[Senate Report 114-33]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


114th Congress    }                                      {       Report 
                                 SENATE
 1st Session      }                                      {       114-33                                                                 
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     




                     ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON

                         HOMELAND SECURITY AND

                          GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS


                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                                and its

                             SUBCOMMITTEES

                                for the

                    ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                 April 20, 2015--Ordered to be printed
                 
                                   ______

                U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

49-010                  WASHINGTON : 2015                  
                 
                 
                 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
                 
        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                    RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio                    CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
RAND PAUL, Kentucky                  JON TESTER, Montana
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming             HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire          CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
JONI ERNST, Iowa                     GARY PETERS, Michigan
BEN SASSE, Nebraska

                    Keith B. Ashdown, Staff Director
                  Christopher R. Hixon, Chief Counsel
              Gabrielle A. Batkin, Minority Staff Director
           John P. Kilvington, Minority Deputy Staff Director
                MaryBeth Schultz, Minority Chief Counsel
                     Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
                                 ------                                

  COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS DURING THE 
                             113TH CONGRESS

                  THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan                 TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas              JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri           ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana                  RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK BEGICH, Alaska                  MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota         JEFF CHIESA, New Jersey\1\
                                 ------                                

                  SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE 113TH CONGRESS
             PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS (PSI)

                     CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas              JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri           ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana                  RAND PAUL, Kentucky
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota         JEFF CHIESA, New Jersey\1\
                                 ------                                

               FINANCIAL AND CONTRACTING OVERSIGHT (FCO)

                  CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri. Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan                 RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas              JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
MARK BEGICH, Alaska                  KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
                                 ------                                

   EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS AND THE FEDERAL 
                            WORKFORCE (FPFW)

                     JON TESTER, Montana, Chairman
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas              ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri           RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
MARK BEGICH, Alaska                  RAND PAUL, Kentucky
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
                                 ------                                

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, AND THE DISTRICT OF 
                            COLUMBIA (EMDC)

                     MARK BEGICH, Alaska, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan                 RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas              JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana          ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana                  MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota         JEFF CHIESA, New Jersey\1\
                                 ------                                

\1\Senator Jeff Chiesa served on the Committee from 6/20/2013 to 10/30/
2013.













                                CONTENTS

                                 ------                                
                                                                   Page
  I. Highlights of Activities.........................................1

      Homeland Security..........................................     2
        A. Cybersecurity.........................................     2
        B. Immigration and Border Security.......................     4
        C. Chemical Security.....................................     5
        D. Department of Homeland Security Management and 
        Oversight................................................     5
        E. Preparedness..........................................     6

      Government Affairs.........................................     7

        A. Leadership............................................     7
        B. Curbing Improper Payments, Waste, and Fraud...........     7
        C. Inspectors General....................................     7
        D. Federal Workforce.....................................     8
        E. Security Clearance Processes..........................     8
        F. Federal Property......................................     9
        G. Information Technology Management.....................     9
        H. Government Management and Efficiency..................     9
        I. Federal Procurement...................................    10
        J. Department of Defense Financial Practices and Improved 
        Management...............................................    10
        K. Grants Management.....................................    11
        L. Census................................................    11
        M. District of Columbia..................................    11

 II. Committee Jurisdiction..........................................11
III. Bills and Resolutions Referred and Considered...................15
 IV. Hearings........................................................15
  V. Reports, Prints, and GAO Reports................................37
 VI. Official Communications.........................................53
VII. Legislative Actions.............................................53
        Measures Enacted Into Law................................    53
        Postal Naming Bills......................................    66
VIII.Activities of the Subcommittees.................................70


   Efficiency and Effectiveness of Federal Programs and the Federal 
                            Workforce (FPFW)

  I. Authority.......................................................70

 II. Activity........................................................70

III. Legislation.....................................................74

 IV. GAO Reports.....................................................75

               Financial and Contracting Oversight (FCO)

  I. Authority.......................................................76

 II. Activity........................................................76

III. Legislation.....................................................99

Emergency Management, Intergovernmental Relations, and the District of 
                            Columbia (EMDC)

  I. Authority......................................................103

 II. Activity.......................................................103

III. Legislation....................................................108

 IV. GAO Reports....................................................108

             Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI)

  I. Historical Background..........................................110

        A. Subcommittee Jurisdiction.............................   110

        B. Subcommittee Investigations...........................   112

 II. Subcommittee Hearings during the 113th Congress................118

III. Legislation Activities during the 113th Congress.............. 129

 IV. Reports, Prints, and Studies...................................131







114th Congress    }                                      {       Report 
                                 SENATE
 1st Session      }                                      {       114-33                 

======================================================================



 
                ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND
                   SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
                       DURING THE 113TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

                 April 20, 2015--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
                    Affairs, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

    This report reviews the legislative and oversight 
activities of the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs and its Subcommittees during the 113th 
Congress. These activities were conducted pursuant to the 
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, as amended; by Rule 
XXV(k) of the Standing Rules of the Senate; and by additional 
authorizing resolutions of the Senate. See Section II, 
``Committee Jurisdiction,'' for details.
    Senator Carper was Chairman of the Committee during the 
113th Congress; Senator Coburn was the Ranking Member.
    Major activities of the Committee during the 113th Congress 
included investigations, oversight, and legislation involving 
strengthening our nation's critical infrastructure facilities, 
cybersecurity, and borders; Postal Service reform; increasing 
transparency into government spending; and curbing waste, 
fraud, and abuse in government programs. Discussion of these 
major activities appears in Section I below; additional 
information on these and other measures appears in Section VII, 
``Legislative Actions.''
    Extensive information about the Committee's history, 
hearings, legislation, documents, Subcommittees, and other 
matters is available at the Web site, http://hsgac.senate.gov/.

                      I. HIGHLIGHTS OF ACTIVITIES

    During the 113th Congress, the Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs Committee (``the Committee'' or ``HSGAC'') 
worked to address critical issues facing our Nation and Federal 
agencies. Through oversight and legislation, the Committee 
worked to bolster the effectiveness and efficiency of the 
Federal Government, in ways such as protecting our critical 
infrastructure from cyber attacks, securing our Nation's 
chemical facilities, reducing wasteful and fraudulent spending, 
and getting better results from Federal programs.
    The 9/11 terrorist attacks prompted one of the greatest 
reorganizations the Federal Government has seen since World War 
II and brought to light a number of vulnerabilities that our 
Nation faces both domestically and abroad. Recent threats from 
cyber attacks to the Boston Marathon Bombings to the rise of 
the violent extremists, including the Islamic State of Iraq and 
Syria (ISIS), show that threats to our Nation continue to 
evolve and underscore that our homeland security needs to 
evolve with it. In response to the evolving threats, the 
Committee prioritized homeland security legislation and 
oversight to bolster the Department of Homeland Security, to 
strengthen our Nation's critical infrastructure facilities, 
cybersecurity, and borders, and to ensure that the men and 
women who keep us safe receive the support, resources, and 
authorities needed to protect Americans and our country.
    Much of the Committee's efforts on governmental affairs 
issues centered on working to reform and modernize the U.S. 
Postal Service, including through Committee passage of a bill 
offering solutions to this American institution's financial 
crisis. Further, an overarching goal of the Committee's 
government affairs agenda this Congress was working on a strong 
bipartisan basis to drive agencies to deliver better results 
for less money in their Federal programs. Through leveraging 
the work of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and 
agency Inspectors General, the Committee passed a number of 
pieces of legislation to make strides in that effort, including 
legislation to curb waste, fraud and abuse in government 
programs, provide greater transparency into government 
spending, strengthen programs against improper payments, and 
improve the government's multi-billion dollar information 
technology (IT) portfolio management.

                           Homeland Security

    As the Department of Homeland Security (``the Department'' 
or ``DHS'') celebrated its 10 year anniversary in 2013, 
Chairman Carper and Ranking Member Coburn conducted a top to 
bottom review of the Department to help ensure it was 
effectively and efficiently accomplishing its missions. As part 
of this review the Committee held several oversight hearings 
including ``DHS at 10 Years: A Progress Report on Management,'' 
``DHS at 10 Years: Harnessing Science and Technology to Protect 
National Security and Enhance Government Efficiency,'' and 
``DHS at 10 Years: Examining Challenges and Achievements and 
Addressing Emerging Threats.'' This review helped inform the 
Committee's legislative and oversight work for this Congress.
    The Committee also conducted several briefings and hearings 
to examine evolving threats to the Homeland, including 
cybersecurity, terrorism, and radiological materials.

                            A. Cybersecurity

    In the 113th Congress, the Committee continued its focus on 
cybersecurity. Following President Obama's 2013 Executive Order 
regarding cybersecurity which put in motion the creation of an 
industry driven framework for voluntary cybersecurity 
standards, the Committee did careful oversight and worked to 
develop bipartisan cybersecurity legislation. By the end of the 
113th Congress, the Committee had worked with its House 
counterparts to pass into law four critical bills to strengthen 
our national and economic security by modernizing our Nation's 
cybersecurity and strengthening the Department of Homeland 
Security's cyber work force.
    At the beginning of the 113th Congress, the Committee held 
a joint cybersecurity hearing with the Senate Commerce, 
Science, and Technology Committee, entitled ``The Cybersecurity 
Partnership Between the Private Sector and Our Government: 
Protecting Our National and Economic Security.'' This was the 
first joint hearing with the Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs Committee (as well as its predecessor committee--the 
Governmental Affairs Committee) and the Senate Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation in over 35 years. The 
Committee continued to examine the evolving issue of 
cybersecurity through several other hearings, including 
``Strengthening Public-Private Partnerships to Reduce Cyber 
Risks to Our Nation's Critical Infrastructure,'' and ``Data 
Breach on the Rise: Protecting Personal Information from 
Harm.'' Cybersecurity was also discussed at several briefings 
and hearings focused on evolving threats, including 
``Cybersecurity, Terrorism, and Beyond: Addressing Evolving 
Threats to the Homeland.''
    In December 2014, Congress passed and the President signed 
into law four cybersecurity bills which were top priorities of 
the Committee. The Federal Information Security Modernization 
Act of 2014, P.L. 113-283, updates the Federal Information 
Security Management Act of 2002 to better protect Federal 
agencies from cyber attacks. The National Cybersecurity 
Protection Act of 2014, P.L. 113-282, codifies the existing 
National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center at 
the Department of Homeland Security and the Center's existing 
cybersecurity responsibilities. The DHS Cybersecurity Workforce 
Recruitment and Retention Act of 2014, passed out of Committee 
and enacted into law as part of the Border Patrol Agent Pay 
Reform Act of 2013, P.L. 113-277, helps the Department hire and 
retain cybersecurity professionals by providing the Department 
with personnel authorities similar to those of the Secretary of 
Defense. The Cybersecurity Workforce Assessment Act, P.L. 113-
246, strengthens the Department of Homeland Security's 
cybersecurity work force by requiring the Secretary of Homeland 
Security to assess the cybersecurity workforce of DHS and 
develop a strategy to enhance the department's ability to 
protect our Nation from cyber-attacks.
    Following the announcement of major data breaches at the 
Office Personnel Management and a Federal contractor 
responsible for processing security clearances, the Committee 
worked in bipartisan fashion through letters and briefings to 
better understand how the data breaches potentially exposed the 
personal information of tens of thousands of Federal employees 
and jeopardized the security clearance process. The Committee's 
oversight helped ensure steps were taken to better secure the 
information obtained through the security clearance process and 
that Federal agencies were working closely with personnel 
impacted by the breaches.

                   B. Immigration and Border Security

    The Committee continued to be an active and important 
participant in the broad debate on comprehensive immigration 
reform legislation during the 113th Congress. The Committee 
conducted robust oversight in this area through a series of 
hearings on border security, beginning with hearings on the 
State of border security: ``Border Security: Measuring the 
Progress and Addressing the Challenges,'' and ``Border 
Security: Frontline Perspectives on Progress and Remaining 
Challenges.'' The Committee then held a hearing specifically on 
legislative language regarding border security within the 
comprehensive immigration reform legislation being considered 
in the Judiciary Committee: ``Examining Provisions in the 
Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration 
Modernization Act (S. 744).'' During these hearings, various 
witnesses discussed the large investments made by the Federal 
Government in securing the northern and southern borders and 
noted that the border was more secure than it had ever been in 
the past though challenges still remain.
    In June 2013, the Senate began debate on the comprehensive 
immigration reform legislation, S. 744. The legislation was 
ultimately approved by the Senate with a bipartisan vote of 68-
32. Notably, the bill included two amendments offered by the 
Chairman. The first amendment (Amdt. 1273) would authorize a 
pilot program to notify visa holders on the looming expiration 
of their visas. The second amendment (Amdt. 1408) would require 
the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security 
to provide training and material assistance to border and law 
enforcement officials in Mexico and Central America in order to 
help them operate more effectively. This amendment would also 
create a ``truth campaign'' aimed at disseminating educational 
materials to would-be migrants about the perils of the journey 
across Mexico.
    In addition to its work on S. 744, the Committee examined 
other challenges associated with border security and the 
Nation's ports of entry. For example, in response to the surge 
of unaccompanied minors and families apprehended along the 
southwest border in the spring and summer of 2014, the 
Committee studied the humanitarian crisis with a series of 
hearings to examine the factors driving the historic surge of 
Central Americans arriving at the border, and in many cases 
seeking asylum, as well as the government response. The 
hearings included: ``Challenges at the Border: Examining the 
Causes, Consequences, and Responses to the Rise in 
Apprehensions at the Southern Border,'' and ``Challenges at the 
Border: Examining and Addressing the Root Causes Behind the 
Rise in Apprehensions at the Southern Border.'' As part of the 
Committee's oversight agenda on this issue and border security 
more broadly, Chairman Carper went on six congressional 
delegation trips to examine the northern and southern borders 
as well as Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras.
    The Committee also addressed concerns about the misuse of 
Administratively Uncontrollable Overtime at Customs and Border 
Protection. The Committee approved and helped to enact The 
Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act of 2013 (S. 1691), P.L. 113-
277, which simplifies the current pay system for Border Patrol 
agents, addresses concerns about the misuse of Administratively 
Uncontrollable Overtime, and saves taxpayers more than $100 
million a year. At the same time, the bill adds more than two 
million hours of border enforcement by frontline agents--the 
equivalent of adding 1,500 agents to patrol our Nation's land 
borders. The Committee held hearings to examine this issue more 
closely, including: ``Examining the Use and Abuse of 
Administratively Uncontrollable Overtime at the Department of 
Homeland Security,'' held before the Subcommittee on the 
Efficiency and Effectiveness of Federal Programs and the 
Federal Workforce, and ``Examining the Implications of S. 1691, 
the Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act of 2013,'' held by the 
full Committee.

