring confidence, by

ensuring interactions and animation are well protected. more important, it will protect the relationship, the partnership between individuals and enterprises, that are so critical to our digital economy. all of us that participate in the public this private partnership need to take the lead in pushing for policy changes that will help protect privacy and critical information. it is not just a technological problem. we need to adapt laws and policies to reflect the very rapidly changing environment we find ourselves in. because our businesses and government agencies are part of a global community, we need to ensure that conflicting regulations that might vary from country to country don't hold back the globally economy. we need uniform laws and better international cooperation to fight cyber crime and prosecute cyber criminals, but we cannot layer so many conflicting laws

on top of our operations that we are paralyzed. whether it is helping to craft new legislation or integrating security in a service offering, or creating trusted online communities, the challenge for every liter, every public policy official, every agency head, is enormous. the future of our digital lifestyle and economy is in our hands. it and trust is really the foundation of this new world. with millions of people relying on the digital world to work and play, no company operating with virtually any industry can ignore the safety of the digital interactions. because every time there is a data bridge, information theft or any on-line crime, it undermines public trust and alternately confidence in the entire digital world. lack of confidence and threaten the very future of the digital environment that we are counting

on for future growth, competitiveness, and international leadership. the united states is in a somewhat unique position. because our policies, what implemented through law or regulation, will be emulated around the world. what takes place in washington will have a profound affect on the whole of the online world. therefore it is in part -- incumbent on us, all of us, security professionals and public and private world, to make information assurance a top priority. so, i will just finish by saying, once again, i think nasa plays a unique role, a very visible and open agency within the u.s. government, that and play a unique role in helping encourage global cooperation in the world of cyber security. many of our agencies, many of our organization that have more defense or intelligence oriented mission are playing an important role, but it is harder for them

to bring together international cooperation around many of these very critical needs. so, i would like to once again,, and nasa for putting focus on i.t., and in particular, realizing the critical importance of cyber security for their mission and for the world at large. and i hope over the next few days, many of you what a chance to have further dialogue and learn more about what can be done to improve the global security of our cyberworld. thanks very much. [applause] we have time for some questions. i think there are some microphones, if you have questions. if not, thank you very much.

[applause] >> thank you very much. i.t. security is everybody's problem. and it is good to see that we are looking at things like international collaboration, international treaties, and things like that, in order to work through the crisis that we face continuously. our next speaker is david cearley, vice president and gartner fellow at gartner research and leading authority on information technology. he analyzes emerging business and technology trends and explores how these tranship the way individuals and companies derive value from technology. his current research is focused on cloud computing and how

internet and web technology, standards, and business models are affecting the i.t. landscape. please welcome david cearley. [applause] >> thank you very much. pardon. i am very pleased to be here today to share our ideas at gartner about what is happening in the future. i have been asked to come here and kind of challenge you a little bit, talk about what is happening not just in the next 12 months but looking out two, three, five years, and even more than five years, and look at some of the emerging

technologies and the emerging trends that we see shaping of the market's overall pared you have heard the speaker earlier today talk about innovation. and i agree with a lot of the points that were made. technology is not going to automatically provide you innovation. it is what you do with the technology, how you apply it in various business context that is really critical. but then again, the technology oftentimes forms the building blocks. it may create an enabling environment that allows you to do new and different things. so today, i am going to focus on some of the technologies and how they are evolving in the marketplace. i'm going to start with a quote from william gibson -- i'm a big science fiction fans. you are an asset, every inch of the web. -- you are nasa. every hand should come up. the feature is already here, just not evenly distributed. i love that quoted.

a lot of things i talk about today that are not brand new. they have been out there in various ways for quite some time. what i want to focus on is, where are some of the interested targeted niche applications and how are those perhaps growing in the market and enter more of the mainstream? there are a lot of innovative things happening. there's a lot of new technologies and techniques emerging. what i would need to do is i want to challenge you to explore some of these emerging trends and technologies, look out over the french and ask yourself, what if. what do some of these technologies potentially hold for the world around you and for nasa in particular? you then of course have to identify barriers and problems and issues with these. i could take any of the technologies i am going to talk about today and give you the dark side -- security and privacy implications and other problems. i will raise a few of those but today i will shift a bit more to the, what if, side, what are the

opportunities potentially into the future and how do we see some of the slings playing out. i will from time to time inject a dose of practicality and certainly what you can do today in this journey as well. what i want to do is over the next 45 minutes or so, is go through the top 10 strategic emerging trends. the first one i want to look at our clout computing. you already heard a little bit about it. we think this is going to be one of the most critical, fundamental shifts that have occurred in quite some time in the industry. but it is not something that just happens next -- this year, but it will happen over the next 20 years. it is a long turn -- long term thing. yet to keep in mind and think, what are the steps? i also want to talk about social software. social software has been around

awhile but we see it entering new phases. we talked about whether 2.0, social computing. what is happening in the future and how does this notion of social computing, combined with cloud, to change the game? i want to look at next generation analytics. beyond the classic business intelligence and looking at data warehouses and internal applications. where does analytics go in the future? there are some immediate things, but we are also going to look at a two to 10-year time frame. also look at mobil and real world. if you look at -- cloud, social software, analytics, mobile computing, those things you can see out there today, real things happening in the market. the beginning of the presentation will hit on those of about the long-term trends. then we are going to get into things like the real world web. how does the web move from something being in cyberspace to

being embedded in the world around us? we get into the world of context where computing, augmented reality, future user interfaces, that all combined with these previous trends to fundamentally change what is happening in the world. let me tell you something. some of you are tweeting in the audience. i will give you a nice phrase right now. the pc era is over. it is 1981 again. what the heck do you mean by that? what i mean by that is back in 1981, the ibm personal computer was released. that was an ignition. we have personal computing and various enabling technologies for quite some time before. but from that ignition point, 1981 all would have to the present, we have the pc era. it was not just about individual pc's, but the way it change the way we thought about computing.

it pulled systems to the britta talk about distributing computing and client server. i would also say getting into the internet and the web was a way to linking these distributed systems together. when we started looking at mobile computing, for example, at some of the other enabling technologies that grow around, we are seeing another sea change in the marketplace. it is shifting to a mobile environment, and that it system model being the center of design, being the focal point, if we look out certainly in the five to 10-year period and even of the next few years. the key ignition has been iphone, related app store and not ipad, not just ipad itself but the ignition point, looking at more mobile computing in a very rich white. i will talk more about that will we get into some of those things. we think there is a fundamental change occurring and it will bring together some of the items i am showing here that we will talk about later.

i will finish up with a couple of items and we've got time that are much more futuristic. 3d printing, and then finally, a mobile robots, which we save as some of very disruptive technology is having an impact more on the five to 10 or even beyond attend if your planning cycle. -- the 10-year planning cycle. i am sorry, i will end up bringing it back to how some of the infrastructure, hardware systems are evolving a well -- as well with fabric computing. let's look at cloud computing. i will start with a little bit of what is happening today and how we define it at gartner. at gartner i actually have been talking about cloud competing sense about -- actually the past four years. we called it web platform to begin with. as the term cloud computing called on, it is really --

[audio difficulties] you can turn that, as jim talked about earlier. the idea of on demand dynamic services -- the fundamental point i want to get across here is this creates an abstraction model between a consumer clout services and a provider. this is a very, very important. a consumer of cloud services looks only at the service being delivered.

an application for crm, what ever the case may be. they use that service. all of the details of the implementation -- what sort of vital processes are in place. they are hidden from the consumer and only available through the service interface. to drive efficiencies and implementation, allows consumers to focus on just consuming the service and building things on top of it that they want. the reason i spent some time there is a lot of people are having problems with cloud computing because they start thinking about the implementation details. only control things through the service interface. the other two fundamental issues with cloud computing. chin talked about the types of cloud computing services. three fundamental our infrastructure, platform,

software, service -- when you move up to platform, running database or application development, you are extracting more of the implementation. you extract more when you are dealing with the end application like ncrm application. as you move up the stack, the provided as more and more and add additional value to implementation and you as a consumer will have to focus on fewer and fewer issues. i would say that you also got to focus on the hire two services as well. we think it is important to look at information as a service. what is actually delivered as a service is an emblem -- information feet. stock market information. catalog information. website traffic data. those are all examples of information feeds which are

information services. and then finally, this intersects with the world of business services. something like adp as a payroll service are many other business services, business outsourcing that you look at today, moving into cloud, delivers these things as a service. why do we even talk about those things? a with the business adp and payroll forever. the reason is when you start thinking about the technology- driven things you start blending all of the worlds together. this as you create your composite business models of the future, you will be able to pull together information sources, business services for people work on your behalf, applications that people use internally, and for structure components that you build upon to create your overall environment. and that can shift over time. also what happens, you heard a little bit earlier about security in some of the business models. i would contend that some of the things that we look back with business services and defining the relationship between

business service provider and a business service consumer will start migrating down. we thought of all of these things underneath. to much as technology today, some people want to specify technology implementation of web server runs, and rather than that model i think what will evolve here, what you need to think about is the evolution of business service levels. so, a business service level might require, i once the data -- stored services, and the data stored has to stay in the political jurisdiction of origin. that is how you specify the service requirement. and your provider will complement that. we are seeing some interesting evolution in each of these areas. one of the other things to think about in terms of cloud computing is how you get your handle, your hands around dealing with cloud computing because people took about prided clouds, building your own cloud s and applications and

consuming and design services, etcetera. it is very confusing. we think it breaks down into three parallel related initiatives. number one, consuming cloud services. you have these types of services on the left and i am going to consume them. we think of that often times like public services like amazon or microsoft. i will talk in the next slide about consuming certain private cloud services. implementing cloud computing environments. you have done this with nebula and things like that in nassau where you implemented the environment. if the first one, it is not about the implementation detail but it is all about consuming services and how you build on top of it. the second focal point is how you act as a provider and build the underlying infrastructure. let me tell you, it is a lot more than just virtualization, as many of you in the audience know who have worked in building your own environment. there is automation,

provisioning technologies, operations management, a lot that has to do it in implementing a cloud environment. not off the shelf. third, developing cloud-based applications and solutions. this is the one more emerging today. word about using o data models, of the distributed processing and bridge-type computing. we are beginning of that. we think it eats up very much by 2012 with mainstream companies focusing on but -- building new types of high-performance computing environments that they could not necessarily do cost- effective lead and efficiently with the existing models. think of high-performance computing and distributed processing moving out of to the mainstream. those are three primary focal points. if there is a d on that list, another thing you wanted in about is most enterprises will not simply be consuming cloud services, implementing environments and building applications. you will be a cloud service

provider. most businesses may be delivering cloud information services or application services or business services that lincoln through a cloud model. you will not necessarily be providing the first two models in most cases. but companies will be cloud service providers as well. the next thing i want to look at will relate back to something you heard about. i want you to think about cloud computing delivery models along the spectrum. over the next five years, this spectrum will be filled out in a very rich fashion. the far right hand side looks at public cloud computing, where basically anybody with a credit card or ability to log onto a site cannot access to that particular public cloud service. amazon is the poster child. the far left-hand side looks at custom private cloud, nebula environment is a custom private

cloud, so you designed architecture, implementation details. guess what? when i talk to exxon, they are building their own private custom cloud environment and in the their own decisions and the implementation details from operations and how they would use of virtualization, etcetera. the far right has a maximum amount of leverage to what the back end lender can do, gives the consumer a lot of flexibility. the custom 5 cloud moves toward a more efficient environment -- custom private cloud, moves toward a more efficient environment but you give up the scale using it to with some of the public efforts. there is a trade-off. what is even more important is these three models in the middle are the only to be increasingly viable. if managed private cloud an example of -- rather than designing your own architecture, go to a provider, in particular one that has the other services, say i want the implementation on my site, and

they may manage it for you as well. operating that as a managed service. we will see how much dell or microsoft and others can actually manage that for you. but as a minimum it will provide it architecture. you can leverage what somebody else is the one. microsoft is being more aggressive in positioning that today. do not expect to see them as the only one. when you look at the past that ibm and many other cloud vendors are on, you see the managed private cloud model in their future as well. some of the traditional webb players like google, probably not. but amazon has been on the fence. you could potentially see that in the future. what you will more likely to see from somebody like an amazon is a virtual private cloud and community cloud. virtual private, the vendor cars off and if fashion. at any given point of time running on a dedicated set of servers and a wall of environment versus everyone else running in their cloud

environment. imagine if amazon can wall off part of the data center as a it is only for you, but starts to that poll in any given point in time. what you decide to have done is change the level of regularity in sharing from a virtual machine to an entire -- -- machine. it gives you additional security and control. community pride at clouds are looking at limiting cloud computing so it is only people member of a particular community. it might be an industry, and named group of people have access to that. as we look at this, there are different levels of ownership and access, etc.. the more you go to the left, the more secure you can make that environment. the more controlled it is. but the less leverage you've got. of the bottom line that you need to be thinking about over the next five years as how you create hybrid cloud computing environment that will mix and match various elements across this so that based upon the

data, based upon applications that you need to deliver, you can deploy and any one of those different models. life is complicated in the future with more cloud computing options, not less. the other thing i wanted to focus on with cloud computing is this idea of service brokerage. the idea of brokerage are having some sort of intermediary in the world of i.t. is not new. we look at that with systems integrators and others. the world of cloud computing where you had all of the services that are out there, makes of this need for a third- party intermediary greater significantly. what we are talking about with brokerage is this is a really business model for entity that adds value to one more services for one more customers. there is a variety of enabling technologies they might use but what i want to focus on is some of these broker categories in

the middle. one is aggregation. we are seeing the evolution of vendors that will provide abrogation services to pull to the other services from multiple vendors. arbitrage. vendors that will provide a third party and provide arbitron of across multiple clout infrastructure service providers on multiple cloud application providers and move things between different providers based on performance needs, pricing, etc.. context. context brokers. if you will hear me talk more about context later. these are providers that will provide some sort of context of the delivery of the service and then drive the performance of services are around a particular end user or business context. customization and enhancement fit into this as well, where you have third parties that will enhance or extend this environment. think of it as a security enhancement or positional performance enhancement or

government mechanisms are around it access to services. finally, you've got integration, which is classic integration. pulling multiple services together. finally, insurance. we you see providers taking some of the business risk from accessing things from multiple service providers. insurance brokerage provider, for example, might say we have vatted is following providers and we have contracts and mechanisms in place to guarantee the movement of data back in fourth between these different providers so we can provide a level higher than the original service provider. so, we will take on higher risk, give you higher business level insurance. the reason why have this up here, looking at the future, is this is a nascent market now. things are just beginning to jell together. things like strike i am providing navigational services, bringing credit information.

