there is a lot of immediately effective provisions such as there is a tax on an excise tax on tanning salons, which was implemented and right now we are doing outreach to them. there are 25,000 was never had an excise tax so we are doing outreach education and then we will have a compliance program. there's a credit for small businesses to help them fight insurance or i mean help them buy insurance for their employees. there is a tax on branded pharmaceuticals which right now we have sent out the initial bill to the branded pharmaceutical companies for that. they are verifying the data based on government purchases so there is that kind of work. that is a small amount of work so between now and 2014 there will be immediately implemented tax provisions in the work that has to happen there. but the big list is building the tech allergy infrastructure to be ready to interface with the state exchanges and the insurance companies around the

$40 billion of refundable credits. >> and that was required in 2014? >> yeah. the open enrollment will happen sometime in 2013 and if you scope a systems built you basically need to lock down requirement. then do your bill and then do your testing so there is a huge list in 2012 around requirements and bills because by 2013 you should be testing the system's. >> mr. chairman i think perhaps my last question is related to the national taxpayer advocate's testimony. she raised a couple of issues for me, talking about really customer service, taxpayer service. for irs fy210 management discussion and analysis including gao's auditing the irs

collection relate to enforcement activities totaled 56.7 billion a 34% increase over 2004. by contrast out of the iris answered 74% of all calls from taxpayers seeking to speak with the telephone assistant in 10 as compared to 87% in 04. so a decline of 13%, 13 percentage points or 13% so less access to the live person on the phone is the point that is being made here and then also this sentence that the backlog of taxpayer correspondence and the tax adjustment amatory is has jumped by 26%, representive uncontrolled correspondence, not exactly sure what uncontrolled means that not yet entered into the computer system has increased by 134% and a percentage the percentage of taxpayer correspondence classified as overreaching has

increased by 135%. what are we being told and what does that mean? >> sure. as i mentioned at the beginning, i take very seriously the vast majority of americans are wrestling with a very complex tax code. their interaction with us every year spyware attorney get a refund and that is the last figure of us. i think about it and talk about it internally as we are big financial service operation and we need to answer the phones. process paper and do all the things you need to do to serve the american people. the reality is we are right now operating with about 1200 less people than we were at the end of last fiscal year because we are under cr and our budget is slightly reduced. we have allocations to taxpayer service and we have allocations to enforcement of those enforcement allocations have a ring around them because they

have a direct revenue producing effect. the reality in my mind is our taxpayer service operations also bring in revenue when we answer a tax law questions to help them get it right. e-file in those computer system so we can do managing, all of those accounts actually help get the $2.3 trillion in revenue. and we are trying to get a mix. the phonecalls i think we are actually doing okay. we actually need more people to answer more phonecalls and we didn't get the request last year for 2011 and we put the credit -- request in for 2012 which will bring up that level of service. i would point out because we use this thing called the level of service. that is not in the taxpayer satisfied with the service. we actually have a 96% customer satisfaction rating on our phonecalls. we have introduced a few things which have dropped our level of

service to increase satisfaction like wait time. so if the taxpayer calls and hangs up, that counts as a negative so that is not in the 74%. but we tell them is a 12 minute wait, you might want to call back at a less busy time. our paper inventory has been growing. we do put people on the phone to put people in the paper. the way we try to balance it is during march and april we be sure to answer all the focus we can sell the paper gets backed up back definitely catch up with paper as we go. this request ask more customer service folks. we need people to process and open it up and look at it and make decisions about where it goes and things fall into error. so that has gone down. i have always leaned in and set around priorities. we want to make sure, technology is the key and we need to make sure we invest in technology. phones and paper and the web we

can move people off the paper and the phone if we do more transactions on the web. it has to be invested in an frankly though, the conversation that ends up happening with people who spend time with the budget is there is always a tendency to put money into enforcement. we really need -- as you are pointing out in the taxpayer advocates are pointing out we need to keep an eye on a balance program. i think the president's budget is very balanced and will boost those numbers and so we will be serving people better but make them -- in tough budget times they were going to be longer wait times and we will answer less phonecalls and papers will take longer. >> are there more inquires overtime with taxpayers calling for help? >> despite based on different provisions. we had a huge spike in 2008 when we sent out the stimulus checks to every american. where's my stimulus check? am i going to get one? vendor phonecall volume spiked in our level of service

plummeted. we have had steady but a lot of it depends on tax law and what is going to happen. if you look at our affordable care act request, back to what you were talking about, technology and service to make sure people understand how the rules work and what they are eligible for is often the request. >> thank you commissioner, thank you mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman done of us have been accused of being in a tanning booth so i think you can go forward with your outreach without us being affected. i want to ask about the taxpayer advocate. it takes american about 6 billion man-hours a year to comply with federal taxes. which, when you divide it out by the full-time equivalent employee is 3 million jobs just complying with federal law. when we look at how people then comply with this law in a

practical way, about 60% of the individuals are hiring someone else. about 29% of people are interacting with software. it is a hidden tax on americans on average of about 250 bucks a year. it is really an extra tax on top of the tax that you pay to comply with federal law. have you thought about a way and it seems to be unreasonable to take 3 million americans in a country of 300 million to comply with federal law. have you thought about a way to develop that matrix through software, get it down to 1 million americans? maybe just 2 billion hours to comply with taxes instead of 6 billion backs this is an incredible drag on the economy. >> so, as you know, the congress has the prerogative of passing the tax laws. our job is to administer whatever laws congress passes

and the president signs. >> let me interrupt you on that. there are two ways in the 21st century we can handle complexity. the ideal way for me is a flatter, fair tax like what the gang of six may come up with to lower the rate to 26% but we will see. the other ways entirely in your hands, that an american doesn't pay h&r block. simply log onto the irs web site and fills out their taxes in an accurate, complete way in which the software is handling all of the complexity and the amount of time spent complying with federal law drops like a rock which is entirely within your purview. >> so we were talking earlier about my few and looking at the metrics that we have under invested in the irs to knowledge he. over 20 years, not in recent history, so i will tell you frankly we don't have -- we need to build some things like art account database and get that

off of a 30 year platform which your finishing this year. way to build some core infrastructure. we do have available you know, forms that calculate that people can go in and file on line directly with us. i think there is a big discussion about irs having software and frankly i think it is an administrative discussion but it is also a political discussion. speier total budget is how much? >> our total budget is about 12 billion. >> mr. chairman i think americans would love not to pay turbotax and not pay someone else. just my guess and correct me if i'm wrong, to develop a software package might ea 20 to 30 million-dollar job and then put it up on the web for free to americans. >> i guess i would say we have taken some looks at this. i don't think it is quite that simple and i think there are traces. >> actually i would disagree.