                          C. Chemical Security

    The Committee conducted a variety of oversight activities 
on the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) 
program at the Department of Homeland Security, including 
holding a hearing, ``Charting a Path Forward for the Chemical 
Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards Program'', and multiple 
briefings. This robust oversight helped inform the CFATS 
reauthorization legislation drafted by the Committee and passed 
by Congress. The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards 
Program Authorization and Accountability Act of 2014, now P.L. 
113-254, reauthorizes the CFATS program within the Department 
and implements a series of important changes to make the 
program more efficient and effective. Specifically, the law 
reauthorizes the CFATS program for 4 years, establishes a 
voluntary new expedited approval procedure for site security 
plans for certain chemical facilities, improves aspects of 
information sharing with State and local officials, and 
enhances the Department's ability to identify high-risk 
chemical facilities that otherwise go unmonitored.

      D. Department of Homeland Security Management and Oversight

    Throughout the 113th Congress, the Committee examined and 
looked for ways to improve the management, efficiency and 
effectiveness of the Department and its various components. The 
Committee focused on streamlining management decisions, 
increasing collaboration among agency components, filling key 
Department leadership vacancies, building a more unified 
Department, and finding ways to improve Department-wide 
employee morale.
    The Committee conducted significant oversight on the 
Department's financial management, specifically on the 
Department's ability to obtain a clean financial audit, through 
hearings, letters, and multiple briefings. In 2013, the 
Department obtained its first clean audit and repeated this 
important accomplishment in 2014. Additionally, the Committee 
engaged on a regular basis with senior officials of the 
Department, the Office of Inspector General of the Department, 
and subject matter experts at the Government Accountability 
Office to discuss progress and challenges in the Department's 
management of acquisitions, human capital, information 
technology and financial systems.
    Another priority for the Committee during the 113th 
Congress was confirming individuals to fill the many vacancies 
in the senior leadership at the Department of Homeland 
Security, including: Jeh Johnson, Secretary; Alejandro 
Mayorkas, Deputy Secretary; Suzanne Spaulding, Under Secretary; 
L. Reginald Brothers, Jr., Under Secretary for Science and 
Technology; Joseph Nimmich, Deputy Administrator, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency; Sarah Saldana, Assistant 
Secretary, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and John Roth, 
Inspector General. As part of the Committee's ongoing efforts 
to oversee Department management, Chairman Carper attended a 
roundtable to discuss low worker morale and supported 
undertakings to foster unity of effort throughout the 
Department.
    Chairman Carper's Majority Committee Staff produced a staff 
report, entitled ``Security and Savings: The Importance of 
Consolidating the Department of Homeland Security's 
Headquarters at St. Elizabeths.'' This report found that the 
Department's consolidation at the St. Elizabeths campus will 
improve the Department's ability to carry out its mission, 
while saving the taxpayer money. Specifically, consolidation 
would foster unity of effort, improve morale and productivity, 
reduce management challenges and travel inefficiencies, improve 
crisis management, and save the Federal Government 
approximately $1 billion over the next 30 years. The report 
drew its findings from interviews with the Department's former 
Secretaries Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, and Janet Napolitano, 
other top former Department officials, agency documents, and 
independent analysis.

                            E. Preparedness

    As part of its Federal emergency management oversight, the 
Committee continued to explore different cases to assess and 
examine how prepared the Federal Government is to respond to 
disasters, both natural and man-made, and what it needs to do 
to improve.
    Following the April 15, 2013 bombings at the Boston 
Marathon, the Committee conducted oversight through letters, 
hearings, and briefings to examine the response to the 
bombings, coordination after the event, intelligence and 
information sharing among agencies, and what could be improved 
to prevent another lone wolf terrorist attack. The Committee 
held a series of two hearings on the incident: ``Lessons 
Learned from the Boston Marathon Bombing: Improving 
Intelligence and Information Sharing'' and ``Lessons Learned 
from the Boston Marathon Bombings: Preparing for and Responding 
to the Attack.'' The oversight provided by Congress on the 
Boston Marathon resulted in a number of counterterrorism 
improvements across multiple Federal agencies.
    Following the addition of the risk and costs associated 
with climate change and extreme weather on the Government 
Accountability Office's High Risk List in 2013, the Committee 
held a hearing entitled, ``Extreme Weather Events: The Costs of 
Not Being Prepared.'' The Ebola epidemic in summer 2014 in West 
Africa prompted the Committee to hold the hearing, 
``Preparedness and Response to Public Health Threats: How Ready 
Are We?'', which examined Ebola and other health threats. The 
Committee also held a hearing examining lessons learned from 
the Hurricane Sandy response entitled ``Hurricane Sandy: 
Getting the Recovery Right and the Value of Mitigation.''

                           Government Affairs

                             A. Leadership

    The Committee moved several key nominations to senior 
positions in the executive branch responsible for government 
management: Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Director, Office of 
Management and Budget; Shaun L. S. Donovan, Director, Office of 
Management and Budget; Brian C. Deese, Deputy Director, Office 
of Management and Budget; Beth F. Cobert, Deputy Director for 
Management, Office of Management and Budget; David Mader, 
Controller, Office of Management and Budget; Anne E. Rung, 
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, Office of 
Management and Budget; Howard Shelanski, Administrator, Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget; Katherine Archuleta, Director, Office of Personnel 
Management; Daniel M. Tangherlini, Administrator of the General 
Services Administration; and John H. Thompson, Director of the 
Census, U.S. Department of Commerce. In moving these 
nominations expeditiously, Chairman Carper underscored strong 
leadership as the key to success of any organization, including 
the Federal Government.

             B. Curbing Improper Payments, Waste, and Fraud

    The Committee continued its oversight and efforts to better 
identify and reduce improper payments across the Federal 
Government. The Improper Payments Agency Cooperation 
Enhancement (IPACE) Act of 2013 (S. 1360), which passed the 
Senate, would direct the Commissioner of Social Security to 
provide information on all deceased individuals that is 
furnished to or maintained by the Commissioner to Federal or 
State agencies in order to reduce improper payments and to 
administer programs more efficiently.
    In addition to sponsoring the IPACE Act, Chairman Carper 
and Ranking Member Coburn testified before House Oversight and 
Government Reform Committee hearing entitled ``Waste in 
Government: What's Being Done?''. The Committee sent multiple 
letters to the executive branch and conducted a review of 
implementation of improper payments legislation across the 
government. The Committee also sent numerous letters to the 
executive branch calling attention to Medicare prescription 
drug fraud and highlighting promising methods of improved 
oversight of Medicare and Medicaid, including Recovery Act 
Contracting. Additionally, the Committee held three hearings 
related to waste, fraud and abuse, ``Curbing Prescription Drug 
Abuse in Medicare'', ``Curbing Federal Agency Waste and Fraud: 
New Steps to Strengthen the Integrity of Federal Payments'', 
and ``Social Security Disability Benefits: Did a Group of 
Judges, Doctors, and Lawyers Abuse Programs for the Country's 
Most Vulnerable?''.

                         C. Inspectors General

    The Committee began the 113th Congress with a letter to 
President Obama urging him to fill Inspector General (IG) 
vacancies throughout the Federal Government. In addition, the 
Committee spent considerable time working with the IG community 
and the Administration on a range of issues. For example, the 
Committee opened a productive conversation with the IG 
community and other members of the Council of the Inspectors 
General on Integrity and Efficiency to discuss ways to expedite 
and otherwise improve the process for investigating allegations 
against IGs and other top officials in IG offices.
    The Committee helped to enact the OPM IG Act (H.R. 2860), 
now P.L. 113-80. This law authorizes the use of funding from 
the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) revolving fund to pay 
for audits and investigations by the Inspector General of OPM. 
This will allow the OPM IG to conduct important oversight of 
the activities funded by the revolving fund, which include the 
conduct of background investigations of Federal employees and 
contractors. The Senate version of this legislation, S. 1276, 
the Security Clearance Oversight and Reform Enhancement Act, 
was reported favorably out of committee and passed the Senate.
    The Committee also took legislative action to help the 
Inspector General's Office at the Department of Homeland 
Security operate more effectively and efficiently. The 
Committee approved the DHS OIG Mandates Revision Act of 2014 
(S. 2651), P.L. 113-284, which eliminated a number of 
unnecessary and duplicative congressional mandated audits 
performed by the Office of Inspector General of the Department 
of Homeland Security.

                          D. Federal Workforce

    The Committee successfully helped to enact the All Circuit 
Review Extension Act (H.R. 4197), P.L. 113-170. This law 
strengthens the protection of Federal-employee whistleblowers 
who suffer retaliation, by extending for an additional 3 years 
the ability of these whistleblowers to appeal their case to any 
Federal circuit court of appeals, rather than being limited to 
the Federal Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The 
committee also successfully helped to enact the Smart Savings 
Act (H.R. 4193), P.L. 113-255, which was the House companion to 
S. 2117. This new law will help Federal employees save for 
retirement in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) by investing the 
employee's TSP funds, by default, in an age-appropriate target-
date asset-allocation investment fund (L Fund), instead of the 
Government Securities Investment Fund (G Fund), if the employee 
makes no election.

                    E. Security Clearance Processes

    The Committee conducted extensive oversight of the 
government's security clearance processes in response to a 
series of incidents--the leak of military information to 
Wikileaks by Pfc Bradley Manning, the leaks of classified 
information by Edward Snowden, the Washington Navy Yard 
shooting by Aaron Alexis, and allegations of massive fraud in 
the conduct of background investigations by OPM's contractor 
USIS. In response to the September 2013 shooting at the 
Washington Navy Yard, the Committee held two hearings, ``The 
Navy Yard Tragedy: Examining Government Clearances and 
Background Checks'' and ``Examining Physical Security for 
Federal Facilities.''
    Following the Navy Yard shooting, President Obama called 
for an interagency review of clearances processes. The inter-
agency recommendations to the President from this review were 
released in March 2014. The Committee hosted several briefings 
by the interagency team, chaired by Office of Management and 
Budget, that managed the President's review. The Committee also 
reported three bills to improve the security clearance process: 
the Security Clearance Accountability, Reform and Enhancement 
Act (S. 1744), the Enhanced Security Clearance Act of 2014 (S. 
1618), and the Preventing Conflicts of Interest with 
Contractors Act (S. 2061). These bills would have, 
respectively, required random checks of security clearance 
holders, ensured that Federal employees or contractors who 
undermine the security clearance process are banned from 
further work related to that process, and prohibited 
contractors who perform background investigations from doing 
the final quality review of their own work. While these bills 
were not enacted, their consideration by Congress helped keep 
pressure on the ongoing interagency reform efforts.

                          F. Federal Property

    The Committee conducted extensive oversight to examine and 
implement ways to improve the management of the Federal 
Government's real property portfolio, including the activities 
of agencies and the Federal Real Property Council, which helped 
inform the Chairman's legislation, the Federal Real Property 
Asset Management Reform Act (S. 1398). The bill would codify 
the responsibilities of the Federal Real Property Council and 
require agencies to take steps to improve the management of 
property. In addition, the bill would establish a pilot program 
for expedited disposal of real property. While the bill did not 
pass, the Committee's oversight continued to highlight the need 
for improvements in this area. These efforts helped give force 
to President Obama's drive to reduce the Federal footprint of 
government office space, resulting in a reduction of 10.2 
million square feet in 2013.