jam cracker, service and aggregation. providing governments mechanisms to let you govern access to various services. when we talk to the various telecommunications providers and system integration -- integrators, they are all looking at how they provide services to you in a cloud environment that can help ease the consumption and integration and use of cloud computing. this is going to be one of the most iraq -- actively growing market. when you look at cloud computing and the complexity of the need for both value added service brokers is growing significantly. i want to shift now to another trend that has been around for the past few years but is continuing to grow, and that is the area of social software. i want to talk about some of the next ages we are going on in the journey. you have already been looking at blogs and wikis, there is

facebook and myspace and other public sites. internal collaboration is one area that you will continue to focus on social software. consumer lead integration and adoption will continue. the sec now is what we call social communication and collaboration. what we see often in the past is it social software has been somewhat disconnected from some of the traditional email and collaboration efforts. what you will increasingly see over the next 3 to 5 years and unified communication and collaboration internet -- interconnecting with social software pretty unified social communication and collaboration. brought environment. go back to what jim was talking about with major trends. i agree. he had -- it is a key enable a, but it is social, too. we are seeing a lot of vendors bringing these together into a more unified suites. i do not want to go down the whole racks nest, vendor

selection, you will not go to one vendor for everything, there will be a more heterogeneous environment but it is a trend of major vendors trying to bring these things together that is important. that is what i want you to think about going forward. don't think of unified communication collaboration and social of the year, but coming together as a way of writing your internal environment. one of the other things that it's been around for awhile but we think begins to increase is this focus on crowd sourcing and collective intelligence. when we talk about crowd sourcing, using the collective, the community, external social network as a source of information, as a source of innovation. for example, look at net flics prize they had for a few years and awarded last fall. a lot of smart people internally driving their recommendation engine. the got to the point of diminishing returns. they opened up and said we will give a million dollars to somebody who can increase the performance of our algorithms by

better than 10% and it came out with details on how they were calling to measure that. that was important to them because it drives their business differentiation. over the course of a couple of years, you had a lot of smart people externally pound on this,, with pretty sophisticated algorithms and the team won the prize and improve the algorithm. that is just one example. there are many others out there doing kraut sourcing. we see this as something that will increase the next few years. as a source of innovation. you in nasa are familiar with especially the crowd sourcing model of people looking at star maps. they looked at this information. i think there read something recently that somebody using one of those found a pulsar somewhere. you know about some of this but look at it being used in more and more places. finally, knowledge management

reborn. knowledge management has gone through the cycle of to the height of hype and crashed into what we call the trough of disillusion and has been firmly entrenched there for quite some time. one of the reasons why it is knowledge management wanted to come up with all of these mechanisms and rules, so the capture, organize, controlled it and none of us wanted to have anything to do with that. there was an inherent problem. what is happening, though, is as you get the social networks growing up, you have people using social media to contribute content, to add at tags, other information. you have tacit knowledge that can be captured as a side effect of this whole social communication and collaboration environment. you short circuit this. we have do you access it and use it. there could be a little organization behind-the-scenes. but we see this model really

starting to unlock the knowledge within a lot of organizations. that leads us to the next up, which is starting to become important, which is social analysis. when we look at social analysis we are talking about an umbrella term of measuring, analyzing, and interpreting the results of interactions and associations between people and various information sources. it really breaks down into four key areas you need to think about the number one, social network analysis, defining social networks, getting information about those networks to identify how people are collaborating with one another. you can feed that back into the social network or feed it into improving business processes. social filtering -- social media analysis office in. one in particular, measuring and sentiment around a particular company or activity.

so we are seeing a lot of commercial institutions especially bringing social analysis into the broader analytics environment. that brings us to the next item of the list, next generation analytics. we see this becoming more collaborative, more productive, more real time, more and bedded -- embedded. if you look of abolition or stages, and is going through in the whole business intelligence and analytics world, it goes through the due three phases. what happens, classic reporting and-boarding. why did it happen, at hoc query and data mining issues. finally, what will happen in the future which gets us into the world of predictions and predicted end of the extent we looked at in the last few years and we see continuing to mature in the future. what is actually interesting if you take that world of predictive analytics and you marry it with two other trends

as well. a first of all, going from explanatory to predictive. but will also move from traditional offline analytics to in line and embedded analytics. analytics was not something else you go to on the side simply, but it is embedded in the business process. you see that happening with commercial lenders light sap and others, and being used much more widespread as well. embedding predicted analyst with in the context of business processes lets you drive better decisions. when you do then surveys every year, this issue of using information more effectively, driving better business decisions, always comes in as one, too, or three on a list of key business priorities. imbedded in the business processes as one way you can do that. however, there is still a problem. too often with bees in a lot of tools you have to be some sort of rocket scientist to figure out how to do it, model the, or

build these algorithms and do the predictive analytics. so this other dimension is critically important as well, which is a shift from just high and export -- expert tools to embedding analytics into real human beings everyday processes. so, serves as a key tool, as an entry point for an analytic. coming up with collaborative analytic environment so that and made it -- may have people building algorithms and building blocks on the back end of putting it into a collaborative environment so you cannot financial professionals, business professionals and others coming together in a collaborative analytic space is an important trend. we see a number of people beginning to build these types of environment. oftentimes they are custom, created with individual enterprises but where they are coming out they are having tremendous value. some of the major vendors light

ibm are starting to build this idea of collaborative, along with predictive analytics into their systems. the key with this dimension is the start making analytics much more successful. there is a variety of enabling trends -- talking about social or bi convergence or search. also the idea of data-ups. when you can bring information and data from disparate sources from different times and analyze that you contrive the. to do that would end user tools to drive these data mashups will be particularly important and married with end memory analysis. here is a side note. another interesting thought. in five years, will we still be using a lot of disk or might be -- might we be putting a lot more in memory? look of the systems today that have terrified or more of memory associated with blade.

take a look at where the path goes the next 5 1/6 years. you suddenly have systems with massive amounts of memory. doing some of the data mash-ups in memory become viable. also, by the way, it becomes viable and many cases to bring operational database or data warehouse and analytic database together and have it in one in- memory data structure. that is powerful as well. if you don't have to have a different from analytic world, i could bring it together, one data structure can do a lot more, real-time analytics driving business processes. they have mash-ups and in memory analysis of bringing the world of analytics into even more real time world. cloud analytics services are comparing this as well. the bottom line is through 2012, 20% of organizations will have skills and maturity to

fully exploit business generation, that means 80% will not. of the make sure you are part of the 20%? that is not a technology issue, that is a skill issues. where you are in the majority curve in the upper left. during the blocking and tackling getting a handle on the data and information and putting it in usable form and then looking at extended tools to get a handle on that. this is going to be something we will see a lot of evolution in the market in the next five-plus years and there will be interesting new technologies but also the processes as well. for the second time out with some of the detail of predicted that analytics and go to the world of mobile computing. the fourth area we are looking at. first of all, we are pretty familiar with lots of mobile devices. we have our blackberrys, or at least some of us have our blackberrys -- i will predict she will have a blackberry

before the end of the day. iphone, kendall. there is an explosion of these mobile form factors. how does this affect you? mobil has become a major design point for more applications. an explosion and the use of tablet. as i said earlier, the era of the pc is over. it does not mean the pc goes away but this tablet form factor and multi-touch interface and with people in interfacing with the attack and applications through that type of device will have a disruptive impact and change the pc and a notebook. it will have an impact on our phones and smartphones as well. just as the pc revolution calls the mainframe to change into a big server, the mobile revolution will cause the pc and other things to grow into a specialized type of mobile interface. so, mobile, i would predict of

the next few years, and the things we think about a run mobile and tablets a day will be your primary design point, and a desktop unit just becomes a fixed function subset of what you can do in the mobile computing world. more on how this mobile world expanded with the liberal mobile apps are a critical enable our to business and consumer interactions. one reason from a business standpoint of this will be driven more rapidly. context aware computing begins to enter your planning. more about this later. but the point here is location- based services that are delivering through mobile devices a type of context. so, my location is part of the context i am using my demise. so the application delivery management and support will increase. no unified single platform for building in a mobile world. if i want to build an iphone app out will not run on enjoy,

fragmented the market versus what i have seen as a pc desktop. there are lots of challenges and things that will slow it down as a result in different areas. a but we think this is an inexorable trend. one other side note to point out. look at what is happening on the x-86 architecture over all. we used to grow it to create more and more massive x-86 chips. now would we doing? more and more course together, a side effect is the individual core is being made smaller and smaller and smaller, so we get to where we can is sent to put the single core x-86 of the little hand-held devices. that trend starts to actually bring together what we see on the desktop. a number of trends come together here.

app stores have been around for a couple of years but they have become much more important. they have become much more important in the future because they give rise to the emergence of the budget premier. i am an analyst. we like to make of words. what we are talking about is someone who offers applications and delivers them through virtual context pacific application stores and marketplaces rather than traditional software and distribution channels. it is amazing. you've got high school kids building iphone applications and making $15,000 over their summer vacation because they did a, is it friday yet cannot application. -- is it friday yet, applications. lots of individuals and power.

app storage is not just about iphone. the same model as applied elsewhere. really about mobile devices, browsers, social networks. look at what is happening on facebook, for example. this is an important new phenomenon that is just as important as what we saw with the revolution in the pc era. suddenly i did not have to own a giant mainframe. i could buy a pc and build my software and start delivering applications. i was back in 1981. we used to deliver software in a little baggie with a disk and typewritten documentation with a company that had eight of them. that same kind of thing is beginning to reignite in this marketplace. we are seeing it already. it is already happening. facebook, lincoln, iphone and ipad applications. and there is also this growing world of the web and cloud platforms. what i am sure when is google app, marketplace, app exchange,

and the microsoft web environment. in fact, microsoft is growing and the environment for information contact -- content exchanges were also people with information services can come up with the way of analyzing and putting information together and not just application but selling and information feet for some of the marketplace. who knows of zingha? anybody is facebook? is -- if you use some of the social games, they create the games that went on some of these social sites. over billions of dollars based

on the latest venture. this is going to drive different aspects of the market. what is the perspective for governments and enterprises? three big interests. when you buy and use these things. even if you don't have an official corporate policy to buy and use them, i guarantee all of those folks using the android and the ipad and iphone, they are using those applications. they are using them in the business context. what is out there and how do we use it, getting your hands around that is going to be important. enabling internal programmers and citizen developers to build and deliver solutions using the tools of the on japan nor is and pour in. you may want to begin what the look at what tools we put in place to build those sorts of applications that are delivered in that model. do we need an internal app store that goes out to users?

you cannot do that with the iphone. that gets into in -- the whole discussion about apple's rather controlling the environment. but we see over time that some of the special extensions to the store for businesses will in fact exist. you have a way essentially for your users, adding apps to some of the different stores. then engaging constituents in the marketplace where they play, competition with a bunch of bernard. you deliver information to your constituency will be competing with your individual entrepreneurs in the market but you also want to look at how to empower them. that community takeover. member to the eco system. what sort of web-oriented architecture structure do you want to make available? you know about this already. you embraced it. information you make available to the public in some of these

manners. that is a starting point that we think is going to be bigger. of course, this is not as simple as building, they will come. a lot of issues on how they will manage it and how they will govern it, but it is a real groundswell phenomenon. the next thing i want to talk about is this world of the real world web. this is moving -- moving beyond mobile to ubiquitous computing. what real world web does is links the physical world to the virtual world. you connect to places and things. we are seeing some examples of this already where you see automobiles that are tweeting. or appliances or other real- world objects that are using tweets or inflammation fees to make their status known. you are seeing other embedded systems like ec down here. this one on the left is an egg, you can put this, move a round

of supply chain and it collects information and you can get data on the environmental factors and perhaps go back to address issues that are courage -- causing breakage or spoilage. it is similar type of thing on the right hand side, looking at measuring the environmental factors. so, environmental monitoring is a big one that we are starting to see. we are seeing it in shipping and intelligent building more and more in the future. greater sense and networks grow as part of this as well. it seems a very interesting leading edge example, oil and gas company, using literally millions of sensors that they dropped into a zone where they are doing seismic analysis for oil exploration. getting data from all of that. they have multiple orders of magnitude improvement in the quality of their data they are getting examining those fields. because of the sensor network that they have put out.