it might actually be more simple because the software companies have to make software calls based on checking with you where is you actually all the rules and could be setting up the decision matrix because you are the authority. >> look him i would love senator to talk about this further and having talked about it here, i've gotten lots of letters on both sides of these issues about should we be in the business of actually the sets of choice is embedded in software or shouldn't we? what i would tell you is we have got a very full plate now off technology of technology that we need to get done that would build a basic and restructure and start talking about those things. i would welcome a full range discussion about a. >> chairman of the something we can work together on because you shouldn't be a theological discussion. your mission should be to make it as easy as possible to comply with federal law, so this argument inside your shop should and again in our. then you say how do we then

deploy software in a 21st century context of the americans get on, put in their basic data files, doesn't pay anybody and sort of like the e-verify program. we are making it as easy as possible with anderson at -- internet solutions to comply with the law. thank you mr. chairman. >> a call from h&r block. [laughter] thank you very much, and i don't think -- i think it is a valid question. >> i do too. i totally agree. >> if we can eliminate the middleman. the middleman will hate it but it may save taxpayers money. i am looking for ease of filing. to put another idea on the table which will never pass as law, i made matt mentioned to you 15 years ago my account and died in springfield and i said, i am a lawyer, i am a senator. my tax return is not that complicated. i will do it myself.

every member of congress should be required to do their own personal income tax. i guarantee we would have tax simplification overnight because i struggled with it for hours thinking, why is this so hard? because i don't do it and i didn't have a computer program to work with. it is just using my wits and it didn't turn out to be that impressive. the point i'm getting to is that the complexity of the system i think you would agree needs to be continually reviewed so that we can make it within the grasp of ordinary americans to understand how their taxes are being calculated. if there is a mystery associated with it, there's a sense of injustice that somebody -- i am paying it in he isn't, that sort of notion. and it is expensive is that to get some of these tax repairs to do some basic returns. i don't think senator kirk is off base on that. i want to follow through and see what we can do on that. senator moran do you have any more?

mr. shulman, we will have written questions for you and baby colleagues will as well. >> thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> this weekend on c-span2, "and reckless endangerment" talking about the role that fannie mae and freddie mac. on the "after word" henry kissinger and whether we can have your relationship with china.

also, microsoft co-founder paul allen talks about his memoir, "idea man." you can get the scandals in your inbox. >> this weekend on american history tv, more than 20 years after the end the cold war, in new york historical panning -- panel focuses. the civil rights movement and the promise of suburbia. on restoring civil war photographs from charleston, south carolina. that the complete schedule from c-span.org/history. you can sign up for email alerts. >> senators expressed concern for extending the director of the fbi and's t-- fbi's term.

congress passed a law limiting the fbi director to one ten-year term. this portion of the hearing is about 50 minutes.

" is back tomorrow morning, at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. have a great day. >> good morning, everybody. good morning, director mueller, i prematurely our last hearing

here complimented you and said this is the last time you have to come to the hearing and put up with the senate jea, --judiciary committee. welcome back. over a month ago met with the president. he had requested congress authorize a limited extension of robert morris services, director of f.b.i., we have a law that normally limits the f.b.i. directorship to one 10-year term . a way to span presidential terms and give it the kind of independence that somebody in this position wants and needs. the president spoke of the ongoing threats facing the united states and the leadership transition at other agencies like the defense department. and central intelligence agency.

he asked us to join together in extending director mueller's leadership for the sake of our nation's safety and security. i was convinced of the call the president made. following the death of osama bin laden i urged all americans to support our president, his efforts to protect our nation, and keep americans safe. with the 10th anniversary of september 11, 2001, attacks approaching and the face of continuing threats, threats both within and without our borders, we must all join together for the good of the country and all americans. i'm pleased in a law enforcement matter like this we have kept it out of any kind of partisanship. republicans and democrats have expressed support for the president's request to maintain stability and continuity in the national security leadership team. senator grassley, this

committee's ranking republican, joined me along with senators feinstein, chambliss, chair and vice chair of the select committee on intelligence, introducing a bill to permit the gum gum -- incumbent f.b.i. director to serve for up to two additional years. chairman lamar smith, the house judiciary committee, has spoken to me. he support's the president's request. and i was encouraged to see reports that senator mcconnell, the senate republican leader, supports the president's request. the bipartisan bill in the committee's agenda provides for limited exception to statutory term of the service to the f.b.i. director. it will be on our agenda tomorrow morning. it will allow direct mueller to continue service for additional two years until september 2013 at the request of the president. this extension is intended to be a one-time exception. something incidentally that director mueller has personally urged, and not a permanent

extension or modification of the statutory design. the president could have nominated a new director of the f.b.i., someone who could serve for 10 years. would be there well after president obama's own term of office expired, instead the president is asking congress to extend the term of service for a proven leader for a brief period give the extenuating circumstances facing our country. bob served this nation with valor and integrity as a marine, as a federal prosecutor at all levels. he againancepsed the call of service when president bush nominated him in july of 2001 to serve as director of the f.b.i. i was chairman of the committee at that time. i expedited that nomination through the senate. he was confirmed in just two weeks. from the nomination to the confirmation. in the days just before september 11, 2001, bob mueller

served tirelessly and selflessly as the director of the f.b.i. i felt president bush, even though of different party than i, made a very good choice and i saw no need to expand the hearing to hold it. we moved very, very quickly. director mueller's handle the bureau significant transformation since september 11, 2001, with focus. he's worked with congress in this committee, testifying as recent as march of one of our periodic oversight hearings. it was very evident at that hearing, if i could be personal for a moment, that bob mueller was raised -- laid down the burdens of this office and take off with his family as he's done throughout his career. bobe is now answering duty's call. i should tell you, director, what the president said to me when i asked him if he had talked to you about this idea, he said, not yet, but bob

mueller is a marine and he answers the call of duty. those are the president's request as a patriotic american bob mueller is continuing to give his service to a grateful nation. senator grassley asked director mueller appear at today's hearing. he's cooperated and has been doing so. i thank him. today we also welcome back to the committee, jim comey, who served as u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and for two years as deputy attorney general during the george w. bush administration, where he worked closely with director mueller. i told mr. comey earlier it was nice to have him back in this room where he spent a lot of time in the committee walls, hearing testimony about the constitutionality about passing exception to the statute. which we created the 10-year term. i thank senator grassley for his cooperation. i hope we now have the hearing. we report the bill in the form

that senator grassley suggested without unnecessary delays. i yield to senator grassley and then to director mueller. >> thank you very much for holding this hearing and welcome back, director mueller. this hearing is the first hearing in 37 years to specifically address the 10-year term of director of f.b.i. in 1968, congress passed a law requiring f.b.i. director to be appointed with advice and consent of the senate. despite the passage of this law, director 4506r -- hoover served until his september in 1972. following his death, a number of high profile scandals came to light. this committee held a hearing in 1974 to address legislation limiting the term of the f.b.i. director to provide for additional congressional oversight of the f.b.i. director and most importantly to insulate the office from political control of the president. in 1976, congress acted by