                  G. Information Technology Management

    The Committee passed key pieces of legislation that will 
modernize and update the Federal Government's management of its 
massive information technology (IT) portfolio. FITARA, which 
was included in the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (H.R. 
3979), P.L. 113-291, strengthens the authorities of agency 
Chief Financial Officers and improves transparency and 
oversight over Federal IT projects. This bill also includes the 
language of S. 1611, the Federal Data Center Consolidation Act 
of 2013, which was reported out of the Committee and passed the 
Senate. The Committee also held two hearings to examine the 
acquisition and management of IT programs and projects: 
``Identifying Critical Factors for Success in Information 
Technology Acquisitions'' and ``Reducing Duplication and 
Improving Outcomes in Federal Information Technology.''

                H. Government Management and Efficiency

    Throughout the 113th Congress, the Committee made it a top 
priority to help ensure that the Federal Government develop and 
maintain a wiser and more effective management strategy and to 
make Federal agencies operate more efficiently.
    In a hearing, ``The Costs and Impacts of Crisis 
Governing,'' the Committee examined the effects of stop-gap 
continuing resolutions and government shut downs, both of which 
happened during the 113th Congress. The Committee also focused 
on updating and modernizing the Federal Government's overall 
management strategy in a two-part hearing series: ``Management 
Matters: Creating a 21st Century Government.'' The Committee 
also approved the Government Reports Elimination Act of 2014 
(H.R. 4194), now P.L. 113-188, to improve government efficiency 
by eliminating requirements for agencies to produce over fifty 
reports that are no longer needed.

                         I. Federal Procurement

    The Committee focused on ways to help the Federal 
Government save billions of dollars each year through better 
procurement practices. For example, the Committee held the 
hearing, ``Strategic Sourcing: Leveraging the Government's 
Buying Power to Save Billions.'' Additionally, oversight in 
this area laid the groundwork for a provision within the 
Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA), 
which includes a provision requiring agencies to produce an 
analysis justifying any decision to use contracts other than 
those available under the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative 
when goods and services are available under the Initiative. 
Committee staff also received regular briefs on efforts to 
achieve better results in Federal contracting from the Office 
of Federal Procurement Policy, the General Services 
Administration, and the Defense Contract Audit Agency.
    The Committee also held a hearing entitled ``The 
Intelligence Community: Keeping Watch Over Its Contractor 
Workforce.'' This hearing was convened in response to a 
Government Accountability Report entitled, ``The Civilian 
Intelligence Community: Additional Actions Needed to Improve 
Reporting on and Planning for Use of Contract Personnel'' (GAO-
14-204). The hearing highlighted the need for the intelligence 
community to track work performed by contractors and costs 
associated with the contractor work force, and to analyze 
whether work being performed by contractors should be performed 
instead by Federal employees.
    The Committee also approved the Never Contract with the 
Enemy Act (S. 675), which was signed into law as part of the 
Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (H.R. 3979), P.L. 113-
291. This legislation provides a streamlined process for 
cutting off government contracts or grants that flow to persons 
who actively oppose U.S. forces who are engaged in hostilities.

  J. Department of Defense Financial Practices and Improved Management

    The Committee held the hearing, ``Improving Financial 
Management at the Department of Defense'' to examine challenges 
still facing the Department of Defense (DOD) in achieving 
auditability and sent oversight letters to senior DOD leaders 
to emphasize the importance of sound financial management. 
While the Department has made some notable progress in 
improving financial management, the Committee's oversight has 
highlighted that DOD has a long road to travel for the 
Department to become fully auditable by the 2017 deadline. The 
Committee also sent oversight letters related to management of 
DOD ammunition, the return of vehicles from Afghanistan, and 
DOD overstock of inventory.

                          K. Grants Management

    The Committee continued its oversight of governmentwide 
grants management in order to ease the administrative burden 
for those applying for and receiving grants, and to ensure that 
recipients are good stewards of Federal funds. Attention to 
this issue prompted the Office of Management and Budget to 
release new guidance in December 2013 to ease administrative 
burdens and curb waste and fraud in grants. The Committee 
continued its oversight in 2014 to evaluate the new guidance 
and its implementation.

                               L. Census

    The Committee pressed the Census Bureau throughout the 
113th Congress to learn from and act on the lessons from the 
technology problems and cost overruns of the 2010 Decennial 
Census. The Committee sent a detailed oversight letter to the 
Director of the Census Bureau expressing concern about 
preparations for the 2020 Decennial Census, including the 
Bureau's testing and research for the September 2015 design 
decision.

                        M. District of Columbia

    The Committee convened the hearing, ``Equality for the 
District of Columbia: Discussing the Implications of S. 132, 
the New Columbia Admission Act of 2013'', to examine Statehood 
proposals for the District of Columbia and the lack of voting 
representation for the District in Congress, reinvigorating 
discussion of the ongoing difficulties for the District that 
result from its unique status. The Chairman also pushed for 
confirmation of judges to the D.C. Superior Court and wrote 
letters to the Appropriations Committee advocating legislative 
and budget autonomy for the District. This advocacy helped 
secure language in the omnibus appropriations bills for fiscal 
years 2014 and 2015 that will allow the District to continue to 
spend its local funds into 2016 in the event of a Federal 
Government shutdown.
    Finally, the Committee helped enact several bills involving 
District of Columbia issues, including: (1) H.R. 1246, the 
District of Columbia Chief Financial Officer Vacancy Act, P.L. 
113-8; (2) H.R. 3343, a bill to amend the District of Columbia 
Home Rule Act to clarify the rules regarding the determination 
of the compensation of the Chief Financial Officer of the 
District of Columbia, P.L. 113-71; and (3) H.R. 4192, a bill to 
amend the Act entitled ``An Act to regulate the height of 
buildings in the District of Columbia'' to clarify the rules of 
the District of Columbia regarding human occupancy of 
penthouses above the top story of the building upon which the 
penthouse is placed, P. L. 113-103.

                       II. COMMITTEE JURISDICTION

    The jurisdiction of the Committee (which was renamed the 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs when 
the 109th Congress convened) derives from the Rules of the 
Senate and Senate Resolutions:

                                RULE XXV

                            * * * * * * * *

    (k)(1) Committee on Governmental Affairs, to which 
committee shall be referred all proposed legislation, messages, 
petitions, memorials, and other matters relating to the 
following subjects:

     1. Archives of the United States.
     2. Budget and accounting measures, other than 
appropriations, except as provided in the Congressional Budget 
Act of 1974.
     3. Census and collection of statistics, including economic 
and social statistics.
     4. Congressional organization, except for any part of the 
matter that amends the rules or orders of the Senate.
     5. Federal Civil Service.
     6. Government information.
     7. Intergovernmental relations.
     8. Municipal affairs of the District of Columbia, except 
appropriations therefore.
     9. Organization and management of United States nuclear 
export policy.
    10. Organization and reorganization of the executive branch 
of the Government.
    11. Postal Service.
    12. Status of officers and employees of the United States, 
including their classification, compensation, and benefits.

    (2) Such committee shall have the duty of----
    (A) receiving and examining reports of the Comptroller 
General of the United States and of submitting such 
recommendations to the Senate as it deems necessary or 
desirable in connection with the subject matter of such 
reports;
    (B) studying the efficiency, economy, and effectiveness of 
all agencies and departments of the Government;
    (C) evaluating the effects of laws enacted to reorganize 
the legislative and executive branches of the Government; and
    (D) studying the intergovernmental relationships between 
the United States and the States and municipalities, and 
between the United States and international organizations of 
which the United States is a member.

                 SENATE RESOLUTION 253, 113th CONGRESS

        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS.

    Sec. 12. (a) * * *

                            * * * * * * * *

    (d) INVESTIGATIONS----
    (1) IN GENERAL.--The committee, or any duly authorized 
subcommittee of the committee, is authorized to study or 
investigate----
    (A) the efficiency and economy of operations of all 
branches of the Government including the possible existence of 
fraud, misfeasance, malfeasance, collusion, mismanagement, 
incompetence, corruption, or unethical practices, waste, 
extravagance, conflicts of interest, and the improper 
expenditure of Government funds in transactions, contracts, 
and, activities of the Government or of Government officials 
and employees and any and all such improper practices between 
Government personnel and corporations, individuals, companies, 
or persons affiliated therewith, doing business with the 
Government; and the compliance or noncompliance of such 
corporations, companies, or individuals or other entities with 
the rules, regulations, and laws governing the various 
governmental agencies and its relationships with the public;
    (B) the extent to which criminal or other improper 
practices or activities are, or have been, engaged in the field 
of labor-management relations or in groups or organizations of 
employees or employers, to the detriment of interests of the 
public, employers, or employees, and to determine whether any 
changes are required in the laws of the United States in order 
to protect such interests against the occurrence of such 
practices or activities;
    (C) organized criminal activity which may operate in or 
otherwise utilize the facilities of interstate or international 
commerce in furtherance of any transactions and the manner and 
extent to which, and the identity of the persons, firms, or 
corporations, or other entities by whom such utilization is 
being made, and further, to study and investigate the manner in 
which and the extent to which persons engaged in organized 
criminal activity have infiltrated lawful business enterprise, 
and to study the adequacy of Federal laws to prevent the 
operations of organized crime in interstate or international 
commerce; and to determine whether any changes are required in 
the laws of the United States in order to protect the public 
against such practices or activities;
    (D) all other aspects of crime and lawlessness within the 
United States which have an impact upon or affect the national 
health, welfare, and safety; including but not limited to 
investment fraud schemes, commodity and security fraud, 
computer fraud, and the use of offshore banking and corporate 
facilities to carry out criminal objectives;
    (E) the efficiency and economy of operations of all 
branches and functions of the Government with particular 
reference to----
    (i) the effectiveness of present national security methods, 
staffing, and processes as tested against the requirements 
imposed by the rapidly mounting complexity of national security 
problems;
    (ii) the capacity of present national security staffing, 
methods, and processes to make full use of the Nation's 
resources of knowledge and talents;
    (iii) the adequacy of present intergovernmental relations 
between the United States and international organizations 
principally concerned with national security of which the 
United States is a member; and
    (iv) legislative and other proposals to improve these 
methods, processes, and relationships;
    (F) the efficiency, economy, and effectiveness of all 
agencies and departments of the Government involved in the 
control and management of energy shortages including, but not 
limited to, their performance with respect to----
    (i) the collection and dissemination of accurate statistics 
on fuel demand and supply;
    (ii) the implementation of effective energy conservation 
measures;
    (iii) the pricing of energy in all forms;
    (iv) coordination of energy programs with State and local 
government;
    (v) control of exports of scarce fuels;
    (vi) the management of tax, import, pricing, and other 
policies affecting energy supplies;
    (vii) maintenance of the independent sector of the 
petroleum industry as a strong competitive force;
    (viii) the allocation of fuels in short supply by public 
and private entities;
    (ix) the management of energy supplies owned or controlled 
by the Government;
    (x) relations with other oil producing and consuming 
countries;
    (xi) the monitoring of compliance by governments, 
corporations, or individuals with the laws and regulations 
governing the allocation, conservation, or pricing of energy 
supplies; and
    (xii) research into the discovery and development of 
alternative energy supplies; and
    (G) the efficiency and economy of all branches and 
functions of Government with particular references to the 
operations and management of Federal regulatory policies and 
programs.
    (2) EXTENT OF INQUIRIES.--In carrying out the duties 
provided in paragraph (1), the inquiries of this committee or 
any subcommittee of the committee shall not be construed to be 
limited to the records, functions, and operations of any 
particular branch of the Government and may extend to the 
records and activities of any persons, corporation, or other 
entity.
    (3) SPECIAL COMMITTEE AUTHORITY.--For the purposes of this 
subsection, the committee, or any duly authorized subcommittee 
of the committee, or its chairman, or any other member of the 
committee or subcommittee designated by the chairman is 
authorized, in its, his or her, or their discretion----
    (A) to require by subpoena or otherwise the attendance of 
witnesses and production of correspondence, books, papers, and 
documents;
    (B) to hold hearings;
    (C) to sit and act at any time or place during the 
sessions, recess, and adjournment periods of the Senate;
    (D) to administer oaths; and
    (E) to take testimony, either orally or by sworn statement, 
or, in the case of staff members of the Committee and the 
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, by deposition in 
accordance with the Committee Rules of Procedure.
    (4) AUTHORITY OF OTHER COMMITTEES.--Nothing contained in 
this subsection shall affect or impair the exercise of any 
other standing committee of the Senate of any power, or the 
discharge by such committee of any duty, conferred or imposed 
upon it by the Standing Rules of the Senate or by the 
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946.
    (5) SUBPOENA AUTHORITY.--All subpoenas and related legal 
processes of the committee and its subcommittee authorized 
under S. Res. 64, agreed to March 5, 2013 (113th Congress) are 
authorized to continue.

           III. BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS REFERRED AND CONSIDERED

    During the 113th Congress, 173 Senate bills and 87 House 
bills were referred to the Committee for consideration. In 
addition, 4 Senate Resolutions and 1 Senate Concurrent 
Resolutions were referred to the Committee.
    The Committee reported 69 bills; an additional 15 measures 
were discharged.
    Of the legislation received by the Committee, 40 measures 
became public laws, including 33 postal naming bills.