so there is a lot of high value opportunities that are coming out here. one of the things that is happening is as technology, traditional i.t. technology, gets in bed and a lot of these operational systems around us, you have a linkage of information technology management and operations technology management. we need to bring together some of the world. we will begin to use the i.t. tools, software management, and change management, etc., over in some of these operational areas because instead of being some of these dedicated proprietary encapsulated systems, those operating technologies now might be running microsoft windows or necks or other dynamic systems. that raises significant challenges can a lot of these industries where these embedded things are part of overall world. look for the digital and real world coming together.

it becomes, not cyberspace, but all space. i mentioned context-oriented computing a few times already. when we look at context-aware competing, you can think of this in a few ways. talk about the context, information about people, processes, location, that makes the delivery of information application components more robust. the classic model -- pre-context is presence. personal information data. what we are seeing emerge, 2010 and 2012 time frame, are simple systems and walled gardens. more identity services, simple behavior and habits, getting mining information from social networks and driving sample proactive alerts. we have more contextual

information to change the way the system will respond to the users. so, context becomes and that it more and more. what you should plan on in the 2015 and the 2020 timeframe is much more robust context delivery architecture. this is a new architecture model you will hear more about and start thinking about over the next five years. so there are more sensors, bio- sensors, complex federated services. to handle this you need to start thinking about how you bring together a structured way of looking at context information, finding the format, the api's to have access to that, relating to information sources to one another. context where competing and the emergence of context delivery architecture's become increasingly important in next two years. what this leads us to is something that starts bringing a lot of this together.

think of a cloud. we have all the services out there in the cloud that we can get access to in a dynamic fashion, to start pulling together to create composites business processes and composite services. we have a mobile computing environment, ubiquitous computing, world wide web that has the world around us join together in a more connected fashion. we have a lot of contextual information about the services that are out there and about individuals and what their preferences are, -- augmented -- augmented reality. i think this is a major long- term opportunity. it has been steadily increasing. it is not brand new pared the brand new. -- it is not brand new. we have had augmented reality for some time. but in the last few years the things we have seen in the global marketplace with gps,

digital compasses, cameras, image processing, accelerometers, all of that is starting to make this world of augmented reality much more a reality. context information is at the point of decision point or action. the example to the left is nokia's point and find -- pointing this to a building or something else and getting information pops up on the screen. there is a reality browser out that does something similar. so, the camera shows you the picture, and it looks like a magic window and will give you information pulled from various information sources to tell you about what you are knocking at. so, you connect to that used, for example, by an electrician going into a building that has access to the schematics and showing a wall and saying, that is where the power is coming down in the wall. so there are some very practical examples.

what you can do is you can start bringing the technologies that are out there right now. one of the other key enablers, by the way, is the available of the overlay data. that goes back to what i was talking about earlier but social networking. the data coming from a lot of structured sources, but a lot of information -- individuals putting information on various incomes -- systems. so, the social content is part of this. the one on the upper right in is an example of an mit project called sixth cents. you have a wearable computer. quite a fashion statement. i think apple got hold of this they might change it around. the idea is he has a workable computer with a camera and projection. what this will do is actually project on real-world objects in front of you. here you see it projected on a newspaper. reading a newspaper and identify

as you are reading the newspaper and pulls some information from the newspaper side and perhaps give you audio or other information, or identify the article you are looking at and pull some news from other sources. so you can't think of a lot cases where you can bring some of these things together. this is an experimental idea. but this idea of bringing together of what is happening in the real world to augment the world around us, this will be increasingly viable over the next five years. this was done, by the way, with inexpensive off-the-shelf technologies. now, there is an interesting set of evolutions occurring in user interfaces over all. .

>> there is a myriad of options. there is context available. " we hate is the user experience becomes a disconnected -- what we have is a user experience becomes disconnected. you can have a interactions involving many devices. so i have my ipad, my iphone, my

desktop, my television set and other types of displays and the environment is the computer. i bring all of those things together based on the context of what i have around me, the system will react differently. the user interface is not just something that is for the device, it is a model that goes across multiple devices. we have much more contextual interactions. lots of sensors and control mechanisms, and emotionally aware interactions as well. there is a threat that we look at, which is a mind as commander interface. there is interesting early systems, some of them are being implemented in toys and games right now. so i could spare at this a little ball that is in this column and by concentrating and relaxing moving it up and down the column. simple mind/machine type of

interface. why is this important? the reason it is important is classics -- ag models to try to do some machine interfaces, inventors have come up with much easier ways to do it. -- the reason it is important is, because of rather than the classic e.k.g. models of to try to do so machine interfaces, inventors have come up with much easier ways to do with. that is where things are going, but probably not for 5 to 10 years. in the near term, think of the experience that is growing at of the things i have talked about so far. think of this really as a portal plus a social plus mobile. all of those things coming together and an environment -- into an environment to build my user experience.

there are lots of individual user technologies that you can see in here. this is not a market yet. there are people coming to the market. what this space. i cannot talk about what major vendors are doing, but in the next two to three months you will see an emergence of what is user platforms packaging some of the portal, social networking and mobile components together to create the next generation interfaces. finally, although emphasize the technology part in this, user experience design is more important than just the plastic form -- platform. 3d printing is becoming increasingly inexpensive. it is almost like an ink jet

printer. a use of powder mechanism and put together a binders and you can build things up and create a three-dimensional objects. what is happening is what used to cost $200,000 is now costing $20,000 or $10,000 in the next year or so, and probably $5,000.20 $500 and then under $1,000 in the subsequent years in planning time. we're going to see this type of printing used more and more for these types of things. the biggest drawback that we see to this really is one that is a material science problem. there are only a few set of materials and certain things you can create with these. you can do simple fabrication of plastic parts and things of that sort, but you cannot tell it to

make a microchip or anything very complex. that is the "what if" factor. if we make a difference in science and combine materials, then we will see something very interesting take all. also, that matter program feeds into this as well. we do not quite get to the replicated out of star trek, but we're getting probably as close as we can think about getting. mobile robot stride infrastructure. it is interesting to look at as well. there is a lot people have been looking at with these robots and such. i want to look at video conferencing. in health care, for example, we

see robot set our video conferencing robots that can go into a patient's room. a doctor that might be in another hospital could use that type of video conference with the patient. we're finding the patients actually like that because they would rather talk with their doctor for the 15 minutes rather than someone at the hospital. that doctor can deal with multiple patients that might be in multiple hospitals. we are seeing this used in different warehouse situations. stables is using this as an interesting example. -- staples is using this as an interesting example. robot can bring things to a person to create a dynamic pick and pack station, whichç is what we're seeing down below. a lot happening with mobile robots. i want to finish up was something that is a little more practical, and that is the idea of computing fabrics. computing fabrics in the near term are individual vendors bringing networking and memory into tightly coupled environment

where you can do a lot of virtualization. imagine if i have the systems available, and i could say i want to have system thea dynamically poll memory. for application b i want more memory. you have dynamically assemble the resources needed for a virtual server for that need. when the need goes away, it the resources can be used elsewhere. that is the long-term ebullition we see with the server environments today. this is what you need but also driven by our model to make the club computing work for vendors as well.

with that, i will leave you with me one final ". there are those that let it happen, make it happen and wonder what happens. what kind are year it -- king d ar eyoue you? [applause] i will be available if anyone has any questions. >> this keyspan networks provide coverage of politics, public affairs, non-fiction books and american history. it is all available to you on television, radio, online and on social media networking sites. -- the c-span networks provide coverage of politics, public affairs and non-fiction books. it is washington your way.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> our coverage of nasa's first ever information technology summit continues now. this is just over 20 minutes. >> jane pick -- it is my pleasure to introduce the nasa administrator. charles bowdon is our speaker for the half hour.

she is a retired marine corps maj. general. -- he is a retired marine corps general. at least i did not say former. i knew that much. ok. in the marines he was a member of nasa's astronaut office. he has traveled to orbit four times aboard the space shuttle between 1986 and 19894. i would like to give you a very -- i would like to give you a

very robust round of applause. [applause] >> the meeting -- let me thank linda very much for letting me come. it is refreshing to see a gathering like this. i understand the total number of people here greatly exceed their expectations and that is really good was cool are you from? -- what school are you from? anyone else from academia?

you must be a marine. no. fantastic. all the way from california? where? are you dave's sister? i am very sorry to hear about the loss of dave's dad. dave and i work crew mates. you didn't ask for any of this, but it was nasa's first mission to planet earth. and interestingly it was an i.t. intensive mission. i am going to use that to fill the void. i did not have a lot to say. i just wanted to say thank you all for coming. i never have a lot to say. where is keith?

i do not have a lot to say. my last two flights were very interesting, because they were i.t. in tenzin, and when did that i flew the shuttle it was called at this. we had 13 different scientific experiments. 10 of them were atmospheric monitoring. the three were solar monitoring experiments. they look at the sun from three different ways. one look directly at the sun and measure the energy, one book that solar energy bouncing off of the clouds, and the eveline looked at it bonds and off the surface. very interesting. in order to do the experiments, we had -- i will miss at the county, but we had seven laptops on the flight deck for that

flight. my last flight i think at one point we had 13 laptops out and about in the space habitation module. all over everywhere. on the flight we were supposed to do a rendezvous and we were going to release something doing its thing for a few days and we would run the big -- re rendezvouse with it. you did ask the of of this, but i will tell you how far we have come. the shuttle is very limited. it is -- we have 50 general- purpose computers on board. i am preaching to acquire corelogic you, as some of you may not know. the general purpose computers are essentially the same computer i had when i flew in

vietnam in 1972. it is probably like 56k or something like that. it had an upper and lower registry so we cannot use the whole thing at the same time. you could use the upper registry or the lower registry, but that was it. while it is an incredible flying machine, were not for the invention of the laptop -- k- state invention -- necessity is the mother of invention. the grid came about because we needed a way to tell crews that you're coming up on the site we want you to take a picture. we will put it on a little computer for you and it will go

beep and that will tell you to look at us and get a camera and look at this window. orient yourself that way and they're ready to take this picture. that was the first use of laptops on the order, and that was a great computer. i am not supposed to say that probably. -- and that was a grid computer. i expect nassim to be here, because you have to because --

also help the industry have to ecdecide to better produce machines that serve your purposes better also. i think you very much for inviting me to be here for a very brief amount of time. i want to thank james williams and karen harper. you are doing an incredible job. your stomach so probably still turning because it is day one. i understand that. and i want to pay tribute to zero of mine who is sitting in the burrow.

i will let her explain. when she talks and a couple of days asked her about junk. bernice is an incredible human being who will talk to later in the week. i am not sure whether she was the first attack fighter helicopter, but i know she has an incrediblet( things anin iraq and other places have and has set the bar pretty high, so i think you are in for a treat when you listen to her talking about motivating people and doing good things. you know, i think it is an incredible sense of community

here. all of you are here because you believe in information technology and what it has done and what it can do for all of us. it gives one the sense that this is a unified community that is here to make a difference in to see where we go. as far as i know, this is the first time nasa has sponsored an i.t. summit. someone will go back in history and say we had people that got together some time ago and that was really the first summit, but this is the first official i.t. summit that i think nsasa has hosted. we are very happy each one of you has turned out. everybody contributes to the whole of what is nasa, and i really appreciate all of you coming together to share the lessons you have learned over

time and also tell us where you want to go. i see some really good things happening in the field of i.t.. when linda came on board we talked a little bit. she talked about things she needed. we talked about the need for cyber security and more attention to that', because next to d.o.d. we're the most poked and prodded organization in the government as far as intrusions into what we do. we have a lot of work to do in the area of cyber security. linda is building a very strong team to help strengthen ourselves against vulnerabilities there. the president wants all of us, and i will say all love you, to come up with better ways to move the government forward on i.t..