limiting the director of f.b.i. to the current 10-year nonrenewable term. congress did so to prevent the accumulation of excess power by the director, as well as to provide some political independence for the f.b.i. the statute expressly prohibits reappointment of a director. despite knowing about director mueller's impending term limit and initiating a search for a successor led by the attorney general and vice president biden, president obama chose not to send the senate a nomination for director of f.b.i. instead, the president has decided that notwithstanding those statutory provisions, director mueller should continue to serve in this position for another two years. although i do not think that our position on legislation to permit this result should depend on personalities, director mueller has performed admirably has f.b.i. director. and was the recent death of bin

laden and the approaching 10-year anniversary of the september 11 attacks, we do in fact have unique circumstances warranting a one-time limited extension of the term of this particular director. against this backdrop and somewhat with a heavy heart, i join in co-sponsoring s. 1103, a bill that would extend the term of the current f.b.i. director for two years. but two years is as far as i will go. director mueller has done a fine job, but he's not indispensable and the likely continuation of the war on terror for many years is not so singularly a circumstance to justify extending the f.b.i. director's term. in two years no matter what, someone else will be nominated and confirmed for this job. although i support this bill, i have resisted efforts to simply pass it with minimal deliberation given the substantial presidential value of any extension of the f.b.i.

director's terms, we have a duty to ensure that the regular order is followed for the consideration of this bill. first i believe that the 10-year limit has achieved its intended purpose. until director mueller, no director subject to the limit has served the full 10 years. the limit has been successful in reducing the power of the director and preserving the vital civil liberties of all americans. second, the 10-year limit has provided important political independence for the f.b.i. director. only one director has been fired in this period and this did not occur for political reasons. and third, the prohibition on reappointment has also served the director's independence by eliminating any potential that the director will attempt to curry favor with a president to be reappointed. we should proceed cautiously in setting a precedent that a 10-year term can be extended if we are going to extend director mueller's term, we should establish a precedent that doing

so will be difficult and that unique circumstances necessitating it exists as those are circumstances at this particular time. we didn't just introduce a bill and hold it at the desk. instead we introduced a bill that would amend existing law. we are holding a hearing as in 1974 we have called the director of the f.b.i. to testify. we are pointing out the special circumstances behind the bill and recognizing the constitutional issues that may arise at extending the director's term and without actually voting to advise and consent to his serving an additional term, we have called experts to address constitutionality. we will hold a committee markup and if successful will seek floor time to pass the bill. that is how we should proceed. changing the 10-year term limit is a one-time situation that will not be routinely repeated.

acting responsibly requires no less. for all these reasons, mr. chairman, i especially thank you for holding this hearing. i thank director mueller for testifying and all the other witnesses that have come. thank you. >> thank you very much, senator grassley. director mueller, the floor is yours again. >> thank you, chairman leahy and ranking member grassley and the other members of the committee who are here today. i thank you for your introductions and for the opportunity to appear before the committee today. as you pointed out, my term as f.b.i. director is due to expire later this summer. however in early may the president asked if i would be willing to serve an additional two years. upon some reflection, discussion with my family, i told him that i would be willing to do so. now the president has asked that congress pass the legislation necessary to extend that term

and if this committee and congress see fit to pass the required legislation, i look forward to continuing to work with the men and women of the f.b.i. as the committee is well aware, the f.b.i. faces a complex threat environment. and with the past year we have seen an array of national security and criminal threats from terrorism, espionage, cyberattacks, and traditional crimes. these threats have range interested attempts by al qaeda and its affiliates to place bombs on airplanes, to lone actors seeking to detonate i.e.d.'s in public squares and on subways. a month ago as chairman pointed out the successful operation in pakistan led to osama bin laden's death and created new urgency concerning this threat picture. while we continue to exploit the materials seized from bin laden's compound, we know that al qaeda remains committed to attacking the united states. we also continue to face the threat from adversaries alaa he

in yemen who are engaged in efforts to persons in united states to commit acts of terrorism. these figures no longer need or speak personally with those to influence. they conduct their media campaigns from remote regions of the world and sent on fostering terrorism by lone actors here in the united states. alongside these ever evolving terrorism plots, the espionage threat persists as well. last summer there were the arrests of 10 russian spies known as illegals, secretly blended into american society in order to clan dess tanly gather information for russia. we continue to make significant arrests for economic espionage as foreign interests seek to control technologies. the cyberintrusions at google last year as well as other recent intrusions highlight the ever-present danger from internet attack.

along with countless other cyberincidents, these attacks set to undermine the integrity of the internet and businesses and people who rely on it. in our criminal investigations the f.b.i. continues to uncover massive corporate and mortgage frauds that weaken the financial system and victimize investors, homeowners, and ultimately taxpayers. we are also rooting out health care fraud based on false billings and fake treatments that endanger patients and cheat government health care programs. in the extreme violence across our southwest border to the south also remains a threat to the united states as we saw with the murders last year of american consulate workers in juarez, mexico, and the shooting earlier this year of two federal agents in mexico. likewise here in the united states, countless violent gangs continue to take innocent lives and endanger our communities. and throughout public corruption undermines the public trust.

in this threat environment, the f.b.i.'s mission to protect the american people has never been broader and the demands on the f.b.i. have never been greater. to carry out this mission the f.b.i. has taken significant steps since september 11 to transform itself into a threat-based spence-led agency. this new approach has driven changes in the bureau's structure and management. our recruitment, hiring, and training and information technology systems. these changes have transformed the bureau into a national security organization that fuses the traditional law enforcement and intelligence missions. as this transformation continues, the f.b.i. remains committed to upholding the constitution, the rule of law, and protecting civil liberties. of course the f.b.i.'s transformation is not complete as we must continually evolve to meet the ever changing threats of today and tomorrow. and as i discussed the transformation of the bureau, i

must say i am uncomfortable about much of the intention that has been placed on me or put on me, my reason of this being the end of my term. the credit for these changes goes to the men and women of the f.b.i. who have responded remarkably to the challenges i have laid out both in the past and present. let me conclude by thanking the committee on behalf of all f.b.i. employees for your continued support of the f.b.i. and its mission. the committee has been an essential part of our transformation and this legislation has contributed greatly to our ability to meet today's various threats. thank you. i look forward to answering any questions. >> thank you. your statement will be placed in the record. my questions will be brief. you and i talk often as you do with other members. and have always been available. i remember when you testified at an oversight hearing on march 30

this year you talked about the terrorism threats facing our nation. your remarks both spoken and prepared, you expanded those today. tell us about the unique role the f.b.i. plays in preventing and prosecuting terrorist activities as compared to our other intelligence and law enforcement agencies all of whom have a role. what is unique about the f.b.i.? >> uniquely the f.b.i. has domestic responsibility, acting under the constitution, the applicable statutes, and the attorney general guidelines to first of all identify those individuals who might be undertaking terrorist threats within the united states along with our state and local law enforcement. the other federal agencies. we also have the responsibility for working with the intelligence agencies to identify threats from overseas

that may impact the domestic united states. and to assure that we gather and analyze and disseminate that intelligence and efforts to thwart those attacks. if indeed an attack takes place, quite obviously our responsibility then is to identify those persons responsible for the attack. gather the evidence against them, and pursue the case through indictment, conviction, and incarceration. uniquely we have the responsibility -- broad responsibility domestically fo -- for undertaking this particular aspect of response against international terrorism as well as against domestic terrorism which often may well be overlooked. >> one of the things, talked with the president and others about the desire to have continuity, national security, there are a lot of changes going on, leon panetta is leaving. the c.i.a. director is becoming the secretary of defense.