                              IV. HEARINGS

    During the 113th Congress, the Committee held 70 hearings 
on legislation, oversight issues, and nominations. Hearing 
titles and dates follow.
    The Committee also held 18 scheduled business meetings.
    Lists of hearings with copies of statements by Members and 
witnesses, with archives going back to 1997, are online at the 
Committee's Web site, http://hsgac.senate.gov/.
Solutions to the Crisis Facing the U.S. Postal Service. February 13, 
        2013. (S. Hrg. 113-18)
    The purpose of this three-panel hearing was to examine the 
financial and other challenges facing the Postal Service and 
proposals that have been put forward to address those 
challenges, including proposals made by the management of the 
Postal Service and legislative proposals that have been or are 
being considered in Congress. The Committee was also interested 
in the witnesses' assessments of the implications if Congress 
does not enact postal reform legislation.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Darrell E. Issa, U.S. House of 
Representatives; and Hon. Elijah E. Cummings, U.S. House of 
Representatives. Panel II: Hon. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster 
General and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Postal Service; and 
Hon. Eugene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General of the United 
States, U.S. Government Accountability Office. Panel III: Cliff 
Guffey, President, American Postal Workers Union; Jeanette P. 
Dwyer, President, National Rural Letter Carriers' Association; 
Robert J. Rapoza, President, National Association of 
Postmasters of the United States; Joel Quadracci, Chairman, 
President, and Chief Executive Officer, Quad/Graphics, Inc.; 
and R. Richard Geddes, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department 
of Policy Analysis and Management, Cornell University.
The Cybersecurity Partnership Between the Private Sector and Our 
        Government: Protecting Our National and Economic Security. 
        March 7, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-295)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing, held jointly with 
the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 
was to examine the cybersecurity partnership between the 
Federal Government and the private sector, as well as the 
Cybersecurity Framework and other provisions outlined in the 
Executive Order issued by President Obama on February 12, 2013. 
The witnesses addressed the Federal Government's progress in 
designing and implementing risk-based Federal and critical 
infrastructure programs, as well as concerns about detecting, 
responding to, and mitigating cyber incidents in both the 
public and private sector.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Janet A. Napolitano, Secretary, 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and Hon. Patrick D. 
Gallagher, Under Secretary for Standards and Technology, U.S. 
Department of Commerce. Panel II: Gregory C. Wilshusen, 
Director, Information Security Issues, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office; and David E. Kepler, Chief 
Sustainability Officer, Chief Information Officer, Business 
Services and Executive Vice President, The Dow Chemical 
Company.
The Costs and Impacts of Crisis Budgeting. March 13, 2013. (S. Hrg. 
        113-25)
    The purpose of this single-panel hearing was to examine the 
fiscal and operational impacts of chronic Federal budget 
uncertainty on agency operations and management. Further, the 
hearing explored the cascading effects of this uncertainty on 
state and local governments, Federal employee morale, and the 
economy at large.
    Witnesses: Philip G. Joyce, Ph.D., Professor of Management, 
Finance, and Leadership, School of Public Policy, University of 
Maryland; Scott D. Pattison, Executive Director, National 
Association of State Budget Officers; Colleen M. Kelley, 
National President, National Treasury Employees Union; and Stan 
Z. Soloway, President and Chief Executive Officer, Professional 
Services Council.
Border Security: Measuring the Progress and Addressing the Challenges. 
        March 14, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-254)
    This single-panel hearing was the first in a series. The 
purpose was to examine the progress that has been made over the 
past decade toward securing the border and to explore what 
challenges remain to be addressed. The witnesses were asked to 
discuss the amount of resources that our nation has devoted to 
securing our borders, the results of those investments, as well 
as how border security fits into our overall immigration 
picture and the need for reforms. Additionally, they addressed 
concerns over what metrics should be used to gauge 
effectiveness at the border.
    Witnesses: Hon. Doris Meissner, Senior Fellow and Director, 
U.S. Immigration Policy Program, Migration Policy Institute; 
Edward Alden, Bernard L. Schwartz Senior Fellow, Council on 
Foreign Relations; and David A. Shirk, Ph.D., Director, Trans-
Border Institute, University of San Diego.
Hurricane Sandy: Getting the Recovery Right and the Value of 
        Mitigation. March 20, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-435)
    This single-panel hearing examined the ongoing recovery 
from Hurricane Sandy. Testimony focused on how well Federal 
officials are supporting and coordinating recovery efforts, 
including through the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force; 
what Federal, state, and local officials are doing to ensure 
that disaster funds are coordinated and well spent; and debris 
removal efforts, which included a discussion of how it is being 
handled in New Jersey and New York. Additionally, the witnesses 
discussed the value of mitigation, including prior mitigation 
efforts in areas affected in Hurricane Sandy, and the 
importance of incorporating smart mitigation measures early 
into the Hurricane Sandy rebuilding process.
    Witnesses: Hon. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Hon. Shaun L.S. Donovan, Secretary, U.S. Department 
of Housing and Urban Development; and Hon. Jo-Ellen Darcy, 
Assistant Secretary for Civil Works, U.S. Department of the 
Army.
The Department of Homeland Security at 10 Years: A Progress Report on 
        Management. March 21, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-296)
    This two-panel hearing was the first in a series marking 
the tenth anniversary of the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS). The purpose was to examine the progress that DHS has 
made and the challenges that remain in improving the management 
of the department. The committee heard from the witnesses on 
the evolution of management in the department, the discussion 
of DHS management in the 2013 ``High Risk'' report issued by 
the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the major 
management challenges still facing the department. 
Additionally, the witnesses provided their views on the 
relationship between the department's homeland security 
missions and its ability to execute the critical functions 
identified by GAO, such as acquisitions, human capital, 
information technology, and financial management.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Jane Holl Lute, Deputy Secretary, 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and Hon. Eugene L. 
Dodaro, Comptroller General of the United States, U.S. 
Government Accountability Office, accompanied by Cathleen A. 
Berrick, Managing Director, Homeland Security and Justice 
Issues. Panel II: Hon. Elaine C. Duke, Former Under Secretary 
for Management of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; 
Hon. Richard L. Skinner, Former Inspector General of the U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; and Shawn Reese, Analyst in 
Emergency Management and Homeland Security Policy, 
Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
Nomination of the Honorable Sylvia M. Burwell to be Director, Office of 
        Management and Budget. April 9, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-63)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of the 
Honorable Sylvia M. Burwell to be Director, Office of 
Management and Budget. The nominee was introduced by Sen. John 
D. Rockefeller IV.
Border Security: Frontline Perspectives on Progress and Remaining 
        Challenges. April 10, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-254)
    This single-panel hearing was the second in a series. The 
purpose was to examine the progress being made in securing the 
border, how this progress can best be measured, and the 
challenges we continue to face. The witnesses discussed how 
their agencies' efforts to investigate immigration and customs 
law violations have progressed and evolved over the past 
decade, the challenges frontline personnel are facing today, 
and how their offices measure progress and effectiveness.
    Witnesses: Kevin K. McAleenan, Acting Deputy Commissioner, 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Michael J. Fisher, Chief, U.S. Border Patrol, U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Randolph D. Alles, Assistant Commissioner, Office of 
Air and Marine, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; and James A. Dinkins, 
Executive Associate Director, Homeland Security Investigations, 
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security.
The Homeland Security Department's Budget Submission for Fiscal Year 
        2014. April 17, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-158)
    The purpose of this annual, one-panel hearing was to 
discuss the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) budget 
request for Fiscal Year 2014. Specifically, it examined how the 
DHS budget request meets the current and future homeland 
security needs of the nation.
    Witness: Hon. Janet A. Napolitano, Secretary, Department of 
Homeland Security.
Border Security: Examining Provisions in the Border Security, Economic 
        Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act 
        (S. 744). May 7, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-254)
    This single-panel hearing was third in a series. The 
purpose of this hearing was to analyze the enforcement 
provisions of S. 744, the Border Security, Economic 
Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. The witnesses' 
testimony focused on how different components of the Department 
of Homeland Security would be affected by this legislation.
    Witnesses: Hon. David F. Heyman, Assistant Secretary for 
Policy, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Kevin K. 
McAleenan, Acting Deputy Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Michael J. 
Fisher, Chief, U.S. Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Daniel H. 
Ragsdale, Deputy Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and Anne L. 
Richards, Assistant Inspector General, Office of Audits Office 
of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Curbing Federal Agency Waste and Fraud: New Steps to Strengthen the 
        Integrity of Federal Payments. May 8, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-114)
    The purpose of this single-panel hearing was to examine the 
implementation of the Improper Payments Elimination and 
Recovery Improvement Act (P.L. 112-248), passed last Congress, 
which refined similar statutes addressing improper payments and 
furthered the goals of detecting and preventing waste and 
fraud. Additionally, the hearing explored potential next steps 
for similar initiatives, such as improving the accuracy and 
sharing of data to prevent improper payments to dead people.
    Witnesses: Hon. Daniel I. Werfel, Controller, Office of 
Federal Financial Management, Office of Management and Budget; 
Hon. Patrick P. O'Carroll Jr., Inspector General, U.S. Social 
Security Administration; Richard L. Gregg, Fiscal Assistant 
Secretary, U.S. Department of the Treasury; Daniel Bertoni, 
Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues, 
U.S. Government Accountability Office; and Marianna LaCanfora, 
Acting Deputy Commissioner for Retirement and Disability 
Policy, U.S. Social Security Administration.
Nomination of Brian C. Deese to be Deputy Director, Office of 
        Management and Budget. May 13, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-120)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Brian 
C. Deese to be Deputy Director, Office of Management and 
Budget.
Nominations of Michael K. O'Keefe and Robert D. Okun to be Associate 
        Judges, Superior Court of the District of Columbia. May 15, 
        2013. (S. Hrg. 113-74)
    This single-panel hearing considered the nominations of 
Michael K. O'Keefe and Robert D. Okun to be Associate Judges, 
Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Mr. O'Keefe and Mr. 
Okun were introduced by Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton. Senator 
Mark Begich, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency 
Management, Intergovernmental Relations, and the District of 
Columbia, presided.
Performance Management and Congressional Oversight: 380 Recommendations 
        to Reduce Overlap and Duplication to Make Washington More 
        Efficient. May 22, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-68)
    This single-panel hearing examined the Government 
Accountability Office's report titled ``2013 Annual Report to 
Congress: Actions Needed to Reduce Fragmentation, Overlap, and 
Duplication and Achieve Other Financial Benefits,'' which 
highlighted areas of fragmentation, overlap, and duplication 
throughout the Federal Government and made recommendations to 
both Congress and the Executive Branch agencies to address 
these problems. In addition to GAO's report, the hearing also 
looked at tools Congress and agencies can use to address 
fragmentation, overlap, and duplication, including 
implementation of the Government Performance and Results 
Modernization Act of 2010.
    Witnesses: Hon. Gene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General of the 
United States, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 
accompanied by Cathleen A. Berrick, Managing Director, Homeland 
Security and Justice Issues.
Reducing Duplication and Improving Outcomes in Federal Information 
        Technology. June 11, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-97)
    The purpose of this single-panel hearing was to examine the 
Administration's efforts to identify and eliminate areas of 
duplication and waste in Federal information technology (IT) 
and the role of agency Chief Information Officers (CIOs) in 
that process. The hearing also reviewed ongoing efforts to 
consolidate data centers, empower agency CIOs, and strengthen 
management of IT projects.
    Witnesses: Steven L. VanRoekel, U.S. Chief Information 
Officer, Office of Management and Budget; Simon Szykman, Chief 
Information Officer, U.S. Department of Commerce; Frank 
Baitman, Chief Information Officer, U.S. Department of Health 
and Human Services; and David A. Powner, Director of 
Information Technology Management Issues, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office.
Nomination of Howard A. Shelanski to be the Administrator, Office of 
        Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
        Budget. June 12, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-207)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Howard 
A. Shelanski to be the Administrator, Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.
Nomination of the Honorable Daniel M. Tangherlini to be the 
        Administrator, U.S. General Services Administration. June 18, 
        2013. (S. Hrg. 113-124)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of the 
Honorable Daniel M. Tangherlini to be the Administrator, U.S. 
General Services Administration.
Curbing Prescription Drug Abuse in Medicare. June 24, 2013. (S. Hrg. 
        113-244)
    The purpose of the single-panel hearing was to examine 
initiatives by the Administration to reduce the fraudulent 
diversion of prescription drugs from the Medicare program, as 
well as additional opportunities to improve oversight. The 
hearing also looked at opportunities for stronger coordination 
among Federal agencies, private sector entities, and others.
    Witnesses: Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant 
Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 
Administration, U.S. Department of Justice; Jonathan Blum, 
Acting Principal Deputy Administrator and Director of the 
Center for Medicare, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 
Services, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Gary L. 
Cantrell, Deputy Inspector General for Investigations, Office 
of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Health and Human 
Services; Stuart E. Wright, Deputy Inspector General for 
Evaluation and Inspections, Office of Inspector General, U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services; and Alanna Lavelle, 
Director of Special Investigations, WellPoint, Inc.
Nomination of John H. Thompson to be Director of the Census, U.S. 
        Department of Commerce. July 9, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-251)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of John H. 
Thompson to be Director of the Census, U.S. Department of 
Commerce. The nominee was introduced by Sen. Richard J. Durbin.
Lessons Learned from the Boston Marathon Bombings: Preparing for and 