he wants us to find ways to bring about cost savings. he wants us to find out better ways to consolidate what we do. the data center consolidations as an example. cloud computing and green i.t. to name a few things. iwe want to become incredibly transparent to the world. so that people can look and find out anything they want to know about us that we want them to know her very easily, whether it is from an ipad or laptop or desktop. we are about pushing boundaries. that is who we are. i think there is no field in which we should assume leadership much more important than in i.t. we need to do many things

differently than the way we do them today. not only must we develop new systems or instruments to send data back about future exploration targets but an areas like i.t., which is the backbone. we need all of you innovators in the room. that is the reason why i asked if we are represented from academia because you will be a crucial role. we need all of you to help us find new ways to safely and effectively share and manage the information and extend our reach about all of the great ideas we have. we need innovations. at ames became public this cloud computing system. anyone here from their? you take credit for that. you will hear the president of

i.t. grouuru talk about that whn he comes. he was very impressed. it is systems like this that you all have developed and refined so that huge data groups can be sent among people who need it. you are all reasons that we are rated so highly on the open government initiatives, which seek to bring the citizens of this country into the interaction withçó our governmet and to participate in it to understand it, and to see it used. they say satellites are like a fire hose because the rapid pace and quantity of data that is sent back to earth. it will take us years to sort through all of that information, and we cannot do it with all of you. making sense of data. making data more than just information, but at tool for discovery and decisions is

something that is our task that we should be about. that is what you do. i am so glad that you do it so and n0

systems that ensure program budgets are managed in the development is funded. human resource systems that help us in our recruitment efforts and to retain top talent for the agency. pay systems. ÷i should not say that, so i wl not. [laughter] pay systems that pay you and me. many more similar systems are pillars that support the weight of the entire enterprise. they play a critical role in the success of every space mission, and those of you develop,ç manage, and maintained systems for nasa are critical to our success. i was watching the end of the space walk that went on this morning, and my executive officer and i were commenting as we walked out of office that it is absolutely incredible to

watch a space walk from 200 plus miles away in space. it is like you're looking out the window. that is absolutely incredible, the way that we had developed the capability to bring data down to earth to convert the electrons to pictures and make it look like we're looking at something outside our window, and it is all because of the types that you all have done. a great thing about your field is people really want to share to extend everybody's capabilities, and people really want to share, not only developing what we do in nasa, but we are taking advantage of what we've year in the government has as resources that we use helping to deepen the field for the nation as a whole. i am excited about great things

coming out of this conference, out of the summit. linda is a retrieve information officer says that you are going to be discussing best practices and looking at onewhat innovations we might want to make use of. hopefully she will tell you that i do pay attention to what comes out of meetings like this. if you make recommendations, we will make every effort we can to see which we can incorporate. i would encourage you to be free in your critique, criticism, comment, offering of constructive ideas as you go through these few days. you need to know that people are looking to you as leaders in this field. we have gained a lot of accolades of the past few years because of the work we have done

in i.t., but that is just the beginning. i do not think there is any end to the things you can do and the accomplishments you can make as members of the i.t. community, and i expect great things of you. we used the term cutting edge a lot, but you really defined what it is for us. we have come a long way since i first caught my electoral science degree from the naval academy 42 years ago. most of you are probably not even that old. icgpr is a long way away from there, and when i got my bachelor's, computers stockrooms -- took rooms. i remember as a high-school student going to carnegie tech back then, now is carnegie-

mellon. and going into a building that housed one computer. we have come quite a long way. today i am very happy to take my laptop or my p.d.a. and get all of the information that used to require a building to provide. it is linda's and my goal to make sure that nasa has the best i.t. in government. we are requiring all of you to tell us what is best of this field and where we need to go next. it is a really exciting time for us. there are a lot of different things going on in nasa. i think that is an understatement. i:ó cobble -- t the course for the nation.e -- t

we're going to have to be able to talk to people who are lot longer distance away than they are today, 250 miles above the earth or when we're doing the apollo arera when we're only a quarter of a million miles away from earth. we will have to talk to surgeons that can perform surgery on a place that is probably months away in terms of time travel, and those are the kinds of innovations you all will have to bring about. i know you are up to the task. as i said, it is an exciting time for us. i am enjoying what i am doing and enjoying watching you do what you do. thank you again for coming out. i will give you time back to you can do hopefully what i am going to do. i am going to go on the floor and look at some of the displays. thank you very much for coming

out for this summit. thank you for doing what you do. best of luck to all of you. enjoyáussrá. thank you. [applause] >> "book tv continue" çis tonight in prime time. -- "book tv" continues tonight in prime time. kenneth ackerman on the:11 campn and subsequent assassination of america's 21st president, james garfield. itñr is in prime time all this week on c-span2. >> washington journal is taking a look at the financial crisis. its causes an impact.

tomorrow, the u.s. public interest research group on how that is live at 9:15 eastern here on c-span. funeral services for for more alaska ñ÷senator, a ted stevens will be tomorrow. it starts at 6:00 eastern here on c-span. gulf coast is being blocked down. trending as reserving in the gulf, and the obama administration has ordered reviews of all deepwater oil rigs of four drilling continues. thisç month, the ocean managemt director talk about mrs. organization will move forward. he spoke of the first public meeting of the committee in the blazing technical causes of the gulf oil spill.

this is just over two hours. to the national academy because we are most interested in getting a completely independent and highly credible technical analysis of the probable causes of the deep water horizon disaster. it that is really what we are looking for. on what likely but ron, here. or the probable causes -- what likely went wrong here. what were the probable causes? our assumption is that that will help us confirm that we are on the right path in terms of addressing the root causes and systemically coming up with againr

understanding -- we appreciate much your willingness to with an interim report by the end of october because we are anxious to ensure that we're on the right path. we also understand that that would focus on the root causes as opposed to the broader set of recommendations that we hope you will be able to come up with in your final report. is being useful to you in any way that we can. obviously, there is an ongoing joint investigation by the coast guard. i understand that there already have been discussions to help insure that you have access to

the information that is needed for your technical analysis to the extent that you need any of our help to make sure that that access is effectuated and you can call on us to make sure. that is all that i wanted to say. there are a number of folks interested and involved in looking at this problem. we look to you and the national academy for your particular insight, given the depth of your experience. we are particularly interested in in what you will have to say about this. >> thank you, very much. i appreciate the charge. i appreciate of for free access

to all the information obtained through the board of inquiry. i think that that will assist us, in particular, in terms of providing a timely input into the process in october and also assist us in terms of assuring a fine report -- a final report is as complete as possible. i think you very much. i trust that we will be able to achieve the objectives that you laid out for us. >> is a daily challenge in that regard. thank you very much. again, if >> you will be talking with david and others. if any is any need to talk to the secretary or me at any time,

please do not hesitate. we will be delighted to talk to you all. thank you. >> thank you very much. michael? >> are these microphones live? >> those microphones should be useful, yes. there is also a microphone on the podium if you would prefer to use that. do that.i couldn't let me know when you are ready.

>> please. but we very much appreciate your convening this committee for the purpose of helping us understand that -- the technical causes of the deepwater horizon explosion. this is obviously a tragedy of national proportions beginning with the tragic deaths of 11 people on the rig and i think that the nation has closely followed this in the past few days. it has riveted the nation's attention as few things have in recent years. what i wanted to do very briefly was to frame the foreign official -- bring the organizational aspect -- frame the organizational aspect. we will do the best to address

this in the time that we have. let me talk about the organization. i have been the head of the bureau of management organization. much of what i have been doing has been to deal with the aftermath of the deep water horizon explosion. i found myself testifying before congress. i took over responsibility for a large group of 1700 employers and an organization with multiple missions. i inherited a reorganization plan that is designed to create three separate entities. this would deal with the leasing and permanent sign -- permitting side. members of my agency have been

in the midst of the response to do for horizon. they have been an integral part of unified command in new orleans and the houston location. my colleagues that are here will do the bulk of the presentation and they have been at the center of the joint coast guard and boem this edition. as you know, when i first met you at one of those events, there was a public hearing in which witnesses have been called to give to the bottom -- to get to the bottom of the technical issues that we will be exploring and what happened in the well bore and what happened aboard the deepwater horizon. i understand that you do not want us to address the specifics of that situation, but we are

happy to take questions on that as well. on some of the other things that our agency has been doing that i have been doing as well, we are in the middle of discussions about the current moratorium on deepwater drilling. i just got back into town last night after conducting the third of what will be eight public forums designed to gather information so that sells art can make decisions on whether there are ways to cut short the moratorium before its current november expiration date. i have been focusing on drilling safety and many of the issues that will touch on today bear on drilling safety issues. the second issue is containment. as we have seen over the past

few days, there were difficulties in containing this bill. we saw the horrible videos of the oil spewing out of the well. thankfully, that is no longer being seen because the well has been capped. that is the second issue. the third issue is the spill response. secretary salazar and i, god forbid if there had been another spill, virtually all of our national resources dealing with the spill were dealing with the deep water response. since those resources are no longer deployed, and we are focusing on this. we are gathering information that we think will be relevant to the secretary's decision on monday. those are some of the things that we have been occupied by

over the last 52 days that i have been with the agency. the agency has come under a substantial amount of criticism and we have been dealing with those criticisms as they come. one of the things that we have done is to create a new review unit that will do a number of things. it will serve as an internal affairs arm of our organization to deal with allegations of misconduct. it is designed to enable us to have an aggressive enforcement effort in our agency. that is a way that we have not had full before. those are some of the things we have been working on. i will be happy to answer any questions the committee may have. let me introduce the two men that will be with me here today and will present the bulk of the material that you have asked for.

sitting to my immediate left is david dikes to he has been with the agency for 11 years for. he came to the agency with approximately 15 years of experience in the oil and gas industry both onshore and offshore. since joining the agency in 1999, he has served as we call a civil relief officer which is why he is the co-chair of the committee. he has also been heavily involved in safety and environmental management. he is currently chief of the office of safety and management. sitting to his left is john. he is the lake jackson district manager. he has been with the agency for 14 years. he was previously a technical assessment person. he came to the agency with 20

years of industry experience. the majority of that [unintelligible] operations. john, like david, is currently assigned to the deepwater horizon joint investigation and both of them have been spending the bulk of their time doing that. those are the two people that will be responding to the technical questions. why don't i turn it over to david. >> thank you, very much. i appreciate you coming down here this morning. good morning. we. uh, got a list of questions earlier this week and we attempted to try to answer most of those questions in this presentation. . .

>> they take anywhere from a minimum of six months to nine months ãof the year to put the environmental impact statements together before you get to the lease sale. from the multi-still that when we get in to police itself where we have site-specific leases you may be putting on the market. -- from some multi sale we get into the site specific pieces you may be putting on the market.

a little over than 2000 in water depths where you are at 1500 to 2,000 feet. a little over 1200 pieces are at 5000 to 7500. then we have just a little over 500 leases at water depths greater than 7,500 feet. quick snapshot of the drilling historyj1 for the past 10 year. we have had roughly a little less than 8500 wells over the last 10 years. of those, as you see, we will go through this, a little over 5000 were development wells. a little less than 3500 wells were exploratory wells. there were roughly 21 that we classified as a research or other type well. a little less than 6400 were in

water depths of less than 500 feet. 186 were in water depths from 500 to 1,000 feet. now, jumping into the regulations. the regulations that cover offshore operations are covered for offshore operations. basically it starts out when you are living at drilling operations, the first bank and operator must do is submit an exploration plan or a plan of exploration. follow behind that, when to move into the development phase, they must either summit development coronation plan or development of a correctiproduction plan.

this outlines the scope of operations to be encountered in to be conducted. it outlines details as to how you will man that. how you will support it with vessel support. shore based activity and so forth. another requirement the operator has to do to cover all of this is a myth and oil-spill contingency plan that will address worst case scenario for the location and the ability to respond to that. if necessary, suspended on the site, the operator may be required to submit a contingency plan. real quick, and exploration plan, these other goals of the

expiration plan. ms conform to the land act. you have to show operations will be safe. you must ensure you are conforming to sound conservation practices. we do not want to interfere with any of the other o.c.s. least uses. we do not want to cause at any point in time to undo or serious harm to the human or the marine or coastal environments. did the into the details of the v.p. describe the drilling unit. whether you are going to install a permanent facility or a floating production unit and conducted operations all of that. you should build and to the

expiration plan a contingency for drilling a relief well for worst-case scenarios should it happen. you must also have a contingency plan should do lose the support craft. you must also identify your proposed well locations. nunes also identified your spill response plan as well. attached that to the e.p. we do require the operator to use new technology as best available and safest technology. we ask them to describe the onshore support facilities, offshore support facilities, whether they are using multiple helicopters, multiple offshore supply vessels. we also require them to describe the types of waste that would be generated from this facility and tell the waste will be disposed

of. both of those being solid and liquid wastes. once again, hydrogen sulfide. in their accounting this: if they're going to be establishing operations in an area known to contain this, this must be submitted as well. last, the financial bond requirements. for the oil spill contingency program and for end of the lease abandonment requirements and also to be able to cover a relief well should be required in the event you have an uncontrolled well even. -- event. i can take questions at any time. >> i think we will go through

your presentation and then come back to a q&a. >> not the problem. thank you. once we have made the determination they want to develop the fields, operator is required to submit a development and operations coronation document or a development and production plan. very similar documents in content. some of the information is retrieved from the exploratory plan. described the activity, but describe your schedule, it gives in to what type of facility are you planning to install. if you're going to use a fixed facilities or exploding insulation than you would cover that in this plan. looking at the environmental safeguards. are you near sensitive areas and what protective measures are you putting in place to protect those areas? you must get into discussing the reservoir and the engineering

practices that will be used to ensure sound operations. well tests and permission if you conducted a oilwell test during the exploratory phase -- will test results if you conducted an oilwell test during the exploratory phase. disposal methods. also, we also require projected emissions and from the facility. whether you are in the containment area or not. moving into the district operations with the drilling engineer. as you see by the list, the drilling engineer has multiple duties as part of his job beyond reviewing the permit to drill. he also looks at the initial completion request, and it is

application for a permit to modify and the district operations, whether an operator comes in with a plan to drill, he submits his a.p.d. at that point in time, brynner must submit an application for a permit to modify. at that point in time, the drilling engineer will review that as well. he will also look at the deepwater operations planne. if there is h2s involved, she will have to review that plan. we have to know whether it there is save welding areas or would require a halt work permits. he may conduct inspections with the inspector if he has

he may look at alternative compliance requests, and i will touch briefly on those as when mr. this. those are departures from the regulations. exhe may be asked to participae in accident investigations. one thing we do is if we have an accident in one of the five with drilling operations, we may ask a drilling engineer from another district to participate in that investigation to give it the outside look. then he may also participate in conducting the compliance for review that will propose potential civil penalties for any violation that have been discovered. moving into the application for a permit to drill, we are required for each well, each side track, each bypass on an existing well. the purpose of this is twofold.

number one to make sure it meets regulatory requirement to make sure we have a good, sound understanding of the drilling operation that the operator is planning to conduct. it focuses on three main areas. operation of characteristics of the of pigs. the well design itself and equipment that will be used in the testing of the equipment. . .