general petraeus is coming in to the c.i.a. the head of the joint chiefs term runs out next couple months . we have nominations pending for deputy attorney general. and also nomination pending for the assistant attorney general in charge of the national security division. in that team i assume the f.b.i. director or your designee is a major part of the team, is that correct? >> i believe that to be the case, yes. also particularly the head of our national security branch is -- as well as myself are both part of the team. >> this is not a 9 to 5 thing i assume.

i expect you probably get a few calls in the middle of the night. >> we do. it's somewhat continuous but that's part of the job. >> you served for nearly 10 years. we talked about a number of things that you tried to reform in the department and other things you want to upgrade. i know in just a few weeks ago you were contemplating leaving as f.b.i. director. since then assuming this legislation passes, which i assume it will, what would you want to build on? what would you -- give two more years, what would be a top goal in your mind? >> the areas of concentration, let me put it that way, for the next two years should continue to be terrorism. particularly the -- in the wake of the death of bin laden, the impact that will have on his

followers. guy obviously what is happening in pakistan, what is happening in yemen, what is happening in somalia bears on the threats to the united states, along with domestic terrorism. that will continue to be a focus. i will tell you that we will increasingly put emphasis on addressing cyberthreats in all of the variations. part of that is making certain that the personnel in the bureau have the equipment, capability, skill, experience to address those threats and not just the cadre of individuals that we have to date who can address any of those threats not just the united states but around the world. but all those in the bureau have sufficient understanding of the cyberbackground to be able to work in a variety of programs and understand how those programs fit into the cyberarena. we have done, i believe, a very good job in terms of advancing our information technology.

we have to finish off the sentinal project that has been ongoing for a number of years and has been the subject of discussion with this committee and i anticipate that will be coming to a conclusion on that project in the fall. in the meantime, we have kept up-to-date in terms of giving our agents, analysts, and professional staff the information technology tools they need to do the job, but we have to continue to be on the forefront, cutting edge of that technology. in terms of legislation, one area which we have raised with this committee and that is what we call going dark. where we have a court order, whether from a national security court, the fisa court, or a district court, based on protocols believe that somebody is using a communications device to further their illegal goals, often now given the new technology, the persons, recipients, carriers of those communications do not have the

solution, capability to be responsive to those court orders. we have to address that increasing gap given the new technologies through legislation so i will anticipate. that would be an issue we want to address in the next couple years. >> thank you. i'm going to put in the record letters of support from a number of people at the national fraternal order of police, national association of police organizations, so forth. one i'm very pleased to put in is one from john ellith, who is sitting behind you a couple rows back. former detailee to my staff. the reason i especially wanted that, he testified at the 1974 hearing on the bill that created the 10-year term for director. i wasn't a senator. i was a prosecutor at the time.

but he then helped me a great deal once he came here and put institutional memory that is extraordinary. i know that the deputy, majority leader, has to leave. you want to make just one remark. i thank senator grassley for that. >> thank you very much. i just wanted to -- it's been my honor to work with director mueller for the last 10 years. you are an honest, honorable man and you have dramatically transformed our nation's premiere law enforcement agency. i'm glad that the president recognizes that talent and america's fortunate you are willing to continue to serve. i fully support this extension. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. senator grassley.

>> the president has stated that he believes that continuity and civility at the f.b.i. is critical at this time. he emphasized at this time. as i said i'm not in support of extending your term just because the president has many leadership transitions occurring at the same time. there are things the president can control like when to change leadership at d.o.d. and c.i.a. and things the president cannot control like the 10-year anniversary of 9/11 or the recent death of bin laden and the revolutions in the middle east. so my first question, director mueller, would you agree that threat environment alone is sufficient reason to extend your term for two years? >> i leave that determination to others. as you point out, no one is indispensable.

i do agree that during a transition there's time spent on that transition process. we certainly have been spending time on it. but to the extent that either i or somebody else should be part of that team, i leave that up to someone else. the president asked that i stay and as i said based on -- after reflections, talking to my family, decided to do that. i will tell you that as i said nobody is indispensable. some of the cal includes was -- calculus was should i really stay? and off the person who is in that position is the worst person to make that decision. i did go out and try to talk to other persons both in the bureau and outside the bureau to get more objective view as to whether or not it would be the best thing for the agency for me

to stay tonight even though the president asked that that be done. >> the legislation on your position is meant to -- for the last 30 or 40 years to give level of independence to the director. but at the same time recognize the president could fire a director for any reason. i'm not sure that that's fully understood so i ask these questions of you. as director of the f.b.i. with a fixed term, under what circumstances can the president remove you? >> i think i serve at the pleasure of the president. >> ok. would you support changing the law so that the f.b.i. director could be removed only for cause so you would have greater independence? >> i believe and support the law, including the 10-year term limit. >> would you support legislation requiring the president to provide notice to congress 30 days prior to removal of f.b.i.

director similar to the way law requires removal of an inspector general? >> i really have not thought about that, senator. >> ok. the f.b.i.'s intelligence analyst association supports the president's request to extend your term. the f.b.i. agents association appears to me to be a little less enthusiastic. if you are extended, how would you intend to bridge a gap if you might not agree there is a gap, but i guess that's the basis of my question, how would you intend to bridge the gap and manage the agents who believe you are creating a double standard by extending your tenure while you limit theirs to your up and out policy? >> i do believe that there's -- i understand the concern on certain agents' part. i do think it's a different issue. the issue of having a maximum