        Responding to the Attack. July 10, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-226)
    This one-panel hearing examined the preparedness for and 
response to the April 15th Boston Marathon attack. In 
particular the hearing looked at steps that Federal, state, and 
local officials took to prepare for terrorist attacks and what 
lessons could be learned from that response. Witnesses agreed 
that the city of Boston was well-prepared for the attack and 
that the response was excellent. However, they noted that more 
attention must be paid to helping the city cope with the long 
term recovery efforts that follow a disaster.
    Witnesses: The Honorable Richard Serino, Deputy 
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Kurt N. Schwartz, 
Undersecretary for Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 
Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, The 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts; Edward F. Davis III, 
Commissioner, Boston Police Department, City of Boston; and 
Arthur L. Kellermann, M.D., Paul O'Neill Alcoa Chair in Policy 
Analysis, RAND Corporation.
Strategic Sourcing: Leveraging the Government's Buying Power to Save 
        Billions. July 15, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-208)
    This one panel hearing examined efforts to expand strategic 
sourcing for goods and services throughout the Federal 
Government. Specifically, the witnesses discussed the primary 
benefits of strategic sourcing, the precise plans for future 
strategic sourcing vehicles, and performance metrics that are 
to be used to judge the success of the program. Witnesses also 
shared their views on impediments to agency use of strategic 
sourcing contracts, as well as lessons that the government 
could draw from the private sector on strategic sourcing.
    Witnesses: Hon. Joseph G. Jordan, Administrator, Office of 
Federal Procurement Policy, Office of Management and Budget; 
Hon. Daniel M. Tangherlini, Administrator, U.S. General 
Services Administration; and Cristina T. Chaplain, Director, 
Acquisition and Sourcing Management, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office.
Nomination of Katherine Archuleta to be Director, Office of Personnel 
        Management. July 16, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-297)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination Katherine 
Archuleta to be Director, Office of Personnel Management. The 
nominee was introduced by Sen. Mark Udall. Senator Jon Tester, 
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Efficiency and Effectiveness of 
Federal Programs and Federal Workforce, presided.
The Department of Homeland Security at 10 Years: Harnessing Science and 
        Technology to Protect National Security and Enhance Government 
        Efficiency. July 17, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-296)
    This one-panel hearing was the second in a series marking 
the tenth anniversary of the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS). The hearing examined the role of the Science and 
Technology Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security 
and how the role has evolved over the past ten years. Witnesses 
addressed the Directorate's current duties, how these duties 
have changed over time, and how they believe the Directorate 
assists DHS and its components in carrying out their missions 
more efficiently and effectively. Additionally, witnesses 
discussed the Directorate's decision-making process in 
conducting research and development.
    Witnesses: Hon. Tara J. O'Toole, Under Secretary for 
Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
and David C. Maurer, Director, Homeland Security and Justice 
Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.
The 90/10 Rule: Improving Educational Outcomes for our Military and 
        Veterans. July 23, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-206)
    This one-panel hearing examined practices put in place by 
the Veterans Administration to safeguard veteran and military 
students from questionable practices by some institutions of 
higher education. The hearing also assessed the current 
incentive structure for some propriety schools to enroll this 
student population and identified current initiatives to 
collect and make available data on educational outcomes.
    Witnesses: Curtis L. Coy, Deputy Under Secretary for 
Economic Opportunity, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. 
Department of Veterans Affairs; Hollister K. Petraeus, 
Assistant Director, Office of Servicemember Affairs, Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau; Hon. Steven C. Gunderson, 
President and Chief Executive Officer, Association of Private 
Sector Colleges and Universities; Tom Tarantino, Chief Policy 
Officer, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America; Sergeant 
Christopher J. Pantzke, USA, (Ret.), Veteran.
Nomination of the Honorable Alejandro N. Mayorkas to be Deputy 
        Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. July 25, 2013. 
        (S. Hrg. 113-404)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of the 
Honorable Alejandro N. Mayorkas to be Deputy Secretary, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security. The nominee was introduced by 
Senator Dianne Feinstein.
The Department of Homeland Security at 10 Years: Examining Challenges 
        and Achievements and Addressing Emerging Threats. September 11, 
        2013. (S. Hrg. 113-296)
    This one-panel hearing was the third in a series marking 
the tenth anniversary of the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS). The hearing examined the achievements the Department has 
made, the challenges it has had to address, and the emerging 
issues and threats the Department should focus on in the 
future. Witnesses discussed cybersecurity and options for DHS 
to enhance resilience to disasters and counter evolving terror 
threats.
    Witnesses: Hon. Thomas J. Ridge, Former Secretary of 
Homeland Security; Hon. Jane Harman, Former Member of the U.S. 
House of Representatives from the State of California; Admiral 
Thad W. Allen, USCG, Retired, Former Commandant of the U.S. 
Coast Guard; and Hon. Stewart A. Baker, Former Assistant 
Secretary for Policy at the Department of Homeland Security.
Nominations of Stevan E. Bunnell to be General Counsel, U.S. Department 
        of Homeland Security, and Suzanne E. Spaulding to be Under 
        Secretary (for National Protection and Programs), U.S. 
        Department of Homeland Security. September 18, 2013. (S. Hrg. 
        113-142)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nominations of Stevan 
E. Bunnell to be General Counsel, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security, and Suzanne E. Spaulding to be Under Secretary (for 
National Protection and Programs), U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security. Mr. Bunnell was introduced by the Honorable Kenneth 
L. Wainstein and Ms. Spaulding was introduced by Senators Mark 
R. Warner and Tim Kaine.
Outside the Box: Reforming and Renewing the Postal Service, Part 1--
        Maintaining Services, Reducing Costs, and Increasing Revenue 
        Through Innovation and Modernization. September 19, 2013. (S. 
        Hrg. 113-405)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to explore how 
the Postal Service can be renewed and reformed to thrive in an 
era when Americans increasingly relying on digital 
communications. It included an examination of solutions 
proposed in S. 1486, the Postal Reform Act of 2013. This 
hearing was the first of two the Committee will hold on this 
topic. Witnesses provided their views on postal services, 
including delivery schedules, delivery standards, and post 
office services; possible changes in the postal ratemaking 
system; and innovation at the Postal Service, including the 
potential offering of new and innovative products and services.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster 
General and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Postal Service; Hon. 
Ruth Y. Goldway, Chairman, Postal Regulatory Commission; Hon. 
David C. Williams, Inspector General, U.S. Postal Service. 
Panel II: Cliff Guffey, President, American Postal Workers 
Union; Jeanette P. Dwyer, President, National Rural Letter 
Carriers' Association; John Beeder, President and Chief 
Operating Officer, American Greetings Corporation; Jerry 
Cerasale, Senior Vice President, Government Affairs, Direct 
Marketing Association, Inc.; and Seth Weisberg, Chief Legal 
Officer, Stamps.com.
Combating Human Trafficking: Federal, State, and Local Perspectives. 
        September 23, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-455)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to raise 
awareness about domestic human trafficking, and examine efforts 
to coordinate Federal, state, tribal and local efforts to 
combat human trafficking within the United States. Witnesses 
discussed the incidence of human trafficking within the U.S. 
and their respective communities, causes of human trafficking, 
as well as existing Federal, state, and local strategies to 
combat it. Additionally, witnesses offered strategies for 
increasing national awareness of human trafficking, and 
opportunities for increased collaboration between Federal, 
state, tribal and local authorities.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Alice C. Hill, Chair, Blue 
Campaign, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; James A. 
Dinkins, Executive Associate Director, Homeland Security 
Investigations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Anne Gannon, National 
Coordinator for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction, 
Office of the Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Department of 
Justice; Joseph S. Campbell, Deputy Assistant Director, 
Criminal Investigative Division, Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, U.S Department of Justice. Panel II: John J. 
Farmer, Jr., Senior Vice President and University Counsel, 
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey; Suzanne 
Koepplinger, Executive Director, Minnesota Indian Women's 
Resource Center; Lisa Brunner, Program Specialist, National 
Indigenous Women's Resource Center; Daniel Papa, Director, 
Project Stay Gold.
Nominations of Hon. Carol W. Pope, Hon. Ernest W. DuBester, and Patrick 
        Pizzella to be Members, Federal Labor Relations Authority. 
        September 25, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-430)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nominations of Hon. 
Carol W. Pope, Hon. Ernest W. Dubester, and Patrick Pizzella to 
be Members of the Federal Labor Relations Authority. The Hon. 
Carol W. Pope was introduced by Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton. 
Senator Jon Tester, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Efficiency 
and Effectiveness of Federal Programs and Federal Workforce, 
presided.
Outside the Box: Reforming and Renewing the Postal Service, Part II--
        Promoting a 21st Century Workforce. September 26, 2013. (S. 
        Hrg. 113-405)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to explore how 
the Postal Service can be renewed and reformed to thrive in an 
era when Americans increasingly relying on digital 
communications. It included an examination of solutions 
proposed in S. 1486, the Postal Reform Act of 2013. This 
hearing was the second of two the Committee held on this topic. 
Witnesses provided their views on issues related to the postal 
workforce, including matters related to health care and 
pensions for postal workers; the manner in which the Postal 
Service calculates and funds such obligations; and the evolving 
role of postal workers in the digital age.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster 
General and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Postal Service; 
Jonathan Foley, Director, Planning and Policy Analysis, U.S. 
Office of Personnel Management; Frank Todisco, Chief Actuary, 
U.S. Government Accountability Office; John E. Dicken, 
Director, Health Care, U.S. Government Accountability Office. 
Panel II: Frederic V. Rolando, President, National Association 
of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO; John F. Hegarty, National 
President, National Postal Mail Handlers Union; Robert J. 
Rapoza, President, National Association of Postmasters of the 
United States; Douglas J. Holtz-Eakin, Ph.D., President, 
American Action Forum; Dean Baker, Ph.D., Co-Director, Center 
for Economic and Policy Research.
Nomination of Beth F. Cobert to be Deputy Director for Management, 
        Office of Management and Budget. October 2, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-
        333)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Beth F. 
Cobert to be Deputy Director for Management, Office of 
Management and Budget.
Nominations of the Hon. Tony Hammond and the Hon. Nanci E. Langley to 
        be Commissioners, Postal Regulatory Commission. October 2, 
        2013. (S. Hrg. 113-429)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nominations of the 
Honorable Tony Hammond and the Honorable Nanci E. Langley to be 
Commissioners, Postal Regulatory Commission. Mr. Hammond was 
introduced by Sen. Roy Blunt.
Nomination of William W. Nooter to be an Associate Judge, Superior 
        Court of the District of Columbia. October 8, 2013. (S. Hrg. 
        113-237)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of William 
W. Nooter to be an Associate Judge, Superior Court of the 
District of Columbia. The nominee was introduced by Delegate 
Eleanor Holmes Norton. Senator Mark Begich, Chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Emergency Management, Intergovernmental 
Relations, and the District of Columbia, presided.
Nomination of the Honorable Jeh C. Johnson to be Secretary, U.S. 
        Department of Homeland Security. October 13, 2013. (S. Hrg. 
        113-427)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Hon. 
Jeh C. Johnson to be Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security. The nominee was introduced by Sen. Robert Menendez 
and Sen. Cory Booker.
Threats to the Homeland. November 14, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-426)
    This one-panel hearing assessed the major threats to our 
homeland as well as the status of U.S. defenses against these 
threats. Witness testimony focused on the current status of 
homeland threats such as terrorism threats, cyber threats, 
transnational organized crime, homegrown violent extremism, and 
lone wolf offenders. The hearing reflected on how these threats 
have evolved since the committee's 2012 threat hearing and also 
highlighted the major initiatives carried out by DHS, the FBI, 
and the NCTC in response to these threats.
    Witnesses: Hon. Rand Beers, Acting Secretary, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Hon. James B. Comey, Jr., 
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of 
Justice; Hon. Matthew G. Olsen, Director, National 
Counterterrorism Center, Office of the Director of National 
Intelligence.
Beyond Silk Road: Potential Risks, Threats, and Promises of Virtual 
        Currencies. November 18, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-516)
    This two-panel hearing explored the threats, risks, and 
promises related to virtual currency for the Federal Government 
and society at large. The hearing focused on how Federal 
departments and agencies are defining virtual currencies, the 
unique challenges virtual currencies present for law 
enforcement, and the approach by Federal regulatory agencies to 
coordinate efforts to deal with this emerging technology. 
Witnesses discussed the extent to which virtual currencies are 
being used in organized crime, terrorist organizations, or 
large scale money laundering activities, but also presented 
examples of opportunities and advantages that virtual 
currencies can provide. Witness provided the committee with 
their assessment of probable future trends in virtual 
currencies, and potential policy consideration for Congress and 
other policymakers.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Jennifer Shasky Calvery, Director, 
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, U.S Department of the 
Treasury; Mythili Raman, Acting Assistant Attorney General, 
Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice; Edward W. Lowery 
III, Special Agent in Charge, Criminal Investigative Division, 
U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. 
Panel II: Ernie Allen, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
The International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children; 
Patrick Murck, General Counsel, The Bitcoin Foundation, Inc.; 
Jeremy Allaire, Chief Executive Officer, Circle Internet 
Financial, Inc.; Jerry Brito, Senior Research Fellow, The 
Mercatus Center, George Mason University.
The Navy Yard Tragedy: Examining Physical Security for Federal 
        Facilities. December 17, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-425)
    This two-panel hearing was the second of two the Committee 
held on the Navy Yard tragedy. This hearing examined 
governmental efforts to physically secure Federal facilities in 
light of the Washington Navy Yard attack. Witness testimony 
focused on Federal practices to identify, prioritize, and 
mitigate threats against Federal facilities; collaboration 
amongst Federal agencies; and what modifications for security 
at Federal facilities have been or need to be implemented 