>> in any plans they may have for logging the well, and a correctional service, and any surveys they might conduct, they are required to submit that throughout the program, in use that to reference offset wells, and concern -- and use it for reservoirs. equipment used and testing -- the engineers will look at what the diver systems will look like.

he wants to assure that the operator is conducting its being required testing. a lot of the review that the drilling engineer does is subject to what we call field verification, so that when he reviews, the drilling inspectors will take out those conditions of approval, and he will verify that the diverse system is installed, and that the block preventer system is installed. as a part of that review, the engineer will look at the pressure testing requirements, outlined those to the inspector, identified departures from the regulations, and pass that on to the inspector, for the inspector to review and verify when his offshore, doing on-site location and inspection.

>> once you transition, those procedures are handled through what we call a revised permit to drill. if you are working into completion, whether it is temporary or permanent, it will be handled through and apm. you might move into a wall, complete the well, and produce the wealth, and you have hydrocarbon bearing zones behind the pipe, you might come back and submit an apm, to isolate, appropriate, and produce hydrocarbons owns further up the wallboard, to ensure conservation and alternate recovery. -- ultimate recovery. the last main thing is to ensure

compliance with applicable regulations. evaluating the robustness of drilling operations -- when looking at a casing program, which require a safety factor of 1.0 on the first design of the casing. with that, well-controlled equipment, and exposed casing must be rated for maximum possible pressure to be seen. we calculate as a part of the engineering process what we considered a conservative maximum maximum -- surface pressure. by this, there is a built-in default safety factor that bumps it from 1.0 to 1.2% or higher -- 1.2 or higher.

quickly, a brief snapshot of the well. the maximum surface pressure that was calculated was a little over 9,000 pounds. the bop stack was rated at over 15,000 pounds. the production casing was rated at 13,000 hundred 40. we were bumping into the neighborhood -- calculations slips my mind at the moment, but it is definitely higher than a 1.2 safety factor. now, when looking at the drilling standards, and the plug in abandoned standards, they are covered under sub-par de. i believe it starts at 400. some part q starts at 1400. they cover drilling operations, and the commission and abandonment.

i spoke earlier about departures. depending on operational necessity, the drilling engineer and the district manager have the option to grant what we call a departure or waiver from the regulations. i have an example right here first. the main thing i want to focus on is that those waivers or departures are only granted when we can insure that personnel safety and environmental protection are not compromised. an example of this would be the blowout preventer. we require them to be tested on every strand of pipe that will be brought into the hole. on the annual preventer, we will waive the larger strings of pipe, if you are running a 6 and 58, where a 3 inch string hanging off of the 5.5. we will waive the test

retirements -- requirements. we will only required on the three-inch because if the presenter will close on a smaller diameter pipe, if you are familiar with that equipment, it is an element that comes up and closes like a donut. it will by default seal on a larger diameter pipe. that is one example of a departure from the regulations. field verifications' -- that is done through our offshore inspection program. first thing is first -- the operator is required to notify us of the rig moves. we track that electronically on a system that is available to all the districts, and also with a hard-copy map. once the rig is on location, and they are either latched up, and

in drilling mode, whether they're running conductor pipe, or jetting in conductor pipe, we will conduct an on-sight inspection. his two-fold. we will look at the record review to make sure they have all of the permits in place, to make sure that everything that is outlined in the permit, onboard, and ready to go, such as mud system components and so forth. then, we will do a physical inspection. the three things that we look at -- housekeeping, unsafe conditions, and the flow sensors and level indicators that the operator is required to have, such as gas detection, mud pits, so they can determine mudflow in, as opposed to mudflow out, and so forth. these inspections are done as an internal policy. we attempt inspections at least

monthly. that is dependent on the weather. sometimes we cannot get out due to bad weather. during the winter, if you are familiar with offshore operations in the gulf of mexico, anywhere from mid november, to the beginning of february, whether days are very long, and very expensive. sometimes, we might not get out to a rig for a particular month, but we try to make that up as weather permits. we do them monthly, only when the rig is an operational mode. his there is one that is that, and not working, for whatever reason, we will not send our resources out there to inspect that rig when is in the stack mode.

this well had not been determined, at this point as tight -- and time, as slated to be completed. it was temporarily abandoned. that is where they were at when the event occurred. had beene apd's approved, andy -- and the apm that was submitted, had been approved. if there are some questions on the use of a long, tapered string for the final casing string, as opposed to tiebacks. wheaton get into some of those discussions later. for all intents and purposes, all that were submitted meant -- met minimum regulatory requirements, and were approved by the engineer. following on that, the horizon

actually moved on to this location january 31, commenced operation shortly after that. we conducted an inspection on february 17, march 3, and april 1. during those inspections, and no violations were discovered by our inspectors. a couple of the questions that you all submitted reflected on how we gather and disseminate information among the agency and the industry. prior to july, 2006, our reporting rule required the opera -- require the operator to report all serious accidents, any deaths or serious injury, all fires, all explosions, all blowouts, and any spills or all spills as required.

for reporting purposes, the spill reporting requirements are for 1 barrel or more of hydrocarbon released to the gulf of mexico waters. there are some subject of words. how you define "serious?" how do you define a blowout? we put out a rule in 2005. it became effective july 17, 2006. we considered substantial improvement over the previous rule. we attempted to align with ocha record keeping requirements, and i will get to the next slide, but we looked at defining oil

control events. one of the things on the injuries were clarified to any injury that required the evacuation of personnel from the facility, to another facility, or two and i'm sure facility for the purpose of receiving medical treatment -- or any other facility, for the purpose of medical treatment, we wanted to know about it. any job transfer case, or missed work case, we wanted to know about it. if you had an injury that you wanted to classified as minor, where first aid only, that was associated with another to initiate event, such as a fire, or explosion, we wanted to know about those as well because those would give you the indication for the potential for that injury to be more severe. on the block side, which changed the term from blowout to while control. we attempted to define that to where you have an underground event, with an under-pressure

zone, being over-pressured. we included the definition for service, where it if you have a breach of the hydrocarbons known outside of containment, the case in design, and outside of your well equipment, where it broaches to the sea floor -- any die burger event reject any diversion event -- we wanted to know about those -- any diversion events -- we wanted to know about those. any event where you had a production facility with a well had that would be considered a well-controlled event. we also added the requirement to report crane incidents, or other lifting incidents. one of the things we have seen

over the past several years is an increase in the number of crane operation accidents that have been occurring, where for whatever reason lows are slamming into the boat, and coming into contact with the personnel, or damaging the facility. wheat also require that operators report mustering events. we want to know the -- about those as well. any event that requires the shutdown of the facility from a gas release, such as having a line that might fail on you, releasing gas to the environment, where the safety system kicks in and just down the facility, we want to know about that. any event that might damage or disable the safety system, and any event that might cause structural damage to the facility -- we did find structural damage as those that are damaged to the extent that

operation of the facility cannot continue until repairs are made. now, what we do with his information? based on the severity of the event, and one of the threshold's when you are looking at injuries -- if we have an injury and it is an injury by itself, a man is walking down a flight of stairs, and a twisted ankle, while working in a shop, moving equipment around, and depose a muscle in his lower back, we might not necessarily to an investigation on those types of incidents because that incident itself is not specific to oil and gas operations. that can occur in the kentucky region the construction industry, in a warehouse, -- that can occur in the construction industry, in a warehouse, in marketing. we try to focus and in trees that are specific to while or gas operations.

-- focus on those incidents that are specific to oil or gas operations. we have to do all types. we have what it what we call our district investigation, which is a still-in-the blank form, and we do that as a minimum on all investigations where the results and a more elevated panel. those are done at the district levels. having said that, i will qualify that by saying the majority of those are done at the district level. we do a panel investigation from time-to-time, and the result may be a district investigation report form. in the course of doing the investigation, we might not find substantial findings or conclusions, because of too many unknowns involved, and i will give you one example.

years back, and i do not remember exactly how many, we had a well -- we had to plug an abandoned well leaking in shallow waters. when the operator moved back on location, he was not able to get down to the debt, so we were not able to find out the exact source of hydrocarbons flow, but the operator commenced operations. we identified all possible flow paths, but we had no recommendations we could go back to the agency with. that report was generated as a 2010 report. moving into panel investigations, depending on the potential severity or complexity of the event, we might elevate those events to what we call a formalized panel report investigation that produces a report to the agency that is available to the public. it outlines the recommendation

that the agency needs to consider to take to prevent the recurrence of that event. what do we do with that information? the agency has several avenues they might pursue. we might issued bay safety alert to the industry. it is in belt out to industry. we look at regulatory reviews on whether we need to revise regulations, beef them up, where change them if they're not really applicable. then, we have training analysis. this is done mainly in our headquarters in herndon, virginia. we might propose workshops, look at additional proposed

rulemaking, or policy changes. when of the last thing the agency has -- one of the last things the agency has is the agency can take actions on those, and follows up with subsequent civil penalties. that is one of the questions that has come out through the course of this investigation and multiple other investigations. why do the investigation reports not recommend issuing violations and civil penalties? the investigation group, the pelting, is somewhat hamstrung, i guess, by the regulation. regulations that govern all work says that our investigations will be fact- finding, with no adverse parties. this decision was made prior to becoming to work for the agency a 11 years ago, and has been passed down from everyone that has been my predecessor.

that term "no adverse parties" was interpreted by the solicitor at that time to mean that the panel investigation team should not be doing an investigation for the sole purpose of finding violations, and issuing those penalties, and those notices to the operator. the main purpose is to find the causes to prevent reoccurrence. now, the agency can take that report, and if the panel discovers violations during the course of that investigation, they can note those during the report, and once the agency has that report in hand, they can take that report, act on it, and issue the violations to the violator. they can then be considered for civil violation. review and inspection changes -- one of the things that was done immediately was that we now

require the operator for their cementing and casing design, to get a certified registered professional engineer to redo that program, or both of those programs, and stamp that they meet good industry standard practices. the second thing we have done is required the inspectors to notify us of when they are attempting stumped tests. we also have the 30-day report that came out. we are in the process of amending the emergency rules based on those recommendations. i believe that is in the process at the moment. i will turn it over to you all. >> thank you, very much. i appreciate the input. what we are going to do now is

i'm going to ask a few questions that perhaps you might want to answer in various aspects. then, i will open it up to the rest of the committee appeared >> before you do that, on one of the last slides david noted that the process we currently have for accessing investigations, and he did not use this word, but i will the disconnect. let me state the ideas. both of those parts of our program, as is the case of many other things, is currently under review, and we anticipate there will be a significant number of revisions to those provisions that we hope will rationalize, and make the program more hard- hitting. >> thank you. david, you talked about the of aing engineers'read you variety of information that is provided to them.

i was wondering if you can comment on who these people are, in other words, what is their background, their experience, their training? secondly, how do they engage in the review process? is it a matter of checking off the submission of certain information, or is there a what type of questions to the typically ask? what type of questions were asked in this particular case? third item -- what review process exists? in other words, how are these individuals overseen, and what type of review of their work is conducted on an ongoing basis? >> i think john is probably better equipped to feel that. do you have a live mike there, or not? >> i do not think so. that is done. >> networks. >> why don't we take them one at a time. >> first question was who are

these individuals, what is their background, experience and training? >> we have a variety of individuals. they can come from the industry reached people what 20-years of industry experience, or you could have people hired straight out of the college. we have varying backgrounds. >> you have a formal training program? >> they have a program that is initiated by the district manager. the district manager is responsible to make sure the person is qualified to review those permits. >> is there any specific criteria you have for various levels that you give to them, that you could provide to the committee, along with any descriptions you have of the training program? that would be helpful to us. >> we have looked at some voluntary programs.