time for service as a supervisor in the bureau was a part of a plan to develop leadership. after looking at how you develop leaders in the military, how you develop leaders in corporate america, and how you given incentives and push persons. the best leaders in the organization to the top. we had had problems with that in the past and after much discussion, the decision was made to enact this. it was one of the hardest decisions i probably had to make as a director of -- during this period of time. but it has in my mind had the beneficial effect, although we do lose some very, very good supervisors who decide either to step down or retire. i have over the years explained the thinking behind the decision . over the years sought out opportunities to discuss the import and impact of that decision. i will continue to do so. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. senator franken.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. director mueller, i want to start off today by associating myself with senator durbin's remarks and commending you for your tremendous service to this nation. it is in large part because of your tenacity and leadership that we haven't seen another major terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11. that is no small achievement and i want you to know that i am grateful for all you have done to reshape the f.b.i.'s counterterrorism strategy. i don't think it should come as a surprise your department has been heavily criticized over the last 10 years for significant misuse of the department's surveillance powers and other major civil liberties violations. i think you have done extraordinary job, but i also believe that term limits exist for a good reason. term limits are like sunshine

laws, they force us to bring in new leaders who take a fresh look at things, and that is almost always a good thing. i'd like you if you could to take a minute to talk about some of the most controversial aspects of your tenure or of the f.b.i. during your tenure. how do you think you have addressed the problems that arose with the f.b.i.'s misuse of the surveillance authorities granted under the patriot act and the foreign intelligence surveillance act, specifically i would like you to address the concerns raised by the inspector general about the department's abuse of national security letters? >> let me separate national security letters out from the general discussion of surveillance. i do not believe that we have abused our powers in any way, with maybe one or two isolated examples, and the additional authorities that have been given

us under the patriot act over the years, and i don't believe the i.g. has found such substantial misuse. with regard to national security letters, we did not do what was necessary to assure that we were in compliance with the applicable statutes. it was brought to our attention by the inspector general. as i know you are aware, national security letters enable us to get not content but information relating to the existence of a communication. and there was a statutory framework for that and we should have set up a much more thorough compliance program to assure that we were dotting i's and crossing t's and we did not. as soon as we learned of the i.g.'s scrutiny on this and the problems that were pointed out, we moved to fix them. the first thing we did is make certain we had a new software capability and data base

capability that assured that all of our agents in seeking national security letters will have -- given all the information that is required under the statute. we put out comprehensive guidance to the field and additional training. we assured the national security letters are signed off on by the chief lawyer in each of our divisions. but perhaps as important if not more important is we set up a compliance program to address not just security letters but other areas such as national security letters where we could fall into the same pattern or habits. and so the national security letters i believe we addressed appropriately at the time. and it was used as a catalyst to set up a compliance program that addresses the concern in other areas comparable to what we had found with national security letters. >> in addition to concerns about

-- those concerns, a number of civil liberties groups have raised questions about the f.b.i.'s misuse of the material witness statute. mishandling of the terrorist watch list and infiltration of mosques and surveillance of peaceful groups that have no connection to criminal activity. if your term were extended do you believe that you would be in a position to give these concerns a fresh airing without being mired in -- >> i certainly -- i'm not certain it needs a fresh look because i am very concerned whenever those allegations arise. i will tell you that i believe in terms of surveillance of religious institutions we have done it appropriately and with appropriate pred case under the guidelines of the applicable statutes. even though there are allegations out there to the contrary. i also believe that we have -- when we have undertaken

investigations, individuals expressing their first amendment rights, we have done so according to our internal guidelines and applicable statutes. and so whenever these allegations come forward, i take them exceptionally seriously. i make certain inspection division or others look into it to determine whether or not we need to change anything. and i will tell you that addressing terrorism and the responsibility to protect against attacks brings us to the point where we are balancing day in and day out civil liberties and the necessaryity for -- necessity for disrupting a plot that will kill americans. it's something we keep in mind day in and day out. the last thing i would say as agents go through our training classes, the importance of adhering to the constitution, civil liberties, is drilled into them day in and day out. every agent, this was

established by my predecessor, goes to the holocaust museum, before they become a new agent, to understand what can happen to a police power that becomes un reined and too powerful. we take those allegations very seriously. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my time is up. i'd just like to say that there are exceptions of approved rules, these are, i think, unique set of circumstances that the new c.i.a. director and new secretary admiral mulen retiring and i -- mulin retiring, and i should note president obama could nominate a new director that would be there for 10 years, and by extending you for two years, he is -- in two years he may not be the president. i think that bears just mention.

thank you. >> thank you very much. dr. coburn. >> first of all let me thank you for your service. >> is your microphone on? >> yes, it is. i think it is. light's on. we'll try that. we are going to hear testimony in the next panel about some questionable constitutionality of what we are trying to do and meeting the president's request. and i have some concerns about that because if in fact there can be a legal challenge to what we are doing, based on previous statutes, and let me give you an example, with the 2005 extension to the patriot act, we added additional requirement on 215 orders for certain sensitive business records such as book sales, firearm sales, and tax return records that are relevant to terrorism investigations.

they can only be obtained by the approval of you, your deputy director, or the executive assistant director for national security. could you envision a constitutional challenge to the section 215 order that was approved by yourself during your two-year extension? and could that be related to the possible unconstitutionality of this extension legislation? >> let me say at the outset that i'm not a constitutional scholar. >> nor am i. >> and i have heard nothing in my discussions with the department or otherwise of a constitutional issue that would make that a problem down the road. if that were a substantial problem, quite obviously then i would be concerned, but i have not heard that to be the case. >> well, my hope would be that you would, after your testimony, you would have somebody here to listen to the second panel. >> i do.

absolutely. >> because i have some concerns. i have no objection to you continuing in this position at all, but i do have concerns that we could get mired in court battles over a questionable constitutional challenge on this that could actually make you ineffective in carrying out your job. with that, mr. chairman, i have no other questions. >> thank you very much. senator klobuchar. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. director, welcome. it's good to see you. thank you for all your good work. my question is i remember when we met earlier at the f.b.i. about some of the challenges you face, particularly, i'm very focused on some of the white collar crime investigations as you know, the resources necessary for those, and how that plays in with necessary steps you had to take after 9/11 to shift resources over to the investigating terrorism. with that in mind what do you see as the biggest challenges

facing the f.b.i. over the next two years? >> quite obviously a continuation of the -- addressing the threat from terrorism both international terrorism and domestic terrorism and increasingly in that area is the radicalization of individuals over the internet where the radicalizers can be offshore and the individuals can be in the bedrooms here in the united states. they need not meet or have any other personal contact but persons can be radicalized through the internet. i mentioned before cyber the increase of cyber as a mechanism for conducting the internet, for conducting all sorts of crimes, but also it being a highway to extracting our most sensitive secrets or extracting intellectual property from our commerce. we as an organization need to continue to grow the capability

of addressing that arena in the future. from a criminal perspective, making certain that we minimize whatever crime can come from south of the border in the southwest border area, and of course as you point out, we have still a backlog of mortgage fraud cases and substantial white collar criminal cases that we are working through. >> so you're concerned about budget cuts that could affect local law enforcement that have been taking up some of the slack here? >> i do. if you talk to state and local law enforcement, you understand their concerns in terms of budget cuts all the way down the line. i think we are all in agreement that we are much more effective working together. and consequently for all of us the increase in task forces where we combine our areas ever expertise and knowledge is going to have to be at least a partial answer to the budget cuts that