following the attack at the Washington Navy Yard. Members and 
witnesses agreed that to increase physical security for Federal 
facilities there needs to be greater coordination among Federal 
agencies, open GAO recommendations need to be implemented, and 
employees need further training and clarification regarding 
what to do in an active shooter situation.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Caitlin A. Durkovich, Acting Secretary 
for Infrastructure Protection, National Protection and Programs 
Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; L. Eric 
Patterson, Director, Federal Protective Service, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Stephen Lewis, Deputy Director 
for Personnel, Industrial and Physical Security Policy, 
Directorate of Security Policy & Oversight, Office of Under 
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, U.S. Department of 
Defense. Panel II: Mark L. Goldstein, Director, Physical 
Infrastructure Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office; 
Stephen D. Amitay, Executive Director, National Association of 
Security Companies; David L. Wright, President, Federal 
Protective Service Union, American Federal of Government 
Employees.
Nomination of John Roth to be the Inspector General, U.S. Department of 
        Homeland Security. January 8, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-436)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of John 
Roth to be the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security.
Examining Conference and Travel Spending Across the Federal Government. 
        January 14, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-431)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was for GSA to 
provide an update on its conference and travel policies, to 
examine the government-wide policies that OMB has put in place 
related to conference and travel spending by Federal agencies, 
and for a selection of IGs to report on the current conference 
and travel policies of Federal agencies. Additionally, the 
hearing explored recommendations for controlling conference and 
travel spending in the future, such as using videoconferencing 
tools or scheduling back-to-back sessions for decreased travel 
costs.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Beth F. Cobert, Deputy Director 
for Management, Office of Management and Budget; Hon. Daniel M. 
Tangherlini, Administrator, U.S. General Services 
Administration. Panel II: Hon. Michael E. Horowitz, Inspector 
General, U.S. Department of Justice; Hon. Brian D. Miller, 
Inspector General, U.S. General Services Administration; Hon. 
J. Russell George, Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Extreme Weather Events: The Costs of Not Being Prepared. February 12, 
        2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to look at the 
costs of not being prepared for extreme weather events and 
explore ways the Federal Government can help make our 
communities more resilient and save money in the long run. 
Witnesses discussed the need for increased efforts to mitigate 
risks before extreme weather hits, investing in resilient 
infrastructure, and possibly incentivizing communities that are 
well prepared.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. David F. Heyman, Assistant 
Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; 
Caitlin A. Durkovich, Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure 
Protection, National Protection and Programs Directorate, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Mark E. Gaffigan, Managing 
Director, Natural Resources and Environment Issues, U.S. 
Government Accountability Office. Panel II: Collin P. O'Mara, 
Secretary, Delaware Department of Natural Resources and 
Environmental Control; Paul Kirshen, Ph.D., Research Professor, 
Environmental Research Group, Civil Engineering Department & 
Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space, University 
of New Hampshire; Lindene E. Patton, Chief Climate Product 
Officer, Zurich Insurance Group, Ltd.
Recycling Electronics: A Common Sense Solution for Enhancing Government 
        Efficiency and Protecting Our Environment. February 27, 2014. 
        (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to explore how 
electronics recycling not only helps to preserve our 
environment, but also contributes to job creation and economic 
development. Witnesses discussed strategies for improving and 
increasing electronics recycling in the Federal Government and 
across the country.
    Witnesses: Kevin Kampschroer, Director, Office of Federal 
High-Performance Green Buildings, Office of Governmentwide 
Policy, U.S. General Services Administration; Thomas G. Day, 
Chief Sustainability Office, U.S. Postal Service; Brenda 
Pulley, Senior Vice President of Recycling, Keep America 
Beautiful; Walter L. Alcorn, Vice President, Environmental 
Affairs and Industry Sustainability, Consumer Electronics 
Association; Stephen Skurnac, President, Sims Recycling 
Solutions, Inc.
Nominations of L. Reginald Brothers, Jr. to be Under Secretary for 
        Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
        and the Honorable Francis X. Taylor to be Under Secretary for 
        Intelligence and Analysis, U.S. Department of Homeland 
        Security. March 5, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-441)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nominations of L. 
Reginald Brothers, Jr. to be Under Secretary for Science and 
Technology, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the 
Honorable Francis X. Taylor to be Under Secretary for 
Intelligence and Analysis, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security.
Management Matters: Creating a 21st Century Government. March 12, 2014. 
        (S. Hrg. 113-418)
    The purpose of the single-panel hearing was to review the 
Administration's management initiatives, with a focus on 
priorities for the remainder of the second term. Witnesses 
provided an update on the President's second term management 
agenda as well as a description of management initiatives in 
the President's proposed Fiscal Year 2015 budget. Testimony 
addressed management challenges through implementation of the 
Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010, 
including the issuance of new Cross Agency Priority Goals, 
individual agency priority goals, and agency strategic plans.
    Witnesses: Hon. Beth F. Cobert, Deputy Director for 
Management, Office of Management and Budget; Hon. Daniel M. 
Tangherlini, Administrator, U.S. General Services 
Administration; Hon. Eugene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General of 
the United States, U.S. Government Accountability Office.
The Homeland Security Department's Budget Submission for Fiscal Year 
        2015. March 13, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this annual, one-panel hearing was to 
discuss the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) budget 
request for Fiscal Year 2015. Specifically, it examined how the 
DHS budget request meets the current and future homeland 
security needs of the nation.
    Witness: Hon. Jeh C. Johnson, Secretary, Department of 
Homeland Security.
Strengthening Public-Private Partnerships to Reduce Cyber Risks to our 
        Nation's Critical Infrastructure. March 26, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-
        000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to examine the 
cybersecurity partnerships among the Federal Government, 
states, and the private sector to secure critical 
infrastructure, including the Cybersecurity Framework and other 
provisions outlined in the Executive Order issued by President 
Obama on February 12, 2013. Witnesses described cyber 
vulnerabilities and threats to critical infrastructure and 
efforts to increase the security and resiliency of such 
networks and assets. Additionally, the hearing explored ways in 
which Federal and State governments can partner with the 
private sector to address cyber threats and vulnerabilities.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Phyllis A. Schneck, Ph.D., Deputy Under 
Secretary for Cybersecurity, National Protection and Programs 
Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Donna 
Dodson, Chief Cybersecurity Advisor, National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce; Stephen 
L. Caldwell, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues, 
U.S. Government Accountability Office (accompanied by Gregory 
C. Wilshusen, Director, Information Security Issues, U.S. 
Government Accountability Office). Panel II: Elayne Starkey, 
Chief Security Officer, Delaware Department of Technology and 
Information; David M. Velazquez, Executive Vice President for 
Power Delivery, Pepco Holdings, Inc.; Doug Johnson, Vice 
Chairman, Financial Services Sector Coordinating Council; 
Steven R. Chabinsky, Chief Risk Officer, CrowdStrike, Inc. 
(testifying in his personal capacity).
Nominations of Sherry M. Trafford and Steven M. Wellner to be Associate 
        Judges, Superior Court of the District of Columbia. March 27, 
        2014. (S. Hrg. 113-442)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nominations of Sherry 
M. Trafford and Steven M. Wellner to be Associate Judges, 
Superior Court of the District of Columbia. The nominees were 
introduced by Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton. Senator Mark 
Begich, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency Management, 
Intergovernmental Relations, and the District of Columbia, 
presided.
Management Matters: Creating a 21st Century Government--Part II, 
        Outside Views. March 31, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-418)
    The purpose of the single-panel hearing was to help 
identify priorities for improving the management of the Federal 
Government. Witnesses provided their views on goals that the 
Administration and Congress should set for short- and long-term 
management initiatives, as well as suggestions to improve the 
delivery of government services. Additionally, witnesses 
offered their views on how the Administration is addressing 
management challenges through implementation of the Government 
Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010, including 
the issuance of new Cross Agency Priority Goals, individual 
agency priority goals, and agency strategic plans.
    Witnesses: Max Stier, President and Chief Executive 
Officers, Partnership for Public Service; Shelley H. 
Metzenbaum, Ph.D., President, The Volcker Alliance; Robert 
Johnston Shea, Principal, Global Public Sector, Grant Thorton 
LLP; Tom Lee, Director, Sunlight Labs, The Sunlight Foundation.
Data Breach on the Rise: Protecting Personal Information From Harm. 
        April 2, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to examine data 
breaches, including those at Target and Neiman Marcus, and the 
efforts that industry and government are taking to address this 
growing challenge. Witnesses discussed what needs to be done to 
address this ever growing problem, including the steps being 
taken to prevent and investigate such breaches, as well as 
efforts taken to better inform and notify consumers after a 
breach. Additionally, witnesses offered their thoughts on S. 
1927 and other legislative proposals they believed may be 
necessary to better address data breaches.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman, Federal 
Trade Commission; William Noonan, Deputy Special Agent in 
Charge, Criminal Investigative Division, Cyber Operations 
Branch, U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Gregory C. Wilshusen, Director, Information Security 
Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office. Panel II: Hon. 
Tim Pawlenty, Chief Executive Officer, Financial Services 
Roundtable; Sandra L. Kennedy, President, Retail Industry 
Leaders Association; Tiffany O. Jones, Senior Vice President 
and Chief Revenue Officer, iSIGHT Partners, Inc.
Nomination of Julia A. Clark to be General Counsel, Federal Labor 
        Relations Authority. April 29, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-443)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Julia 
A. Clark to be General Counsel, Federal Labor Relations 
Authority. Senator Jon Tester, Chairman of the Subcommittee on 
the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Federal Programs and the 
Federal Workforce, presided.
Lessons Learned from the Boston Marathon Bombings: Improving 
        Intelligence and Information Sharing. April 30, 2014. (S. Hrg. 
        113-444)
    This one-panel hearing examined the systems and processes 
for sharing intelligence and information regarding the Boston 
bombers and their actions leading up to the attack on April 15, 
2013. Specifically, the hearing focused on the joint work by 
the Inspectors General for the Intelligence Community, the 
Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and 
the Central Intelligence Agency, to determine the extent of 
information available to the U.S. Government prior to the 
bombings, where the sharing of information was complete, 
accurate, and in compliance with government's ability to detect 
potential threats to national security. Witnesses discussed the 
findings and recommendations contained in the recent report 
issued by the Inspectors General, as well as additional steps 
needed to improve intelligence and information sharing 
processes. Following the open session, the committee continued 
the hearing in a classified session.
    Witnesses: Hon. I. Charles McCullough III, Inspector 
General of the Intelligence Community, Office of the Director 
of National Intelligence; Hon. John Roth, Inspector General, 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Hon. Michael E. Horowitz, 
Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice; Hon. David B. 
Buckley, Inspector General, Central Intelligence Agency.
Identifying Critical Factors for Success in Information Technology 
        Acquisitions. May 8, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to examine the 
best practices and critical factors that lead to the successful 
acquisition of information technology (IT) investments. 
Witnesses discussed the challenges both government and industry 
organizations face in implementing IT systems, the similarities 
and differences between government and industry in this area, 
and lessons the Federal Government can learn from how industry 
implements IT.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Daniel M. Tangherlini, 
Administrator, U.S. General Services Administration; Steven L. 
Vanroekel, U.S. Chief Information Officer, Office of Management 
and Budget; David A. Powner, Director of Information Technology 
Management Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office. Panel 
II: Daniel J. Chenok, Executive Vice Chair, Industry Advisory 
Council, American Council for Technology and Industry Advisory 
Council; Karen S. Evans, Partner, KE&T Partners, LLC.
Improving Financial Management at the Department of Defense. May 13, 
        2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to examine the 
Department of Defense (DOD) plans and challenges for improving 
Department-wide financial management. Congress established a 
requirement for the DOD to become financially ``audit ready'' 
by 2017. However, past hearings and studies brought into 
question whether the DOD, and the military services and 
agencies, will meet this deadline, as well as achieve other 
financial improvement goals. Witnesses discussed the 
consequence to the Department and its missions for inadequate 
financial management.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Robert F. Hale, Under Secretary 
(Comptroller) and Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), U.S. Department of Defense; 
Robert M. Speer, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army 
(Financial Management and Comptroller), U.S. Department of the 
Army; Hon. Susan J. Rabern, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary of the 
Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller), U.S. Department of 
the Navy; Hon. Jamie M. Morin, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary of 
the Air Force (Financial Management and Comptroller), U.S. 
Department of the Air Force. Panel II: Hon. Jon T. Rymer, 
Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense; Asif Khan, 
Director, Financial Management and Assurance, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office.
Charting a Path Forward for the Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism 
        Standards Program. May 14, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to examine the 
Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-
Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program and the progress that has 
been made in working with more than 4,000 high-risk chemical 
facilities to reduce the risk of terrorism or sabotage against 
those facilities. Witness testimony focused on previous 
enhancements to the program made by the Department, how the 
Department could accelerate efforts to review security plans 
and conduct compliance inspections, and what additional actions 
could be taken to improve management of the CFATS program, 
including providing a long term legislative reauthorization of 
the program.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Suzanne E. Spaulding, Under 
Secretary, National Protection and Programs Directorate, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; David M. Wulf, Director, 
