mr. brenner's of the future can't get away with it? mr. brenner, did you recommend other people to get the special treatment? >> i don't remember having spent mr. sullivan, which investigate pelosi recommended to get this and whether he had business deals with them? i mean, this is just unbelievable. and who would be the proper person, mr. perciasepe, to audit this to make sure the people within the agency are honest? >> well, first of all, we put some new controls in already on the retention bonus system. no one at epa right now is getting a retention bonus. even the inspector general themselves have used this technique to keep valuable employees. and so we don't want speakers are not questioned the policy. i'm just saying we need professionals and we need highly qualified people get many offers but i believe that mr. beale never had another offer. i believe that he lied, like he lied to everyone else. so how do we catch the liars? who would use it would be the appropriate agency to audit the epa to see if anyone else is involved in some t

mr. brenner, back in the 70s, when you and mr. beale went to princeton, you begin a friendship that could require, that should require when you are the superior if someone that you helped bring into the agency, that you look with the little bit more scrutiny. but you are more likely know what someone is saying isn't true and i find it astonishing that. and additionally during our investigation and the help of the inspector general we became aware of what appears to be an inappropriate set than 70,000-dollar gift. a discount on a mercedes-benz. from an outside lobbyist. my understanding is this was not done with the approval of cooperation of mercedes-benz, but it is her attention to use our power beyond that which the ig has authority. it were up to me, the ig would've had authority to interview all of you or both of you even as he sought retirement escape history section. one of the reasons that you're here today is in fact that the ig act has certain limitations and it cannot compel former members of government to speak them. yo

mr. brenner back in the '70s when you and mr.eale went to princeton you began a friendship that should in fact, should require with your superior of somebody who you help bring into the agency you look with a little more scrutiny if you're more likely to know that somebody says is not true additionally with the investigation with the help of the inspector general we became aware of what appears to be an inappropriate except in $78,000 gift, a discount on the mercedes benz for an outside lobbyists. this was not done with the pre-approval in cooperation with mercedes-benz but our intention to use our power to investigate that the ig has authority. if it was up to me id would've had the authority to interview both of you even as you saw retirement to escape his jurisdiction. one of the reasons you're here today is in fact, that the -- it has certain occasions it cannot compel former members of government to speak to them it cannot go between agencies and is a very stovepipe baby will move legislation to expand the ability of the ig

mr. brenner, you think you have done anything wrong? >> no, i do not think i have done anything with respect to mr. beale's personal issues in the way they were handled during the time that it was a supervisor. >> let's start by the fact he recommended him for a retention bonus, which he did. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> it is required that you have a written bonus on this. is that correct? >> i don't know whether a written authorization is required. either a written authorization were determined that the authorization was made. i believe this has gone through a phone call to discuss it with whoever was making the offer. >> is that true, mr. salus? is required to serve you a written? >> it is my understanding that a written offer is not required, although most packages do have this and what is required, the supervisor recommended the incentive of the bonus is to assert that he or she had due diligence. >> so what was your due diligence? >> we are talking about something that happened many years ago. >> you cannot recall it? >>