ms. murphy i think i have 6 minutes. >> yes. >> i'll try not to take 6 good evening ms. murphy i wanted to brief focus on the issues properly before you on other discusses and focus on the variances and i do want to remind just recall what he was referring to and mr. sanchez about the site this sites as mentioned the whole configuration of the lot was a kwunls of embarcadero free we tried to show an image by and regularly shaped lots a lot of those relatively complicated set of open space and garages it is a circumstance that is out of older but in variances are really intended to have the thoughtful sculpting the reason the planning code permit that a notion that the enforcement of symprovisions cause unnecessary hardship taken for example, the oscar pistorius we've heard here tonight part of the reason. the evaporates of the oscar pistorius a contradiction in the code 4 a specifically says in c-3 you'll say a 27 feet opening and because we're trying to have one curve cut it creates the hardship of the difficulty of trying to get the trucks in at that radius in is what s

ms. murphy. >> no further questions? >> further comments?h, sorry we spent a lot of time on this i feel it is fair we give the appellant a few minutes if they have any questions >> mr. osgood anything to say. >> in regards we gave the project sponsor a lot of time so in all fairness. >> a couple of things in response real quick planning did not give this project a lot of care in fact, they've got all the way to a public hearings that was originally proposed nobody at planning stopped that i think we stopped that through our objections and planning commission said they would have voted for the huge building they've abused the discretion and the eir itself notes that this i don't remember the exact words but points out this is essentially the first block the city that actually shows that you know it is 75 howard not one 75 howard and another point about the diagonal a dispute within the port and the dpw who owns that triangle in front the port said it's there's they've been trying to market it for decades they've having had no takers and the l

ms. murphy sets the table for more consumers at the surplus lines policy when that occurs. i will point out commissioner miller for my own date have sold flood insurance with a thousand policies what evidence and state regulators have not with policies carriers -- >> sure. what evidence? what evidence do you have where you can show me what this has been an issue? >> the evidence is regulators don't have authority to approve forms are raised. commissioner miller has issued a bulletin on price optimization, telling insurers they can't use a consumer's willingness to pay to determine the price they charged. she has no authority to do the same thing for surplus insurers. same thing with other issues and policy farm issues. surplus line insurers can include a provision -- >> you say could. i am looking for specific examples where it's happening. that's what i'm looking for from you. >> well, i will give you evidence from the insurance market. the largest writers of private flood insurance today are flood insurers than the largest of those are admitted carriers. private flood ins

ms. lynch: that is also correct. senator murphy: for those trying to determine whether they fall under the law or not, the existing precedent may be confusing or hard to track down. ms. lynch: it is hard to track down and it is a lot to ask every citizen to do a search and determine what the courts have said about how they are operating. what often happens is individuals operating at gun shows or smaller sales will reach out to the atf and they have questions. they say this is what i'm doing and i don't know if it means i need to apply for a license or not. they asked those questions in person when they see investigators at gun shows, they call in and so our hope is this guidance along with the educational program the atf will be beginning providing the information to people will allow people to have clarity about this issue. we don't assume everyone is a lawyer or even wants to be, but they do have this requirement if they are engaged in the dealing of firearms and we hope this will ease compliance for those individuals seeking to

ms. lynch: that is also correct. senator murphy: for those trying to determine whether they fall under the law or not, the existing precedent may be confusing or hard to track down. ms. lynch: it is hard to track down and it is a lot to ask every citizen to do a dyslexic -- do a lexis-nexis search and determine what the courts have said about how they are operating. what often happens is individuals operating at gun shows or smaller sales will reach out to the atf and they have questions. they say this is what i'm doing and i don't know if it means i need to apply for a license or not. they asked those questions in person when they see investigators at gun shows, they call in with those questions. our hope is this guidance along with the educational program the atf will be beginning providing the information to people will allow individuals to have clarity about this issue. we don't assume everyone is a lawyer or even wants to be, but they do have this requirement if they are engaged in the dealing of firearms and we hope this will

so as advocates of the ross-murphy approach, do any of you all, ms. miller, mr. bradshaw, mr. kelley, want to address that issue? >> i'd be happy to. you know, i think the issue of cherry picking is certainly a concern, and something that we would recommend we monitor going forward. but right now as i've said a few times. i mean, this market is very small. there's just too little data i think at this point to know how the market's going to react going forward. from our perspective, if this bill will enacted sooner rather than later, i think it would give us a chance to get more data and really observe how this market is going to perform going forward. and i think that does a couple things. i think, one, it gives us, all of us looking at the nfip program, it will give us more information to inform potential changes to that program, but, also from a state regulator's perspective, i think if we had more data, it would help us as we look forward and think about ways we might need to change our regulation to address this evolving market. so, but i think from our perspective, i cert

so as advocates of them ross-murphy approach did any of you all, ms. miller, mr. branch are, mr. kelley, what do address that issue? >> i be happy to. i think the issue of cherry-picking is a concern and something that we would recommend we monitor going forward. right now as i've said, this market is very small. there's too little data i think at this point in the market is going to react going forward. from our perspective if this bill were enacted sooner rather than later i think it would give us a chance to get more data and observe how this market is going to perform going forward. i think it does a couple things. one, it gives us and all of us would look at the nfip program, it will give us more information to inform potential changes to the program but also from state regulators perspective if we had more data it will help us as we look forward and think about ways we might do to change our regulation to address this evolving market. i think from our perspective i wouldn't want concerns about cherry-picking to get in the wake of us providing more options for consumers in t

ms. dawn von tempo the director of the veteran benefit management system office. mr. steven suisseman, the assistant deputy chief information officer for program management and mr. thomas murphy, the director of compensation service. also testifying for us today mr. brent arente the deputy assistant director inspector general for the audits and evaluations with the office of the ig. he's accompanied by mr. michael bowman, the director of information technology of the security audits division of the office of inspector general and finally valerie melvin the director of information technology at the united states government accountability office. thank you all for being with us this morning. your complete written statements will be entered into the record. mis ms. mccoy, you are recognized for five minutes to present your opening testimony. >> thank you. good morning, mr. chairman, chairman miller, ranking member brown, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the recent department of veterans affairs office of inspector general and government accountability office reports dated september 14 and september 15th, 2015, respectively. also, chairman, t