some information was put out a few years back. that is available. >> i think what we will have is a number of follow-ups. you will ask questions we did not have immediate answers for. >> if you could provide that information to the committee, we would appreciate it. secondly, whether they looking for? what is the process of engaging with the request for -- the request in these various circumstances? >> it is kind of gone through a couple of stitches since i have worked there. initially, we had a program where you did some hand, get -- calculations. then, it has evolved into a system that encompasses all of the hand calculations, and calculates various aspects of the program, the most critical

been casing design, and cement levels, and the safety factor, whether it is a 1.0 safety factor or not. there are some calculations buried within the program that calculate the maximum anticipated surface pressure. it is based upon a roughly three different formulas -- a displacement formula, a 70% of the burst of the casing formula, and a gradient formula. >> the industry has access to all of these different formulas? >> the industry uses several formulas, but industry, to be candid, they are more and -- more advanced. their computer programs are more intense than we are currently using in our bureau. they simulate various size cakes, various conditions for the casing -- worst-case scenarios. >> your people do some

calculations that are rough estimates to determine whether or not what is being submitted makes sense to them? >> that is correct. >> they did not make any other interpretations, assessments -- i guess what i'm trying to get at is can you characterize the type of feedback that industry receives on the vast majority of their submissions? are the best majority of submissions either accepted, as is, or is there a set of recommendations and questions that goes back and forth? >> i can only speak to my own individual experience. i work as a drilling engineer for nine years in the second desist district -- business district. new orleans is the busiest. as a maximum, but in my tenure, the maximum regular run was about 50 rigs.

i do not remember ever accepting an apd, as is. i've always felt discrepancies corrected. >> be no particular discrepancies were found in this well, and what requests were made from the drilling engineer to bp? >> i do not know specifically. i was not the drilling engineer. it was not in my district. typically, it would be fed back to them for various questions. >> is there a record made of that? >> there should be. >> can we be provided access to that? >> yes, there is an electronic record every time it is returned. >> last question -- what oversight is provided to the process? in other words, how is the individual drilling engineer

assessed? >> the district manager is responsible to evaluate the drilling engineer. they evaluate every year. they have five different categories. you get feedback from people outside of the district. you get feedback from the civil penalties. >> are there any attempts to use some fraction of the adjudications that are done by a given drilling? >> ultimately, the permanent approval which it the responsibility lies with a district manager. he allocates that responsibility to the drilling engineer, if the drilling engineer is qualified to make those approvals. if he deems the drilling engineer is not qualified, the system has something that says "ready for approval, and the drilling engineer or just put it in that mode, to deliver parts that document >> i want to try

to deliver a more simple question. the drilling engineer is working on a day-by-day basis. what oversight does that individual point of supervisors have? >> the drilling engineer, if he looks at a permit, and does not understand something, he would take it to the district manager, who should have more experience than him in this area, for his opinion. >> but me ask a question to a different way. as a part of the oversight and review process over a particular engineer, is it part of the normal process for the supervisor to read you a certain percentage of the drilling applications that a particular drilling engineer has we do? is that your question? >> you might spot check the drilling engineer on some of the

applications, but more likely you have set some sort of agreement with the drilling engineer. if you have a high-pressure, high-temperature well that comes in, before you approve it, bring it to me, and let me review it. no well is a risk free, but fairly simple wells that are 10,000 feet, you might have that approved. something outside of that norm that might be extremely deep, extremely high-pressured, he should bring that. >> are their standards? >> written standards? i am not aware of any. >> you talk about some of the inspection activities. these obviously occur on and infrequent basis. how'd you verify that the

drilling operations were, in fact, consistent? >> we have several methods. you have the inspector who goes off shore, and physically inspect the facility. >> that, as i gather from the schedules of inspections, is fairly infrequent. >> you have a goal of doing it monthly. >> i understand, but you are there for a short time. for the rest of the time during which drilling operations are being conducted, activities occur. there has been a submission of the information that says it will be conducted in a certain matter. is there any review process to determine whether or not the companies involved in the drilling activities abided by the information? >> we also have electronics of metal, that is included in the system. it is called the weekly activity

report. it is a summary of the activities on the raid for the entire day, the entire week, and it is submitted for the entire agency. it is reviewed and compared to the permit. it is an office review. >> i assume those records are available for this particular >> yes, sir. >> do you know if any comments or deviations were found by the drilling engineer? >> i am not aware of any deviations. normally, if you find a deviation, you would issue. >> you are not aware of any? >> could that be verified? >> sure. just for clarification, inc is a incident of noncompliance. >> we would just like to know

what the process was, how often the data was reviewed, and whether or not any deviations were found through that process. >> as you know, doctor, there are very, very small numbers of inspectors. many people have identified that as a critical and glaring inadequacy that we agree with pat help is on the way. we will have quite a few more inspectors before long. >> just one further clarification, we had an independent inspector review the daily reports. he did not find any violations. >> i am as interested in the process that was employed to check this frequency, -- frequency of that process, as i am with any deviations or lack of deviations that were noted. if i could go on with one other question on the safety factors

that you talked about in the case in design -- how do you factor in the potential consequences of a failure in terms of establishing the safety margin, or do you use a common safety margin on all wells? >> as far as casing design? >> we will start off with kissing design, and then move on to other aspects but >> -- casing design, and then move onto other aspects. let me give you some background. the methodology that i am familiar with looks at risk from two perspectives, the probability of occurrence, and the consequences of occurrence. depending on the potential consequences of occurrence, when typically sets criteria for the probability of occurrence, that

is, if that were be -- would be appropriate for that consequence. i am try to understand, as you go to the safety factor and determination, how you figured in the potential consequences of failure? >> i do not think we address it exactly that way. we do a mechanical calculation, a rough calculation of the safety factors and of the maximum anticipated surface pressure, using three different methods. we use the lesser of those methods as far as risk- analysis, we read the entire apd, but not specific to casing designed to >> who do hold responsible for safety -- system safety in that regard? in terms of safety of the entire process? >> we all the rest operator

responsible. >> you all the operator? >> in this case, it would be dp. -- bp. there ultimately the person we hold responsible for all of the activities of the lease. >> de -- de u.s. and to provide a safety case for you? >> no. >> so, safety determination is accomplished how? >> we have looked at the safety case is used in british permitting. we're not decided to go that route. >> that is under consideration right now.

>> absent that, how do you determine the adequacy of the safety program you were given? >> how do you determine -- i am not sure i understand your question. how you determine the adequacy of safety program with respect to -- >> with respect to the implementation of the well. >> what i am trying to get to is the standards and practices. >> times are. >> from a drilling standpoint, you never can be safe enough. to get the rest 20 is almost impossible. -- to zero is almost impossible. >> we did not have a formula. we look at it from a regulatory

compliance standpoint. >> let me try to ask a question in a different way. you talked earlier about best available and safest technology. now a given technology, that is the best available, or the safest available, how you determine the accuracy of that technology? how the determine whether or not that technology, that approach is suitable for a given well, given the uncertainties associated with the various wall parameters, the on known strata, the pressure, temperatures, etc.. >> if you have new technology you're proposing for awhile? >> you tell me. what i'm trying to understand is you talk about trying to ensure that the best available, safest

technology was used. i am asking what are the limits that you believed exist for where that technology is adequate? our best available technology, in the way of communicating might have gotten off message where we look at our best available technology is on new equipment that would be replacing existing pieces of equipment. the industry would have to prove to was that the new piece of equipment could do the job as safe as the old piece of equipment. >> i am looking at from a different approach. if somebody comes in and asks to drill a well, and say i'm going to make this twice as deep as anyone that has been drilled in that region, how you determine the adequacy of the technology they propose to use?

>> if you have an extremely deep, high-temperature, high- pressure well, you have critical factors to evaluate. the first is the rubber element, and the tools that go into that well only been good for a certain temperature. you can talk to the experts at halliburton. >> i intend to understand how you would look at it as a regulator. >> that is how we do it -- find out what the existing rubber element is good too. it is around 400-degree range, if the new well is still a need to temperatures that are 550 degrees, we will need the operator to explain how they are going to control this well with that particular temperature. they have to explain to us what is the technology you are going to employ that is going to be able to control that temperature. >> how often does that occur?

rally, but it does. we -- >> rally -- rarely, but it does. as you are drilling, they have reached a much cooler to actually cool the mud down, so the exposure to the employee on the right floor is all the lower temperature. i'll give you one example. >> i think one of the things you have within the regional office, in the gulf of mexico, and here, we have the technical assessment and operations support group. their main focus is to stay on top of that leading-edge, new technology to make sure that it will still maintain a safe, and environmentally sensitive compliance operation. that is a group that is in what

-- within field operation in the gulf of mexico, and they are also a branch of our headquarters. their sole purpose is to stay on top of the leading-edge, new technology, and do an evaluation so that family -- when we get the apd com's, right out of the gate, it sends up a flag that everyone in that assessment groups starts to find out what they know about it, and what they need to find out. >> i worked in the technical assessment group for one year. 10 distended meetings did they keep up with the standard technology -- i in its -- i attended meetings.

>> to go back to the questions, when you do the assessments of this technology, for example, of the casing, do you take into account the location of the well? the take into account the consequences of the potential problems you might have? how safe is safe enough? you take that into the account? >> we have certain areas where you had wreaths in the gulf of mexico. you have certain restrictions. the location is important, as well as the equipment, in evaluating the risk. you have a higher standard if you are in an environmentally- sensitive area. >> let me switch topics just briefly here for a moment. we spoke several times about the

offshore inspection program. it would seem we are going to be hearing from both the flag state, and the coast guard later in this discussion, but it inspection program, between what you do, where you are responsible for, what the flag state is responsible for, and/or, their agents, and what the coast guard does. what is your view of how you manage those scenes, recognizing that seems are often points of a bomb ability? >> that is one of our key finding so far. when a drilling engineer looks at the fit-for-purpose of the upgrade or drilling unit that the operator has proposed to use, the inspector or the drilling engineer is looking for

that certificate, whether it is a coast guard is expected, or a flag state certificate. -- whether it is a coastguard certificate, or a flagstick certificate. there is a misunderstanding of what that certificate means. we surveyed our engineers, and asked them what it means to them when they see it appeared they were under the assumption that the certificate covers the full aspect of the vessel, from the stability, the conditions, the drilling unit -- la whole 9 yards. what we have discovered is dead that certificate does not always cover the drilling package on that mobile offshore drilling unit. that is an election by the drilling contractor, and the operator, depending on who is handling the coverage for that to detective -- for that

certificate, that does not always cover the drilling package. that is an elected option. >> just to follow up on that, what does the certificates stand for? >> well, it has different meanings. one of the things we learned is that they have different insignia's that they put on the certificate. each one of those different stamps has a different meeting, and unbeknown to our drilling engineers, there is a certain stamp for the drilling package certification, and there is a misunderstanding that we have. what does the certificate mean? they aren't supporting the certificate to mean that the drilling pact reached -- package has been the debt, and fit for the service it was intended to perform appeared >> i take it there was no formal process for

sitting down with the various parties, and try to reconcile? >> no, not until this event that this has come to light appeared >> there was no training program to inform your drilling engineers of what the flag state, classification societies, and coast guard is, or is not inspected for. >> corrected this was an issue that came to life only as a result of this incident. >> can you comment briefly, and i really emphasized briefly, because this could go into a multi-hour conversation, on the process you use to review the standards that you impose on the well and the drilling equipment -- what is the extent , and

compare with other organizations in the u.k., norway, brazil -- other areas of oil drilling. >> i will defer to john, the telling expert. >> i know that management has made several trips overseas, and reviewed standards from norway, which speaks a lot about barriers. i like that aspect of regulations. the british speak a lot about the risk case, which i am not quite as satisfied with. management has reviewed that. it is not me, personally. people hired than me, what aspects of renewing our regulations, look at standards, attend conferences on is normallyso, api

the technical assessment group, were the talk about reviving standards. i have actually worked on this cementing standards, which is a very small part of that. we do get actively involved any time possible, and we do have limited manpower. i will put that in there, with standard committee's, anytime they want to rewrite a standard. we do from the support them. -- we do certainly support them. -- we do firmly support them. we have a joint interest project, that actually funds part of the research into the new standards. >> let me provide the overlay

of 52 days of experience. i think there is the perception and reality that we have been heavily reliant on the domestic oil and gas industry in setting standards. that has been the history, whether it has been from a lack of resources, or a lack of available models, where a lack of energy in pursuing those alternative models -- i do not know. we will pursue alternatives i'm uncomfortable with the extent that there has been reliance historically. i think it has been the default because of the shortage of resources in the agency. we will be exploring borrowing from alternative models, and process and standards. >> did you normally except standards as is? >> no. we might adopt certain portions of the standard, and i will give you an example.

fire prevention -- at the moment, we have only adopted the section regarding the fire pump itself. we did not look at the whole document, or recognize the whole document. we only pull out those sections that we deem appropriate, and do not contradict our own standards and our own belief as to what is the best. >> to be clear, and david is up of a right. -- is absolutely right. not all standards are incorporated. those that are, are incorporated as is. it might not be part of the regulatory acquirement, but it is enacted by api. there is no internal modification of that standard. what type of wells, in terms

of developmental, pressure temperature, etc. would you accept, or not accept certain standards? >> i am afraid i will let the gentleman to question. we have a different part of the organization -- regulations and standards, that i believed would be able to get quicker and more complete answers. this is not what they do on a day-to-day basis. >> perhaps, in opening the conversation of two other members of the committee will. >> i would encourage david and john rather than struggling to enter some of the questions that might be beyond the realm of their expertise, to just point as to who can provide the best dancers. >> -- point us to who can provide the best answers. >> i have a question regarding your accident an investigation

procedure. this is related only -- only to oil and gas operations. specifically, what are the actions you mentioned in your chart as trend analysis? can you share what type of event or series of events might indicate a trend analysis, and talk a little bit more about the procedures used for those. >> one of the examples we talked about was the reporting of crane operation event. the new incident reporting rule requiring that was the result of a trend analysis of the data been reported to mms over the past 10 years or so. we were seeing a lot of a crane accident, so we started thinking that we need to capture this information, and categorize it so that we can further look at

it to see if it is the equipment. it is equipment contact? is it equipment-to-human contact? is it an operating error? is it from fixed facility to bustle transfer? -- vessel transfer? that is one of the trend analysis that we have looked at that resulted in the rule change. we're trying to expand that. we included the other lifting. there are a lot of events where drilling operations work on fixed facilities, where you might text -- might have erred by status causing contact with personnel -- air device causing contact with personnel. we changed the rule.

this is just one example of trendy and analysis that we have done that has resulted in a rule change. most of that is done at our headquarters. it is not done in the region. they take the data from all of the regions. they look at the data, and start analyzing it. >> have you done trending analysis on prior gas analysis? >> could you print -- could you repeat that? >> you mentioned in your new incident reporting rule? events were considered. did you include those in your trendiness analysis? -- trending analysis?