Infrastructure Security Compliance Division, Office of 
Infrastructure Protection, National Protection and Programs 
Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Stephen L. 
Caldwell, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues, U.S. 
Government Accountability Office. Panel II: Dana A. Shea, 
Ph.D., Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, 
Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress; Anna 
Fendley, MPH, Legislative Representative, United Steelworkers; 
Timothy J. Scott, Chief Security Officer, The Dow Chemical 
Company, Appearing on behalf of Dow and the American Chemistry 
Council.
Evaluating Port Security: Progress Made and Challenges Ahead. June 4, 
        2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine the 
Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) progress in securing 
the nation's ports and waterways, protecting global supply 
chains that make use of U.S. ports, and in implementing the 
SAFE Port Act, while continuing to facilitate the flow of 
essential trade and transportation. Witness testimony focused 
on the actions taken by DHS to physically secure U.S. ports and 
waterways from a variety of threats, including nuclear threats; 
how DHS works with state and local authorities and private 
sector stakeholders to improve maritime security, including 
through the use of grants; and what progress has been made in 
securing global supply chains in cooperation with international 
authorities and private sector stakeholders.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Ellen McCain; Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Transborder Policy, Office of Policy, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Rear Admiral Paul F. Thomas, 
USCG, Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy, U.S. Coast 
Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Kevin K. 
McAleenan, Acting Deputy Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Brian E. 
Kamoie, Assistant Administrator for Grant Programs, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Stephen Sadler, Assistant Administrator for 
Intelligence and Analysis, Transportation Security 
Administration, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Stephen 
L. Caldwell, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues, 
U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Border Security: Examining the Implications of S. 1691, the Border 
        Patrol Pay Reform Act of 2013. June 9, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine the 
implications of S. 1691, the Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act 
of 2013. Witness testimony focused on the impact this bill 
would have on Customs and Border Protection's ability to secure 
the border, manage its workforce, and make the most effective 
use of taxpayer resources.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Ronald D. Vitiello, Deputy Chief, U.S. 
Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Brandon Judd, President, 
National Border Patrol Council; Paul L. Hamrick, Deputy 
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Internal Affairs, U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Adam Miles, Deputy Special Counsel for Policy and 
Congressional Affairs, U.S. Office of Special Counsel.
Nomination of the Hon. Shaun L. S. Donovan to be Director, Office of 
        Management and Budget. June 11, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of the 
Honorable Shaun L. S. Donovan to be Director, Office of 
Management and Budget. The nominee was introduced by Sen. Mary 
L. Landrieu and Sen. Susan M. Collins.
Securing Radiological Materials: Examining the Threat Next Door. June 
        12, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine the 
threat to the nation posed by terrorists seeking to detonate 
explosives designed to disperse radiological material or 
``dirty bombs'' within the U.S.'s borders. Building upon a 2012 
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management 
investigation into the security of radiological material in 
medical facilities that could be used to construct a dirty 
bomb, this hearing analyzed the adequacy of the security 
measures for radiological sources used in industrial and 
commercial applications. Witness testimony focused on the role 
of various government agencies in safeguarding industrial 
radiological sources from terrorist theft or sabotage.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Anne Harrington, Deputy 
Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, National 
Nuclear Security Administration; Huban A. Gowadia, Ph.D., 
Director, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security; Mark Satorius, Executive Director for 
Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; David Trimble, 
Director, Natural Resources and Environment, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office.
The Intelligence Community: Keeping Watch Over its Contractor 
        Workforce. June 18, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine the 
issues raised by the report of the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) entitled ``Civilian Intelligence Community: 
Additional Actions Needed to Improve Reporting on and Planning 
for the Use of Contract Personnel'' (GAO-14-204). Witness 
testimony addressed overall trends in the use of contractor 
personnel for core functions, and efforts by the civilian 
intelligence community (IC) to inventory core contract 
personnel. Witnesses also discussed challenges associated with 
compiling the inventory and plans to improve accuracy, 
consistency, and comparability of the surveys across the 
civilian IC. Following the open session, the committee 
continued the hearing in a classified session.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Stephanie O'Sullivan, Principal 
Deputy Director, Office of the Director of National 
Intelligence; Timothy J. DiNapoli, Director, Acquisition and 
Sourcing Management, U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Challenges at the Border: Examining the Causes, Consequences, and 
        Response to the Rise in Apprehensions at the Southern Border. 
        July 9, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine the 
current situation along our southern border with Mexico. This 
was the first of two hearings the Committee will hold on this 
topic. Witness testimony focused on the impact that the 
increasing number of individuals from Central America-including 
unaccompanied children and family units- arriving at our 
borders is having on agency operations and the status of the 
current interagency response. Witnesses highlighted efforts 
their agencies are taking to address the root cause of the 
situation along our border, and recommended various solutions 
to curb it.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security; Hon. R. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner, U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Thomas S. Winkowski, Principal Deputy Assistant 
Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Mark H. Greenberg, Acting 
Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families, 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Francisco 
Palmieri, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Caribbean and 
Central America, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. 
Department of State; Juan P. Osuna, Director, Executive Office 
of Immigration Review, U.S. Department of Justice.
Nominations of Hon. James C. Miller III, Stephen Crawford, David M. 
        Bennett, and Victoria Reggie Kennedy to be Governors, U.S. 
        Postal Service. July 14, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nominations of Hon. 
James C. Miller III, Stephen Crawford, David M. Bennett, and 
Victoria Reggie Kennedy to be Governors, U.S. Postal Service. 
Mrs. Kennedy was introduced by Sen. Edward J. Markey.
Challenges at the Border: Examining and Addressing the Root Causes 
        Behind the Rise in Apprehensions at the Southern Border. July 
        16, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine the 
reasons that so many Central Americans--particularly 
unaccompanied children and families--are leaving their home 
countries and trying to enter the United States. This hearing 
was the second of two the Committee held on this topic. Witness 
testimony focused on the root causes of this migration and 
various efforts that might help to alleviate those causes. 
Witnesses highlighted the effectiveness of current and 
potential initiatives by the U.S. government, international 
organizations, faith institutions, and the private sector to 
address those factors.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Michael Shifter, President, Inter-
American Dialogue; Eric L. Olson, Associate Director, Latin 
American Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center for 
Scholars; Eric Farnsworth, Vice President, Americas Society/
Council of the Americas; Richard Jones, Deputy Regional 
Director for Global Solidarity and Justice in Latin America and 
the Caribbean, Catholic Relief Services; Bryan Roberts, Ph.D., 
Senior Economist, Econometrica, Inc.
Nomination of Anne E. Rung to be Administrator, Office of Federal 
        Procurement Policy, Office of Management and Budget. July 24, 
        2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Anne E. 
Rung to be Administrator, Office of Federal Procurement Policy, 
Office of Management and Budget. Senator Claire McCaskill, 
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting 
Oversight, presided.
Nomination of Joseph L. Nimmich to be Deputy Administrator, Federal 
        Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland 
        Security. July 24, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Joseph 
L. Nimmich to be Deputy Administrator, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. 
Senator Mark Begich, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency 
Management, Intergovernmental Relations, and the District of 
Columbia, presided.
Oversight of Federal Programs for Equipping State and Local Law 
        Enforcement Agencies. September 9, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to examine 
Federal programs responsible for distributing surplus military 
equipment and grant funding to state and local law enforcement 
agencies. The hearing assessed the justification for the 
programs and the policies in place for coordinating, managing, 
and overseeing them. Witness testimony discussed the processes 
for awarding grants, disposing of excess and surplus Defense 
Department property to state and local law enforcement, and how 
agencies ensure that recipients of equipment and grant funding 
use, manage, and account for them.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Alan F. Estevez, Principal Deputy 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics, U.S. Department of Defense; Brian E. Kamoie, 
Assistant Administrator for Grant Programs, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Karol 
Mason, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, 
U.S. Department of Justice. Panel II: Chief Jim Bueerman, 
President, Police Foundation; Peter B. Kraska, Ph.D., 
Professor, School of Justice Studies, Eastern Kentucky 
University; Mark Lomax, Executive Director, National Tactical 
Officers Association; Mr. Lomax was accompanied by Major Ed 
Allen, Seminole County Sheriff's Office; Wiley Price, 
Photojournalist, The St. Louis American Newspaper; Hilary O. 
Shelton, Washington Bureau Director and Senior Vice President 
for Advocacy, National Association for the Advancement of 
Colored People.
Cybersecurity, Terrorism, and Beyond: Addressing Evolving Threats to 
        the Homeland. September 10, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine 
several key global threats and how they impact the U.S. 
homeland. The hearing predominately focused on cyber threats, 
but also addressed other homeland threats, such as the 
terrorist threat from the Islamic State of Iraq in the Greater 
Levant (ISIL), Syrian foreign fighters, and terrorist travel. 
Witnesses provided the committee with an update on the current 
status of these threats, including how they have evolved over 
the past year, and highlighted the major initiatives carried 
out by DHS, the FBI, and the NCTC in response to these threats.
    Witnesses: Hon. Francis X. Taylor, Under Secretary for 
Intelligence and Analysis, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Hon. Suzanne E. Spaulding, Under Secretary, National 
Protection and Programs Directorate, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security; Nicholas J. Rasmussen, Deputy Director, 
National Counterterrorism Center, Office of the Director of 
National Intelligence; Robert Anderson, Jr., Executive 
Assistant Director, Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services 
Branch, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of 
Justice.
Equality for the District of Columbia: Discussing the Implications of 
        S. 132, the New Columbia Admissions Act of 2013. September 15, 
        2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this two-panel hearing was to examine the 
rationale for and implications of S. 132, the New Columbia 
Admissions Act of 2013. Witnesses discussed the challenges and 
disadvantages the District of Columbia faces due to its current 
status and shared their assessment of S. 132 and the effect it 
would have on the District of Columbia. Witness testimony also 
addressed the constitutionality, legality, and feasibility of 
achieving statehood for the District of Columbia through 
legislative means.
    Witnesses: Panel I: Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Delegate of 
the District of Columbia, U.S. House of Representatives; Hon. 
Vincent C. Gray, Mayor, District of Columbia; Hon. Philip H. 
Mendelson, Chairman, Council of the District of Columbia. Panel 
II: Hon. Viet D. Dinh, Professor, Georgetown University Law 
Center; Hon. Alice M. Rivlin, Ph.D., Senior Fellow and Leonard 
D. Schaeffer Chair in Health Policy Studies, The Brookings 
Institution; Wade Henderson, President, Leadership Conference 
on Civil and Human Rights; Roger Pilon, Ph.D., Vice President 
for Legal Affairs and B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional 
Studies, Cato Institute; Hon. Paul Strauss, Shadow Senator, 
District of Columbia; Hon. Michael D. Brown, Shadow Senator, 
District of Columbia.
Nominations of Hon. Sarah R. Saldanna to be Assistant Secretary for 
        Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of 
        Homeland Security; Russell C. Deyo to be Under Secretary for 
        Management, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Hon. Mickey 
        D. Barnett to be a Governor, U.S. Postal Service. September 17, 
        2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nominations of Hon. 
Sarah R. Saldanna to be Assistant Secretary for Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; 
Russell C. Deyo to be Under Secretary for Management, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; and Hon. Mickey D. Barnett to 
be a Governor, U.S. Postal Service. Mrs. Saldanna was 
introduced by Sen. John Cornyn and Mr. Deyo was introduced by 
The Honorable Michael Chertoff.
Nomination of Rear Admiral Earl L. Gay, USN, (Ret.) to be Deputy 
        Director, Office of Personnel Management. November 18, 2014. 
        (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    This one-panel hearing considered the nomination of Rear 
Admiral Earl L. Gay, USN, (Ret.) to be Deputy Director, Office 
of Personnel Management. The nominee was introduced by 
Representative John Lewis. Senator Jon Tester, Chairman of the 
Subcommittee on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Federal 
Programs and the Federal Workforce, presided.
Preparedness and Response to Public Health Threats: How Ready Are We? 
        November 19, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-000)
    The purpose of this one-panel hearing was to examine our 
country's preparedness for and ability to respond to a public 
health threat or incident in the United States, and the efforts 
that Federal and State governments are making to prepare for 
and respond to public health threats and incidents. Witness 
testimony discussed the measures Federal and state governments 
are taking to respond to public health threats, as well as 
preparations that are being made in the event that an outbreak 
such as Ebola may become a more significant international or 
domestic threat. The hearing also highlighted the strengths and 
lessons learned in the past few months of the Ebola response, 
and how the overall U.S. public health system can be improved 
to address the current and future threats posed by disease 
outbreaks and pandemics.
    Witnesses: Hon. Nicole Lurie, M.D., Rear Admiral, U.S. 
Public Health Service, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and 
Response, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Hon. 
Thomas Frieden, M.D., Director, Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention; Hon. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner, U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; 
Commissioner Kerlikowske was accompanied by Dr. Kathryn 
Brinsfield, Chief Medical Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Hon. Nancy E. Lindborg, Assistant Administrator, U.S. 
Agency for International Development; David L. Lakey, M.D., 
Commissioner, Texas Department of State Health Services.