we see coming down the road. always my encouragement to the appropriators is that i am giving moneys, i give moneys in such a way that's an incentive for us to work together in task forces as opposed to a disincentive for persons to go and start their own look at a particular area. >> as you and i have discussed we have had tremendous success in minnesota with some of these combined efforts. i brought up the cybercrime issue, i think it's very important that we start getting something done in this area and start to be sophisticated in our laws as those that are breaking them. i have heard that because of new technologies and outdated laws there is a growing gap in the f.b.i.'s ability to get court ordered information from communications and internet service providers. in prior statements you have referred to this as going dark. could you talk more about this problem and you see -- and how you see we could fix it? >> i did refer to it briefly

before. where we have the authority to go to a court and get a court order directing that a communications carrier of some ilk provide ongoing communications to the bureau in a terrorism case, white collar criminal case, child pornography case, what we increasingly find given the advent of these two technologies is that the carrier of that communication no longer or does not have the solution in order to be responsive to that court order. so my expectation is that legislation will be discussed and perhaps introduced that would close that gap for us. we cannot afford to go dark in the sense that we have a legitimate authorized order from a court directing a communications carrier to provide us with certain conversations related to criminal activity and not be able to get those conversations because a communications carrier has not put in place a solution

to be responsive to that court order. >> that makes a lot of sense. two things i just wanted to mention at the end. first i want to thank the bureau for the help with the synthetic drug issue. senator grassley, senator schumer and i have been working on this and senator grassley has a bill to include some of these new synthetic drugs. we had a kid die in minnesota. a number of people get sick. i don't think people realize the power of these drugs and i.n.s. crease we are seeing in the use of those -- increase we are seeing in the use of those drugs. secondly i want to thank you for having kevin perkins at a hearing we had earlier to find missing children. this is the issue of trying to be as narrow as we can to get exception to the tax laws. you don't have local law enforcement trying to find a kid when it is in fact a family abduction. then you have one arm of the government, the i.r.s. that knows exactly where that kid is, where that family is, and trying to put an exception in place that doesn't hurt privacy interests but like many of the extemmingses -- exception that

is are already in that law so law enforcement can access it. >> thank you very much. senator, i understand questions have been asked. other than director mueller, we'll excuse you with our thanks for your service. you should also thank ann mueller. she doesn't get thanked enough for the support she gives you as do your daughters in this. and i appreciate that very much. i appreciate she suggests it. >> a preeshates that acknowledgement and much deserved. >> she's a remarkable woman as you know. i appreciate that. i will take a three or four minute break while we set up for the next panel. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> this week on "road to the white house," g.o.p. candidate and former new mexico governor, gary johnson. he talks about gay marriage, abortion, prayer in public schools and how he would reduce the national debt and the federal deficit. "road to the white house," sunday at 9:30 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span. >> now available, c-span's congressional directory.

a complete guide to the first session of the 112th congress. inside new and returning house and senate members with contact information, including twitter addresses, district maps and committee assignments and information on the white house, supreme court justices and governorers. order online at c-span.org/shop. >> the national oceanic and atmospheric administration released new policies on aquaculture thursday. the rules will allow seafood businesses next year to begin applying for permits to start fish farms in the gulf of mexico. noaa administrator, jane lubchenko, talked about the new rules in a discussion on the impact of the oil spill on gulf seafood at the natural history museum in washington, d.c. she's joined by actor and environmentalist ted danson and louisiana seafood business owners. this is an hour and 20 minutes.

>> good even, my name is cristian samper. the broader events, demystifying seafood, the ocean and its bounty. tonight should be an interesting mix. on the one hand interesting, hopefully fun. at times, depressing. and after this event, delicious. [laughter] in september, 2008, we opened the new sand ocean hall here at the museum of natural history. which is a wonderful project we collaborated with noaa and many leading organizations here in the country. since then over 10 million people have been through to see it and it is our way of sharing our knowledge about the ocean and this planet with millions

of people and hopefully raise awareness about those 2/3 of the planet and our intimate connection with it. the hall is part of a broader ocean science initiative that we have been working on for a number of years using our collections, using our science and our poirns. and tonight is an opportunity to come together here at your national museum to address some of the really important topics for society and this panel. let me start by acknowledging a lot of the institution that is have supported the event tonight, starting with noaa, which has been our collaborator and partner with the museum actually more than 100 years. wegman's food markets, which was a sponsor of this event last year as well. monterey bay aquariums seafood watch program that's back with us again and they've been one of the leaders in seafood sustainability in the nation. this year we have a new sponsor, the gulf states marine

finishries commission, whose support has enabled us to bring six chefs from the gulf states that will join some of d.c.'s best chefs tonight after the panel. now, i mentioned before that the mew cell has had a close collaboration with noaa for many years. as a matter of fact, going back almost 100 years and taken to a whole new level with our collaboration on education outreach. and we're delighted to have with us tonight to give us some opening remarks, the administrator of noaa, dr. jane lubchenko. she is a distinguished marine biologist. has been a member of our advisory board here at the museum for a number of years, and then she was appointed administrator of noaa a few years ago i'm a great pleasure to have you here, jane, and if you'd like to give a few welcoming remarks, please join us. [applause]

>> good evening, everyone. welcome to the event here in baird auditorium. tonight's program is designed to tantalize your mind as well as at this time late your taste buds. so i hope you will have good things both at the program and afterwards. this intellectual appetizer that we're beginning with will offer you a look at the gulf one year later. and i'm very anxious to hear the views of the members of the panel. by way of opening remarks and a keynote address to get us going, let me begin by sharing -- teeing off what some of cristian has mentioned, some of the behind-the-scenes information as well as our program. i refer to the strong partnership between the smithsonian and noaa that goes back over 100 years.