>> we have done extensive work prior to the rule on shallow guess event. we have a web page, located off far gulf of mexico web page, where that group did extensive analysis, we have identified those areas of shallow gas transfers paid one of the things we have looked at regarding that is where operators are going back into these mature fields, and drilling new wells to deeper depths. in the past history, they might not have encountered a shallow gas hazard, but now that they are into a mature field, you might have had a previously under-pressure, or no-pressure zone that the operator runs into off of the existing locations. we got extensive data posted on the web as a result of that. >> just a really quick question

-- you said that these active investigations only happen for drilling-related accidents per >> drilling and production -- all activity of the gulf of mexico appeared >> of any accidents that would be excluded? imagine somebody hurting their back appeared >> from an investigation standpoint, -- back. from the investigation standpoint, we might not have an investigation of someone who pulled a muscle. he is required to be reported. just because it is reported, it does not mean it will result in an investigation. you have to understand the attempt with a new incident reporting rule was that we saw the new need to capture additional confirmation. . .

fyb. >> i have two questions, oe about information and one of that individual. you pointed out the report did not show anything unusual, and yet over a period of days and weeks, a number of events were occurring on the rig that

ultimately resulted in the accident. i was wondering whether or not you have access to the information that is available during his time process that might have alerted someone that there was a potential for the accident? >> the real-time access is available to the operator. they pay for that service. they were providing the service time it is not provided directly to our agency. with all information, you have to man it was someone confident enough to evaluate the risk. you'll have to manage with an experienced person, not a clerical person who cannot evaluate what is going on on the

rig. just for clarification, without getting into the investigation in detail, my interpretation of the incident probably was more significant than the last 24 hours of operations is where they had some anomalies that were caught. our current reporting is on a weekly basis. >> we can come back to all of that. when you were reviewing a plan, there is an operational procedure you are reviewing, the equipment to be used that you review, but you considered the qualifications of the individuals that will carry it out their plan and the ability to react to what is happening bill time when unusual events start to occur? is there any kind of certification process where people making critical -- gues>> we do a value which are

their qualifications, and may be it is not on an instantaneous basis, but when we inspect or we get whistle- blowers who colin with the discrepancy, we can have an audit performed on the rig. >> that is why i wanted to double check with you on your question. are you looking at the personnel on the rig, is that we're question is going with respect to qualifications? >> yes. >> typically what is required in the gulf of mexico is under the new training road requires operator to identify the personnel that have personnel responsibilities and identify the type of treatment operator

or person is required to receive. under that rule, operator will designate the company personnel that have those well control responsibilities. with respect to the contractor, operator may, if he chooses, to dictate to the contractor certain levels of training. what rule requires is that the operator evaluate and insure the operator is comfortable with the level of training and expertise that the contractor is providing to the operator. now, having said that, most operators and contractors are sticking to the old standard for well control, which is typically a 40 hour training program for your on-site company's supervisors for both subsea and service will equipment.

an aide our level introductory for york floor hands. -- for your floor hands. >> [inaudible] is there a requirement for a safety factor for collapse? >> yes. 1.0. safety factor. >> 1.0? >> yes. >> is there any specification on the use of collapsed discussed and where they go? >> first, they are fairly news o the industry. you have the expansion of the temperature across the casing, which could lead to a collapse in the deep wells with all the different casing strings.

i would say it is on the case by case basis at this time. there is nothing in the regulations requires the specific review, but you to look at on our general risk evaluation of the unheara.p.d. in other words it should be a bottle, because you have it this, that is the whole point. it has relieved, and it does not and could collapse internally. you'll need a little bottle to relieve the pressure. that is where this comes in. there is no specific regulations for that, but it is part of your risk evaluation for the general

a.p. d. deregulation minimum is 500 feet of cement over the zone. 500 feet over the issue, if it is intermediate casing stream. >> is this specification as to ceme=1um h.s,p&c+ >> no, there is no specification. ñ&&rand they would submit thatn the written part of the permits. >> what is the requirement for proof of the 500 feet? >> as far as what did they have to do in the logs? it is just a displacement program. if you know you will get a certain volume at a certain depth, if you lose returns and that brings the placement into question. then there are requirements in the regulation, for different requirements that you need to

performed to verify whether that siemens has been placed correctly. >> ok. on the emergency disconnect -- do you know how about that was supposed to work on transocean? >> you hit the emergency disconnect and it generates a sequence that goes through a computer that simply says it will close a blind share ram and then disconnect l.m.r.p. that sequence is within the contractor and operator to decide. >> this is an ocean floor blowout preventer disconnect? >> yes, in this. >> is a possible to disconnect the riser at the surface? >> we have not seen any like that.

to coat the signals to the blowout preventer are all the electric? >> yes. -- >> the signals to the plot revenge are are all the electric? >> yes. you have a hydraulic, that goes to this. >> it just supplies power. >> what happened to the communications to the device if you had an explosion at the surface? >> if you had an explosion that crippled the table that would send a signal down there and you are hitting the button, then something would happen. >> thank you. >> i would like to understand a little bit more detail the process to go through as you are getting into the design and the application of the permitting states. for example, i think you said the cnet blogs -- cement log would be described to a standard

you approval. is that right? if he did not show, what you considered accuracy in determining how well the cement was put in, you would use that as a basis to return application? to go if it is not placed according -- >> it is not place according to the pump strokes, the regulation states what you have to do. it would not be in a permit normally. it has to follow regulation, so you would be ready it twice in effect. >> it did not how reticulate which way it was going to go? >> no. >> if he made an on-the-spot decisions, then he doesn't have to be notifying the agency? >> it would be to his a vintage to keep us informed -- it would

be to his advantage to keep us informed. >> if the plan was to run along and i elected not to run along, and i am the guy making the decision on the rig -- what i make that notification to you the day i make the decision so when i do now run blogged you are aware of it? >> i do not think so, because if you could back that up, you would have no reason to notify us you not run the lagog. you are going to run at 21 centralizes vs six. it is not that specific. you will run it using standards in the industry, and did you violate standards, obviously you are not following the

regulations fo in a sense. you are violating the standard set the industry goes by. >> and not necessarily a standard in the d.o.e.m. but a industry standard? >> why don't we get back to you on that. what i was really after is the level of detail you get into. >> we do not get into that level of detail. if they include it, we will look at it, but it is not required to be submitted to us as part of the package. >> if someone called you and said i have 21 centralizes plan but i will only run sex, you will not approve it.

it is not our requirement, but it would be a standard you will not approve that. >> i appreciate that. would you agree that there will be a calculation of what will happen to prevent the blowout, there is the dai a degree of uncertainty? >> yes. >> how is it a safety factor of 1.0 sufficient to handle the city's bandits? >> i did not set the safety standard, but in industry more regulation iy recollection is w. we use safety factors of 1.25, 1.5, so it is not a lot of difference, but i was a little

surprised. >> the authorities by which technical standa maintained and communicated exercised by drilling engineers flowed in said the agency? is there a letter that says you have these responsibilities? or is that a black voice that kind of delegation? how would i know when i am entitled to make decisions in deviations and all of that? picco you're talking about -- >> you are talking about the training of new drilling engineers? >> the first part, let's talk about the responsibilities. from a and drilling engineer standpoint, if you are familiar

with the scale, g.s. 13 is a full performance engineer in the district level. to be this, she is acting with a minimum oversight from the district manager. by default, if you have a g.s. 12 or 11 you will have more oversight. a level of responsibility is dictated by the district manager, because he is the one performing the evaluations of the engineered to determine whether or not he is eligible to a promotion to the people performing 13 level. how is the communications conveyed among the district's? within the region, and an economic speech critical of mexico region -- and i can only speak for the gulf of mexico

region, there are teams made up opoor drilling engineers. it consists of all the drilling engineers from the districts, and they get together and review, it discuss, and try to resolve problems that they see from the collective standpoint. typically there is a sponsor for that group, and that sponsor is usually one of the district managers, one of the five district manager sponsors. so that he champions any of the recommendations that come out of the group as a result of any discussions that they're having and problems that they're trying to resolve. he champions that route. he brings to recommendations forward to get those implemented as policy implementation or to get them implemented if they are proposed regulatory changes. we have that happening on the

drilling and engineering side. the work side, as well as the production engineers. >> the last question is how do you define the productivity of a drilling engineer? is applications processed per week? >> i do not think it is applications processed per week. wells safely? are you giving waivers that later resulted in some sort of unsafe acts occurring? it is not the time vs. no. piece that you process. what you're looking for is the experience level of the individual. forward to you consideration on wells? does he know his level of that he is able to approve something and when he should bring it forward to you for further

approval? >> are there any metrics that are established to track the performance? is it just a matter of the individual supervisor or is there a set of metrics that are maintained for a given individual that is part of their record? >> i would say there is no metrics. >> could you tell me is there are record kept of how many incidents that have occurred on wells that the drilling engineer was responsible for? performance over time of its individual drilling engineers? >> can i elaborate on that a little bit?

>> please. >> no is the answer. the drilling engineers need as a team and one of the things we try to resolve is consistency. that is the biggest problem we have is we have five different districts that control the gulf of mexico and five different individuals who have varying qualification levels and mayone navy an expert in one area and another in another area. the way they interpret the rules may be slightly different. what we work on mostly is consistency between the groups in to try to help people recognize their limitations and to ask for advice form -- from other engineers who have expertise in a certain area. you may not only be going to your district manager, you may go to appear with questions about a specific high temperature, high pressure, someone who is more his

experience in high pressure, high temperature wells. we are not isolated from each other with electronic gauge. new orleans district. if someone in the district had a problem, he wanted the drilling engineer in my district to look at, he just has to call. the a.p.d. he is not sure about. i want to do to be aware there is some cross blow across -- cross flow across engineers. >> as you are aware, a key safety tests it is theñrñi intey of the cement between the formation and the casing and the so-called negative pressure tasks.

to the extent that each operator $ inhave a different processb a very importantñr test, there n be gross confusion, and is there any way of coming up with a standard test for negative pressure test? >> we have made some recommendations to the headquarters and to the department of interior based on some of our initial findings, and one of those is a standardized-test procedure -- negative test procedures and

