dr. moniz was professor of physics and engineering at mit where he was a faculty member since 1973. from director of the office of management budget. secretary lew now serve as the secretary of the treasury. without objection the witness's full prepared statements will be made part of the record. members will have five days to submit statements for the record. and before turning to the testimony we have most members present here. i know we all recognize the gravity of this issue. we want everybody to have a chance to question the secretaries. to accomplish they would ask everyone members and witnesses respect the time limit. and that means leaving adequate amount of time for witnesses to answer your questions. and nothing requires full use of your time. so we will begin with a summary of secretary kerry's testimony. mr. secretary. >> well chairman royce, ranking member engel and all of the members of the committee, thank you very very much. we genuinely appreciate the opportunity to be here to,

suddenly transformed into armchair nuclear scientists, disputing the assessments of experts like dr. moniz. challenging his findings. offering sometimes contradicting arguments about why congress should reject this deal. but if you repeat these arguments long enough, they can get some traction. so let me address just a few of the arguments made so far in opposition to this deal. first, there are those who say that the inspections are not strong enough because inspectors cannot go anywhere in iran at any time with no notice. here's the truth. inspectors will be allowed daily access to iran's key nuclear sites. if there is a reason for inspecting a suspicious, undeclared site anywhere in iran, inspectors will get that access, even if iran objects. in fact, it can be with as little as 24 hours notice. and while the process for resolving a dispute about access can take 24 days, we will be watching it continuously until inspectors get in. by the way, nuclear material isn't something you hide in the closet. [laughter] it can leave a trace for years. the bottom line is, if iran cheats, we can cat

has is what dr. moniz ignited. moreure he will get accolades when he gets back.he agreement does not provide for this exponential increase in enrichment capacity or a drop-off in terms of breakout time limits. they asked what criteria do we need. i offered several of them. assessment is not about managing all the bad things that could go wrong. you try to put parameters, measure the risks. how do you do that? you compare one thing to another. we talked about to this being exceedingly strong agreement, arguably the most robust non-corporation agreement negotiated industry. compared to the others, that should give you some confidence going over. second and separate, evaluation criterion is how does it compare to the alternatives? i hear some say that 15 years isn't long enough. resists the song i've heard this before. a few weeks or months notice before iran do something. a few weeks or months. and then john kerry comes and says where at six months breakout time. then he was told six months isn't enough. then they come back with an agreement that says a year, doubl

fofor example, this evening, inn all-senators classified briefing, at that meeting we'll hear from dr. moniz, the secretary of energy, a man eminently qualified as a scientist, m.i.t. physics professor who is really actually world-famous for his scientific prowess, and wendy sherman, one of mechanic's truly great -- america's truly great diplomats. we've yet to see the language of the legislative response to the accord that's been negotiated. i know that senator corker and senator cornyn are working on it, but it is not out yet. it is incumbent on congress to review this agreement, with a thoughtful, level-headed process. an agreement of this magnitude deserves it. now let's hopefully remember that we all agree, now the world agrees, that a nuclear-armed iran is unacceptable, a threat to our national security. the safety of israel and the stability of the middle east. mr. president, like many senators, i'm continuing to consider this matter. i'm looking forward to the briefing tonight. it's altogether appropriate for senators to consider this deliberately and with the understanding that this

that's really part of what dr. moniz, who has now been knighted by the portuguese and i'm sure will be getting other accolades once he gets back and has working out there. are some provisions that will be coming out that we expect will be investigated during the review period. but we don't -- the agreement does not provide for this exponential increase in enrichment capacity or a drop-off in terms of the breakout timeline. >> okay. >> let me -- can i follow up on that for a second. because i testified before the senate foreign relations committee last month. and they asked what are the criteria we should use for evaluating the new agreement. i offered several. one of them is assessment is not about imagining all the bad things that could go wrong and listing them. that's not assessment. assessment is you try to put parameters, measure the risks involved and weigh these risks and calculate trade-offs. so how do you do that? well, you compare one thing to another. and we've talked about this being exceedingly strong agreem