noaa fisheries was actually created in 1871 as the u.s. commission of fish and fisheries. it was the very first federal agency concerned with natural resource conservation and science. its first commissioner was none other than spencer baird for whom this auditorium was named. the same spencer baird who was also assistant secretary of the smithsonian institution. now, can you imagine doing both of those jobs today? [laughter] 140 years later noaa's collaborations with the smithsonian remain strong. we share the world's largest collection of fish with noaa's fisheries systemics laboratories working closely with them and our partnerships extends to a wide variety of areas in marine sciences, education and conservation, a relationship that is evident throughout the wonderful,

fabulous ocean hall. tonight's event reflects this partnership in science and conservation and it's appropriate that we do so here in the baird auditorium. turning to the subject of tonight's event, last april the deepwater horizon exploded on to the scene in the gulf. an unprecedented environmental disaster. the deepwater horizon spilled oil over 1,000 miles of shoreline and released oil into the gulf itself. 10 days into the spill i met with more than 100 fishermen in plaque mans parish who feared losing their way of life and the gulf that they know and love. they knew better than anyone that oil seeping into the nursery wetlands where larvae develop into juvenile fish may mean an uncertain future. their connections to the bayous, the gulf waters and

their concern about losing it were palpable and they were right to be concerned. many of them have suffered deeply. their businesses and their communities, many of them have been devastated. fast-forward to today. although the vast majority of oil in the gulf is now gone, oil lingers close to shore in many coastal areas in louisiana and in isolated places on the sea floor bottom. and the effects on the gulf ecosystem and communities will undoubtedly be felt for years. a cooperate any natural damage assessment -- natural resource damage assessment is well underway, but indeed, it will be years before we have a clear picture of the full impact of the oil on the gulf yeek systems and, therefore, on their communities. but while we wait for full information about the damage done and the future

implications, we do know the status of seafood today. all of the federal waters in the gulf that were once closed to fishing, and that represented at its peak 37% of federal waters in the gulf, all of that is now open to fishing. and it's open for the reason that the seafood therein has been extensively and thoroughly tested for oil and dispersant contamination and found to be safe to eat. noaa, f.d.a. and the states tested seafood extensively prior to reopening these areas and they continue to ensure the safety of seafood today through additional surveillance and testing. and if new oil appears that may be a threat to seafood safety, we will not hesitate to close waters again. but our focus of the status of seafood in the gulf should be

more about simply answering the question, is gulf seafood safe from oil and contaminants? the larger focus must also include, what are we actually doing to ensure healthy fisheries, healthy gulf yeek systems and healthy sources of seafood, the foundations of the unique culture and the very special attraction that the gulf offers to so many visitors to the region, as well as to the local inhabitants. indeed, the health of the gulf is really inseparable from the health of its coastal communities, economies and their culture. our efforts to support a healthy gulf are multiple, from ending over fishing to has been at that time restoration, to making gulf coast ecosystems communities and economies more resilient to devastation from disasters, such as hurricanes, floods, oil spills, climate change and ocean acidification.

devastation from hurricane after hurricane, katrina in 2005, rita on its heels, gustav and ike in 2008, have given us keen insights into the consequences of losing the gulf barrier islands and their coastal wetlands, losing the protection those places once afforded as people in the gulf call them, speed bumps for hurricanes. with hurricane season about to begin and with the devastating power of the mississippi river tragically apparent, it has never been more critical to take a hard look at what is essential to building gulf coast resiliency and rebuilding the wetlands and barrier islands that provide protection. now, restoration is not a silver bullet, but it can help on many levels. past experience shows that restoration yields significant economic as well as environmental payoff, creating

jobs and furt you are opening the way for travel and recreation, adding income for restaurants, hotels and coastal economies. and healthy ecosystems provide major benefits, such as hurricane protection that i mentioned, pollution control and improved consumer confidence in seafood, benefits that stretch far beyond the gulf. as we begin the long road to environmental and economic recovery in the gulf, noaa is pursuing efforts on multiple fronts to help with progress. thus far i have touched on seafood safety, ending over fishing and has been at that time restoration, all of which are key elements for a vibrant, resilient future for the gulf. i'd like to touch briefly on one additional component that complements these, and that is aquaculture. the farming of marine plants and animals has huge potential to provide healthy seafood, create new jobs and contribute

to reducing the trade deficit. however, it is vite tale acontact culture be done so it is environmentally sound. the department of commerce and noaa released our new aquaculture policies. these policies establish a framework intended to encourage sustainable domestic aquaculture, support coastal communities and important commercial and recreational fisheries as well as help restore species and has been at that time. in addition to these policies, we are committing to developing a national shellfish initiative in partnership with the industry to day specific steps to increase commercial production of shellfish and promote innovation in the industry and to implementing the gulf of mexico plan for aquaculture, which includes the regulatory infrastructure

needed for offshore gulf development. we hope both of these initiatives will have profound and lasting effects on the environmental and economic recovery in the gulf and on aquaculture development throughout the nation. and with that, i am pleased to turn the program over to our moderator tonight, mr. richard harris of national public radio. thank you all. [applause] >> thanks for that wonderful warm-up introduction. you should come up here, too, because you have a seat up here. and welcome one and all. we have about an hour to talk, and i promise i won't hold you over. we will get off to the food and wine at the end of the hour. but i think there will be some thoughts to share here before we go, and we will proceed at

pace. so i will start by introducing the panel and peppering them with a few questions. and then we do have a couple of microphones in the aisles and after a little while i will welcome everyone here to join in the conversation. there are a couple of scattered seats down in front, if people want to take a moment and come down here. i see a few. so if you're standing and you want to sit, there are some opportunities to do so. anyway, let me start by introducing this really quite impressive lineup of folks who will talk to us today. we'll start on my -- on your far left, don boesch, who is a professor of marine science and president of the university of maryland center for environmental science. he's a buy loling cal ocean nothing grapher. i met don more than 20 years ago because he was running a lab down in louisiana called lumcon and he was also a professor of marine science at louisiana state university. so he really knows the gulf, he

knows chesapeake bay really well, and he was also on the president's oil spill commission. so he's served in many key positions here and has a wealth of information. to his left -- see, i didn't -- i forgot to wear my watch and i usually tell right from left with my -- anyway, it's a familiar face to you, i hope, ted danson, who you may have seen on tv once or twice. and he is -- he was in coney island earlier today shooting his hbo thing really early in the morning. but he's amazingly fresh for having had a tough time. but he's here actually because he's become a very passionate ocean activist, and he actually works for the organization called oceana very closely and he's actually written a book called "oceana," our endangered oceans and what we can do to save them. so ted has hollywood in his

blood, but i think he also has the ocean in his veins. so he is joining us for that reason. to his left is an associate professor and a specialist and food scientist at louisiana state university and she's been diligently running up and down the gulf coast since the oil spill looking at seafood safety issues and will be participating with us on those grounds. to her left is patrick riley. patrick is a shrimp fisherman. but he's more than a shrimp fisherman. he's also general manager of an outfit called western seafood company and actually from freeport, texas, not from louisiana. but that's still the gulf coast. he's been instrumental in developing some of the apparatuses to help make shrimp fishing less damaging to sea turtles and other sea life that we care about there. so he's been quite involved in that. and mike is from louisiana, way

down on the big foot where louisiana sticks out into the gulf of mexico. it's one of the gulf of mexico's largest otherwiser harvesting companies. are your oisters being served here tonight? so you will have a chance to taste his oysters when we are done here. i'm delighted that he's here. and you've already heard from dr. lubchenko. so there we are. let me turn to done boesch and say, ok, it's been a year since the oil spifment how do things look? when we saw the videos that brought back all the memories of how horrible everything looked a year ago, what's the state of the gulf right now from the position of an ocean nothing grapher? >> well, nature is a wonderful