>> you are doing a test on the uñrig. it is to the operators and contractors advantage to do the test on the rig, because if you find a ball that is leaking, it is already there right in front of you and you can fix it. if you wait and cut it on the seafloor and performed the test and the ball is leaking, it will

cost you 2 million to $3 million to replace the ball. it is to the advantage of operator in the contractor to do an extensive tests on the stump, which would mean on the surface where it is visible and you can make the repair so that when you get on the sea floor, which takes time and money to get there, everything passes the official test. >> then you do not have the effect of the high-pressure, so you have a different condition in terms of whether or not you have any good indication that the ramps would do the job. >> that is correct. you do impose internal pressure. s external pressure is not there. conditions are slightly different. that is why you test again when you make the connection on the sea floor before you start

drilling. >> [inaudible] in the slide before do concluded, you said you have included professional engineers. we have to [inaudible] how far do you think we should go back with independent experts? al affected is this, and how many complaints did you get to? should we have experts a valuating -- we are asking for

your help here to tell us what you think might or might not work. you might want to answer it now. you might want to take it later, but that is one of the questions i have a. >> that discussion is ongoing, and i do not know if mr. brown which wants to discuss it, but it is an ongoing discussion in that there are multiple opinions on how far you go back with that. -- that discussion is ongoing, and i do not know if mr. bromw hich wants to discuss it, but it is an ongoing discussion in that there are multiple opinions on how far you go back with that. >> my impression is that it is a robust process. there are lots of comments

provided, but whether they focus on some of the issues we're talking about today, i have not heard that, and i would be surprised if that happened extensively. >> i have two more questions. to you have an internal audit process? -- do you have an internal of that process? we have an audit process. the randomly selected people that handle money and turn my place upside down. do you have a similar audit process for the decisions you are making? >> there is an internal audit process. there obviously is an inspector general within the department of interior that performs audits on subjects and topics that they select, notk. only within our

agency, but within the entire department of the interior. whether there is a specific internal audit program related to these decisions, which is what i heard in the last part of your question, i am not aware of that. are you? >> we have what we call an alternative management control review or alternative -- i am trying to think of the name. it is an internal program review with the group is hand selected from washington, from the main interior building and headquarters and a select individuals to participate that come in and look at all of the programs, meaning different groups look at all of the individual programs, not one group looking at all of them collectively. they have a group that comes in

and books, for example, at the accident investigation program. they have a group that comes in and looks at the leasing program. to be specific, i am not sure we have a group that looks at the drilling engineering aspect of it. i am not sure of that, but we do have within the region a dedicated person that goes and tries to ensure consistency among the districts from an inspection standpoint to make sure the new orleans district is inspecting consistently all plathe way across the gulf to include the jackson district. and >> i am looking for ways of strengthening this. >> to repeat what i said, we have created and are now staffing investigations in the review unit at headquarters, and part of what they are likely to do is look at specific important

issues like that that i believe have not been looked at officially in the past. take, last question. we talk quite a big -- >> my last question, we talked quite upset about the safety factor. [inaudible] but can you help us region where should we look on how to improve the method quet? >> david and john are focusing on the investigation. they would be able to provide you insight on that. >> i am asking if you can tell us where else to look? >> i think you are looking in a broad-gauged way at a range of

issues, and i think what you are doing as well as the other investigations are doing are going to be helpful. you have a level of technical expertise around this table that we do not have, so the recent the secretary ask you to do this is because he thinks you have the ability to ask the right questions, and we have seen some of that today and provide us with information that will not only help us to revise and modify what we do, but also how we do it. we're going to think about whether we can provide you with further guidance, but we're looking for guidance from you. >> i like to -- my question is a combination of what the professor was getting at and professor winter. you guys have been remarkably non-offensive. it is clear you thinking deeply about the problem in the agency.

my question is really this. you guys have obviously done a lot of thinking. in six weeks we have cranked out report. the first is what happened in seconds how we can do better in the future. my academic friends are going to think about how we can better the picture. i am going to get involved in what happens here apart of its. you have done a lot of thinking about this. there was also -- some of us want to the coast guard hearings. there was real time interaction with the minerals management service about last-minute decisions. i am sure, given the level of candor and introspection, you guys have got a lot about if we could have the phone calls back again, what might we have done different? how much of the benefits of that -- i want something more

specific. i can tell from your background, i know exactly what you're doing, and that is investigating what happened here and how much of the benefits of that can we get? >> we would like to share as much as we can. obviously the investigation is still in midstream. there are least two sets of hearings that are sold to take place. -- that are still to take place. we're happy to sit down with you at your convenience to really provide you with a walk through of where we are at this point and what they have learned. and i think as david mentioned to you both for, they have already distilled from what we have collected so far. a set of recommendations that they provided to me a couple of weeks ago and that we are in the

process of examining, but i think what you want is barack, factual material -- is the raw, factual material, and we are happy to do that. >> that is the real part i of the interested in. not only the facts, but i would benefit from your insight about what that said with the benefits of hindsight now. on monday morning everyone is a better quarterback. and your installation and not just the facts, but your insight into what communications you have with saithat rig. some people have referred to it as the wealth froell from hell.

your agency was making some real time approvals, like in the change in the last mintminute cementing process. someone could make an approval that obviously, they did not have time to run a computer program and probably did not run a computer program. i do not know how many calculations they did, but obviously how the process work internally in the distillation of what could have been done better in does not rise to our recommendation to be very valuable. >> that would be great. we could provide you with a detailed general briefing were you and your colleagues could consider this. >> this will be the last. thank you very much. it is almost lunch. with regard for this, i want to

thank you for your presentation. i saw the excellent meeting that you and your co-chaired from the coast guard, and i really learned a lot from the session. as you know, one of the charges and the task of the committee is to prevent similar accidents in the future. in the context of looking into the future, i'd like to ask you a couple of questions. in your presentation you referred to an attempt to align with existing ocea practices. i know that mms tried to promulgate a neutral on safety and management system, which is an excellent piece. i am very sorry to see that did not go into effect. in fact, i looked at the

registrar and based on the group cause analysis you did in last year of june 2009, it was the root cause of most 80 environmental accidents was one or more of the elements. here is my question, and then maybe a little confused. this is a mobile offshore platform. what is moving in the ocean is under jurisdiction of the coastguard. when it starts drilling it goes under york jurisdiction at mms. -- when it starts drilling, it goes under your jurisdiction at mms. you try to promulgate safety

environmental management system, however, it went through the regular rulemaking process and they wrote letters and said we need to stick to the recommended practice. hear exactly is my question. i see, unfortunately, history repeating itself. i want to take you back to 1989. prior to the safety management, at that time we have the practice and chemical manufacturers that come into practice. that is white osha came. here is my question in my request, -- and my request, how

could [inaudible] . no violations are discovered. then add your steerin at your hr about and handed it alarms. don't you think this is the time again that you need to resurrect that environmental management regulations? >> the good news is it is being resurrected. >> excellent. there are other good practices. you are only addressing four out of 12 practices.

why is that a good thing for offshore facilities? >> i think you raise a very good question. and i have already had meetings with the head of osha and we are exploring ways to learn from what they do and push forward the standards we use. >> there is another standard i with to bring to your attention. and [inaudible] there are beautiful standards that are being used in the united kingdom about standards for human factors. why did i not see any of that in the proposed rule making in 2009, and if you want to

resurrect the measure to include that also? that is the standard that is being used all over the world. the u.s. navy uses that also. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it. >> i want to thank you very much for coming here this morning. i would like to bring a little bit more information out regarding the four vs the 12. understanding that accidents that we have reviewed, the study was done from 1995 to 2000 and 2000 to 2005, and looking at colossal factors that both amounted to the key areas, and the reason it was proposed to only require those is an operator cannot implement those four sections in and of itself

by itself as a stand-alone unit. operator will have to implement those other elements to be able to achieve the goal of the a womensweaelements we were requi. that is one reason option was thrown out there as looking aftet tehe four vs the 12. >> thank you for the clarification. unfortunately, the problem with that is if you tried to a cherry pick from that, that affect the integrity of the whole system. my humble request to my friends at mms is try to --

try to go beyond that. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you very much for coming here this morning. there were a number of actions that were accepted, i believe. try to make sure we have a list of items to the extent that you can help us in a timely way it will be greatly appreciated. >> absolutely. >> also there are few items that we did not get to. i will build them here right now.

perhaps we can figure out one way of working that out at a later point in time. we talk about the regulatory environment. there are seems associated with the contract arrangements and the contractors they employ. we would like to have your perception of how that works and what you look for in that structure and delegation of responsibilities as you go through that safety management chain. there were also a number of issues that have been raised at the previous board of inquiry meetings relative to the same and responsibility that occurs at the time of crisis, in particular emergency disconnect and your views of how that has worked between the o.i.m. and

to the structure. that is an unfortunate situation where one is changing command in the middle of a crisis. lastly, we talked a little bit about response plans that are prepared, and you noted some aspects of the response plans, including the requirement for relief wells, preparation for that and clean-up provisions. i would like to understand what thought you have given to public mechanisms of regaining well control. other than just a relief well. there are obviously a number of steps and process theses that we mentioned before we got one that worked. i would like to understand your thoughts on that to the extent

it has been previously looked at, steadied, it said rep. that would be very helpful. >> to add to that and i think you are a referring to the proposal by the major. we as a presentation on mobile, alabama, on tuesday from bp on spoken tame it. i specifically asked them to provide a detailed report by september 1 on their spill containment and their spill response activities with respect to this incident. that is very detailed accounting, which highlights the bill years as well as six assesses -- which highlights the still yeafailures as well as su. >> the whole question of what should be included of the

response plan. >> exactly. to the plans in terms of the ability to actually implement. any thoughts there would be appreciated. again, i want to thank you very much. >> we look forward to working with you in the future. >> i want to extend the invitation that you walall are welcome to sit down with the investigation team. and we have an operations room that we had commandeered in their regions office. we have all of our layouts and decision making -- >> i appreciate the offer. operating under rules that are specific to committees -- we operate under rules set a specific to committes of

the national committee. one of the issues we will have to deal with here is how do we take advantage of your generous offer, but still comply with our requirements imposed on us relative to public hearings. we will reconvene at 1:30. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

"book tv" continues tonight with the focus on campaign and elections. senate historian, donald richie. and kenneth ackerman on the campaign and subsequent assassination of america's 21st president, james garfield. book to be in prime time all this week on c-spa 2. -- "book tv" in prime-time all this week on c-span2. >> nixon was flattered, but declined. telling the owners, and do not tell pat, she would kill me for turning you down.

>> find all of cspan's american history tv online anytime at the c-span video library. it is washington your way. watch what you want, when you want. >> throughout the week, "washington journal" is looking at the financial crisis. 8btomorrow a look at how consumers have been affected. that is tomorrow at 9:15 a.m. eastern time. a funeral service for ted stevens will be held tomorrow in anchorage, alaska. he died last week in a plane crash on the way to a fishing trip. we will have live coverage of the funeral service. that starts at 6:00 eastern here on c-span. former u.s. ambassador to iraq

briefs reporters on the political situation in iraq. embassador hill has been there for 16 months. he previously served as the top u.s. diplomat in the sixth party talks with north korea. this is about 40 minutes. >> a man up next is a man who needs no introduction. christopher hill. >> i went into extra time, but it is a pleasure to be here. i left iraq of today's ago. it is quite a time of transition at the embassy.

we have a whole new cast of characters coming in, and i think anyone who deals with iraq is very much aware that the problems in the country are severe, but the potential is very great, and i think those of us that are there do our best to make things better for our successors, and i hope i have done that for embassador jim jeffries, who i understand theives tonight. jim and i have talked on many occasions about the transition there. -- and i hope i have done that for ambassador jim jeffries, who i understand leaves tonight. it has not been easy to put the government together. we have tried to be very helpful and will continue to be helpful,

because iraq does need a government. in the meantime, we work very hard with our military colleagues to make this year a year of transition from military-led operations to civilian-led operations. çóthere have been numerous security challenges that continue to exist. i am sure you all saw the horrific news this morning at the suicide bombing in front of a military installation where people were killed. several -- i have often said it oftet offers no instant gratification, but i do believe there is real progress there. as we speak, major oil companies are beginning to put drill bits in the ground.

iraq, i think, will emerge as one of the major oil producers of the world. i think that part of the picture is really coming into focus, and i think the iraqis are really making some progress. having done what i could do with my team, in terms of making it better with where i left it, and i know that jim jeffreys approaches it with great enthusiasm and a good team, and i certainly wish them the best. >> [inaudible] i wanted to ask you about al qaeda. they are described as being back on their heels. what is your view on what is to stop them from redounding once u.s. forces are gone at the end of next year? >> are now around 65,000 troops

going down to 50,000 at the end of august. the key issue is not the overall number of forces, but what the mission has been. indeed, on june 30, 2009, that turned out to be very important, because that was the date u.s. forces were out of the city and towns and into politicmunicipal. d.r. rocky -- the iraqi forces were challenged. i think they did a very good job of continuing to ensure a reduction in the level of violence. i think it will take awhile, to some extent it is a function of

developing the institutions in the country. to some extent it is developing the kind of political consensus necessary to deal with security issues, while at the same time preserving the human rights gains of the country has made. it is going to take some time. the question you posed is what is the role of u.s. troops? i think it is now appropriately shifted from combat operations to advise and assist role to helping the forces. i think they are doing that. i think they will continue to do that. i am confident that can predict at what can be done will be done in terms with dealing with the insurgents. -- i am confident that what can be done will be done in terms of dealing with the insurgents. >> are they still connected to al qaeda central? >> they have had great difficulty communicating

outside of the country. we know this from various means. they have funding problems that have cropped up. i know you have heard many people say that somehow they are on brunn, and i do not want to get into that, but i can tell you what can be done against them is being done against them. it's a problem getting worse? no, i think it is actually getting better and it is a testament to a couple of things. one of what our forces have done end to, what the are rocky -- and two, with the iraqi forces had done. a lot has been done. what is frustrating to all of us is to wake up in the morning and hearing about a bomb blast killing innocent people.

everyone wants to know when this will end? i think that is difficult to predict. >> how is the political support for al qaeda as compared to a couple of years ago? -- how is the local support for al qaeda compared to a couple of years ago? >> there is no local support. we monitor this very closely. we do not see any upgrade in support for insurgents. when we look at the participation in elections, voting patterns, it has been tremendous. unlike in the past, they were able to take over entire buildings. i do not think there is much support. on the contrary, there is a

revolution. i think it's important to stress the need to build institutions, it is precisely to have any reverse and the pattern. >> [inaudible] >> i have to tell you, i got there in april of 2009, and everyone talked about the oil wallaw, and i saw a virtual stalemate in the council of representatives, and i supported the approach of just going