thing and it treated the oil in the organic substrait, a lot of it grew and devoured much of that oil. so as dr. lubchenko said earlier, it's no longer there. a number of issues that we need to resolve about linger effects and she also mentioned there's damage assessment, to very carefully quantify the impact. and there are lots of ongoing studies to see the degree to which those impacts are long term and are going to quickly recover. but i think in general scientists think that the gulf handled this remarkably well. specifically, though, with respect to why everyone's here tonight to enjoy is gulf seafood. as a scientist when this spill was happening and all the concern about this contamination problem and potential risk to human health who studied oil spills, i'm aware that fish, for example, have mechanisms to take these compounds, the ones that we are

most concerned about, the hydrocarbons that could be incorporated in the tissue, fish have very effective mechanisms to detoxify those and not to incorporate them into their muscle tissue, the part that we eat. so from the start the risk to seafood that could be contaminated seafood that we would ingest is small to begin with. then, of course, on top of that, it's a very large ocean. only small amounts of the seafood that could have been exposed to this. and then i have to say from the standpoint of the ocean commission, we studied not the effects of the spill so much as the governmental response. and what we saw was a quite remarkable effort led by noaa to assess and make sure that we have a safe process. there are these areas that were closed just as a precaution, without any real evidence that there was contamination. and subsequently a program with

very detailed testing. that's still going on to look and see whether using the best chemical methods we have, we can detect contaminants. with thousands of samples at this point and very little indication that there is any contamination, i think we can all feel safe that the seafood is safe and enjoy it tonight. >> patrick riley, you actually go out in the gulf, i assume, catching shrimp and so on. what is your perspective from somebody actually on the water? >> the areas we are harvesting from just after the spill -- is the microphone on? hello? >> let's do a little buddy breathing here. this is another little trick. >> ok. [laughter] >> thank you, mike. >> anyway, just after the spill and, of course, the quick

response by noaa and other state officials and the closing of areas affected by that, you had very wide buffer zones for safety reasons and whatnot. not only the areas that were directly affected, but also very wide perimeter around them. we never saw any effects of oil on our product. and, you know, since those closed areas reopened, we never saw any effects of oil on that product. we, as a fishery operator, typically are a little bit further offshore. we're out to almost 360 foot of water and up to really the beach off texas. we don't get that close in louisiana. but we never saw anything. >> and is the shrimp fishery back in full swing? >> the shrimp fishery never left. >> did you not take a hit last year? >> we took a hit of overall volume because production

units, vessels, basically shut in. they joined the vessel of opportunity program helping with the cleanup or they chose not to fish overall because some of the near-shore vessels didn't have access to their near-shore waters to fish. southern louisiana bays and right there on the beach, once that shrimp left estuaries, left the beach area and went offshore, the boats don't have the capability of catching that product. it's left up to the larger boats. frankly, we didn't have the number of larger boats to participate in the fishery this last year. in our own case in freeport, even though we are free the far western reaches of the gulf. after our texas closure, which is typically a 60-day cooperative closure between texas parks and wild life and the national marine fisheries, we generate quite a bit of volume from boats that come over to texas to fish the opening after typically july 15. we would generate one or two,

typically 20 to 30-day trips out of these larger freezer boats generating 60,000 to 80,000 pounds apiece when they come in. we took a little hit there. about 40% of our volume historically we weren't able to capture because those boats could not make it over. but the shrimp, from a biological standpoint, no, there's no problem. >> mike, did you have trouble selling oysters after the spill? >> actually, right after the spill it was interesting, because a lot of people got real hungry for seafood and they thought that the oil was coming to the beach and they wouldn't get any seafood for a teert. it was almost like when johnny carson said there was going to be a shortage of toilet paper, everybody went out and bought toilet paper and there was a shortage of toilet paper. [laughter] that's kind of what happened immediately. we sold all of our freezer inventories. and then we were closed because of the impending oil. noaa, i want to compliment dr.

lubchenko. they did a fabulous job. the government's response to this was above and beyond responses i've seen to other events in the gulf in my 40 years in this business. they did an excellent job of being on the ground, helping us to understand what the challenges were, and then acting on resolving those challenges. the oyster community took a challenges. the oyster community took a hit during the event because the governor opened fresh water diversions. we have floods in national about two weeks before the event and that water was coming down the mississippi river. it was to push the oil offshore. we have 7,500 miles of coastline in louisiana. only about 400 miles were oiled. >> all that fresh water was also welcomed by the oysters. >> we had about 50% of our

oysters die. we were down to 50% production. this year, probably another 50%, or about 25% of our traditional production. we are kind of a big guerrilla of oyster production in the gulf. >> so it will take you a couple of years, if you have to wait for the oysters to grow up. you have a few years. >> maybe three or four years, we will be back to whether then -- back to better than we were before. this year, knocked down again with the great floods. we are beginning to see -- we are beginning to see some straws that are breaking people's backs this time. it is really a challenge. >> we heard a lot after the spill that people were afraid

to eat gulf seafood. why did that happen? >> people were afraid to eat the seafood because we saw all these pictures in the media of oiled seafood. entrance a plea, it meant to them that it might be toxic -- intrinsically, it meant to them that it might be toxic. we had to try to help elay the fears of the consumer. the consumer included the processor and the chef. the national marine fishery service, dr. levchenko's organization, invited people within the states and within academia to be trained on the testing that was done to screen the seafood for any sort of oil contamination.

we know that we can smell the pah's at very low levels. we have a very low threshold in our noses. this technology dates back to the early 1960's in japan, where japanese researchers tried to equate -- if i have an oil spill and i take what i think is that concentration and put it in a tank and put in fish and allow them to swim and then take out at certain periods -- how quickly does it take up the compounds. by the same token, put it into water and see how quickly that dissipated. it was shown that they can

detect down to .5 parts per million. what does that mean for you? one. one part per million is about a drop. >> our people back to eating gulf seafood now? >> there are still some concerns. we did a lot of training with the harvest through open waters, working with the fda and noaa to guarantee that the seafood is harvested through open waters. they can do that easily. we trained the processors so they could see that you really can smell it. people are gradually coming back, but there is still concern. was a very large national media

effort. it created a perception tree we know perception is one of the hardest things to change -- it created a perception. we know perception is one of the hardest things to change. >> we also did extensive chemical testing on seafood. we have had a chemical tests for the compounds in the hydrocarbons that have been mentioned that are a potential concern because they are carcinogenic. during the spill, we developed a new test for the dispersant. we were doing both the sniff test and the chemical test. i think that is useful information. when i go back to the gulf still, people ask. there's a lot of concern. there are lingering concerns about the safety and i think you have put your finger on it.

that is, the images that we saw a day after day after day have made people suspicious. >> yeah. ted, you have obviously been passionate about oceans for many years long before the spill happened. did the spill help you focus a different way focusbeing an ocean activist? ocean activist?