                  V. REPORTS, PRINTS, AND GAO REPORTS

    During the 113th Congress, the Committee prepared and 
issued 33 reports and 7 Committee Prints on the following 
topics. Reports issued by Subcommittees are listed in their 
respective sections of this document.

                           COMMITTEE REPORTS

    To reauthorize the Congressional Award Act. S. Rept. 113-
109, re. S. 1348.
    To increase oversight of the Revolving Fund of the Office 
of Personnel Management, strengthen the authority to terminate 
or debar employees and contractors involved in misconduct 
affecting the integrity of security clearance background 
investigations, enhance transparency regarding the criteria 
utilized by Federal departments and agencies to determine when 
a security clearance is required. S. Rept. 113-111, re. S. 
1276.
    Activities of the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs and its Subcommittees for the One Hundred 
Twelfth Congress. S. Rept. 113-115.
    To require the Federal Government to expedite the sale of 
underutilized Federal real property. S. Rept. 113-122, re. S. 
1398.
    To amend the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery 
Improvement Act of 2012, including making changes to the Do Not 
Pay initiative, for improved detection, prevention, and 
recovery of improper payments to deceased individuals. S. Rept. 
113-124, re. S. 1360.
    To amend title 31, United States Code, to make improvements 
in the Government Accountability Office. S. Rept. 113-128, re. 
H.R. 1162.
    To expand the Federal Funding Accountability and 
Transparency Act of 2006 to increase accountability and 
transparency in Federal spending. S. Rept. 113-139, re. S. 994.
    To require certain agencies to conduct assessments of data 
centers and develop data center consolidation and optimization 
plans. S. Rept. 113-157, re S. 1611.
    To improve cybersecurity recruitment and retention. S. 
Rept. 113-207, re. S. 2354.
    To prohibit contracting with the enemy. S. Rept. 113-216, 
re. S. 675.
    To prohibit the use of Federal funds for the costs of 
official portraits of Members of Congress, heads of executive 
agencies, and heads of agencies and offices of the legislative 
branch. S. Rept. 113-217, re. S. 1820.
    To amend chapter 22 of title 44, United States Code, 
popularly known as the Presidential Records Act, to establish 
procedures for the consideration of claims of constitutionally 
based privilege against disclosure of Presidential records. S. 
Rept. 113-218, re. H.R. 1233.
    To provide for the elimination or modification of Federal 
reporting requirements. S. Rept. 113-232, re. H.R. 4194.
    To reauthorize the Multinational Species Conservation Funds 
Semipostal Stamp. S. Rept. 113-235, re. S. 231.
    To require the purchase of domestically made flags of the 
United States of America for use by the Federal Government. S. 
Rept. 113-236, re. S. 1214.
    To require the purchase of domestically made flags of the 
United States of America for use by the Federal Government. S. 
Rept. 113-237, re. S. 1486.
    To codify an existing operations center for cybersecurity. 
S. Rept. 113-240, re. S. 2519.
    To provide taxpayers with an annual report disclosing the 
cost and performance of Government programs and areas of 
duplication among them. S. Rept. 113-243, re. S. 2113.
    To amend title 5, United States Code, to change the default 
investment fund under the Thrift Savings Plan. S. Rept. 113-
244, re. S. 2117.
    To amend title 44, United States Code, to require 
information on contributors to Presidential library fundraising 
organizations. S. Rept. 113-245, re. S. 2640.
    To amend title 5, United States Code, to improve the 
security of the United States border and to provide for reforms 
and rates of pay for border patrol agents. S. Rept. 113-248, 
re. S. 1691.
    To amend chapter 21 of title 5, United States Code, to 
provide that fathers of certain permanently disabled or 
deceased veterans shall be included with mothers of such 
veterans as preference eligibles for treatment in the civil 
service. S. Rept. 113-249, re. S. 2323.
    To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
Emergency Assistance to provide eligibility for broadcasting 
facilities to receive certain disaster assistance. S. Rept. 
113-250, re. S. 2665.
    To amend chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, to 
provide for reform to Federal information security. S. Rept. 
113-256, re. S. 2521.
    To prevent conflicts of interest relating to contractors 
providing background investigation fieldwork services and 
investigative support services. S. Rept. 113-257, re. S. 2061.
    To require adequate information regarding the tax treatment 
of payments under settlements agreements entered into by 
Federal agencies. S. Rept. 113-259, re. S. 1898.
    To repeal certain mandates of the Department of Homeland 
Security Office of Inspector General. S. Rept. 113-261, re. S. 
2651.
    To amend titles 40, 41, and 44, United States Code, to 
eliminate duplication and waste in information technology 
acquisition and management. S. Rept. 113-262, re. H.R. 1232.
    To recodify and reauthorize the Chemical Facility Anti-
Terrorism Standards Program. S. Rept. 113-263, re. H.R. 4007.
    To provide transparency, accountability, and limitations of 
Government sponsored conferences. S. Rept. 113-268, re. S. 
1347.
    To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that 
persons having seriously delinquent tax debts shall be 
ineligible for Federal employment. S. Rept. 113-272, re. S. 
1045.
    To strengthen the accountability of individuals involved in 
misconduct affecting the integrity of background 
investigations, to update guidelines for security clearances. 
S. Rept. 113-276, re. S. 1744.
    To enhance the Office of Personnel Management background 
check system for the granting, denial, or revocation of 
security clearances or access to classified information of 
employees and contractors of the Federal Government. S. Rept. 
113-283, re. S. 1618.

                            COMMITTEE PRINTS

    The Committee issued the following Committee Prints during 
the 113th Congress:
    Rules of Procedure. Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs. (Printed. 41 pp. S. Prt. 113-10.)
    Rules of Procedure. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on 
Investigations. (Printed. 22 pp. S. Prt. 113-9.)
    Rules of Procedure. Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs. (Printed. 42 pp. S. Prt. 113-19.)
    Rules of Procedure. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on 
Investigations. (Printed. 22 pp. S. Prt. 113-20.)
    IRS and TIGTA Management Failures Related to 501 (c)(4) 
Applicants Engaged in Campaign Activity. (Printed. 1991 pp. S. 
Prt. 113-26.)
    The Air Force's Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS): 
A Cautionary Tale on the Need for Business Process 
Reengineering and Complying with Acquisition Best Practices. 
(Printed. 53 pp. S. Prt. 113-27.)
    Defense Acquisition Reform: Where Do We Go From Here?--A 
Compendium of Views by Leading Experts. (Printed. 250 pp. S. 
Prt. 113-28.)

                              GAO REPORTS

    Also during the 113th Congress, the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) issued 268 reports at the request 
of the Committee. GAO reports requested by the Subcommittees 
appear in their respective sections. Reports are listed here by 
title, GAO number, and release date.
    Financial Regulation: A Framework for Crafting and 
Assessing Proposals to Modernize the Outdated U.S. Financial 
Regulatory System. GAO-09-216. January 8, 2009.
    Veteran-Owned Small Businesses: Planning and Data System 
for VA's Verification Program Need Improvement. GAO-13-95. 
January 14, 2013.
    U.S. Postal Service: Overview of Initiatives to Increase 
Revenue and Introduce Nonpostal Services and Experimental 
Postal Products. GAO-13-216. January 15, 2013.
    Financial Audit: U.S. Government's Fiscal Years 2012 and 
2011 Consolidated Financial Statements. GAO-13-271R. January 
17, 2013.
    Information Security: Actions Needed by Census Bureau to 
Address Weaknesses. GAO-13-63. January 22, 2013.
    Performance Measures and Comprehensive Funding Data Could 
Enhance Management of National Capital Region Preparedness 
Resources. GAO-13-116R. January 25, 2013.
    Broadcasting Board of Governors: Additional Steps Needed to 
Address Overlap in International Broadcasting. GAO-13-172. 
January 29, 2013.
    Warfighter Support: DOD Needs Additional Steps to Fully 
Integrate Operational Contract Support into Contingency 
Planning. GAO-13-212. February 8, 2013.
    Human Services: Sustained and Coordinated Efforts Could 
Facilitate Data Sharing While Protecting Privacy. GAO-13-106. 
February 8, 2013.
    U.S. Postal Service: Urgent Action Needed to Achieve 
Financial Sustainability. GAO-13-347T. February 13, 2013.
    Government Reorganization: Potential Benefits and Drawbacks 
of Merging the National Marine Fisheries Service into the Fish 
and Wildlife Service. GAO-13-248. February 14, 2013.
    2020 Census: Local Administrative Records and Their Use in 
the Challenge Program and Decennial. GAO-13-269. February 21, 
2013.
    Iran: U.S. and International Sanctions Have Adversely 
Affected the Iranian Economy. GAO-13-326. February 25, 2013.
    Defense Contracting: Actions Needed to Explore Additional 
Opportunities to Gain Efficiencies in Acquiring Foreign 
Language Support. GAO-13-251R. February 25, 2013.
    Managing for Results: Data-Driven Performance Reviews Show 
Promise But Agencies Should Explore How to Involve Other 
Relevant Agencies. GAO-13-228. February 27, 2013.
    Combating Autism Act: HHS Agencies Responded with New and 
Continuing Activities, Including Oversight. GAO-13-232. 
February 27, 2013.
    Characteristics of Presidential Appointments that do not 
Require Senate Confirmation. GAO-13-299R. March 1, 2013.
    Agricultural Quarantine Inspection Fees: Major Changes 
Needed to Align Fee Revenues with Program Costs. GAO-13-268. 
March 1, 2013.
    Use of Remanufactured Parts in the Federal Vehicle Fleet Is 
Based On a Variety of Factors. GAO-13-316R. March 7, 2013.
    Cybersecurity: A Better Defined and Implemented National 
Strategy Is Needed to Address Persistent Challenges. GAO-13-
462T. March 7, 2013.
    Wind Energy: Additional Actions Could Help Ensure Effective 
Use of Federal Financial Support. GAO-13-136. March 11, 2013.
    Information Sharing: Additional Actions Could Help Ensure 
That Efforts to Share Terrorism-Related Suspicious Activity 
Reports Are Effective [Reissued on March 26, 2013]. GAO-13-233. 
March 13, 2013.
    Budget Issues: Effects of Budget Uncertainty from 
Continuing Resolutions on Agency Operations. GAO-13-464T. March 
13, 2013.
    Border Security: DHS's Progress and Challenges in Securing 
U.S. Borders. GAO-13-414T. March 14, 2013.
    President's Emergency Plan For Aids Relief: Per-Patient 
Costs Have Declined Substantially, but Better Cost Data Would 
Help Efforts to Expand Treatment. GAO-13-345. March 15, 2013.
    Information Security: IRS Has Improved Controls but Needs 
to Resolve Weaknesses. GAO-13-350. March 15, 2013.
    High-Risk Series: Government-wide 2013 Update and Progress 
Made by the Department of Homeland Security. GAO-13-444T. March 
21, 2013.
    FEMA Reservists: Training Could Benefit from Examination of 
Practices at Other Agencies. GAO-13-250R. March 22, 2013.
    Critical Infrastructure Protection: DHS List of Priority 
Assets Needs to Be Validated and Reported to Congress. GAO-13-
296. March 25, 2013.
    Major Automated Information Systems: Selected Defense 
Programs Need to Implement Key Acquisition Practices. GAO-13-
311. March 28, 2013.
    Energy Efficiency: Better Coordination among Federal 
Programs Needed to Allocate Testing Resources. GAO-13-135. 
March 28, 2013.
    Acquisition Workforce: Federal Agencies Obtain Training to 
Meet Requirements, but Have Limited Insight into Costs and 
Benefits of Training Investment. GAO-13-231. March 28, 2013.
    Medicaid: Enhancements Needed for Improper Payments 
Reporting and Related Corrective Action Monitoring. GAO-13-229. 
March 29, 2013.
    CMS: Activities, Staffing, and Funding for the Center for 
Strategic Planning. GAO-13-377R. April 1, 2013.
    2012 Lobbying Disclosure: Observations on Lobbyists' 
Compliance with Disclosure Requirements. GAO-13-437. April 1, 
2013.
    Federal Employees' Compensation Act: Case Examples 
Illustrate Vulnerabilities That Could Result in Improper 
Payments or Overlapping Benefits. GAO-13-386. April 3, 2013.
    Political Intelligence: Financial Market Value of 
Government Information Hinges on Materiality and Timing. GAO-
13-389. April 4, 2013.
    Information Sharing: Agencies Could Better Coordinate to 
Reduce Overlap in Field-Based Activities. GAO-13-471. April 4, 
2013.
    Critical Infrastructure Protection: DHS Efforts to Assess 
Chemical Security Risk and Gather Feedback on Facility Outreach 
Can Be Strengthened. GAO-13-353. April 5, 2013.
    Border Security: Partnership Agreements and Enhanced 
Oversight Could Strengthen Coordination of Efforts on Indian 
Reservations. GAO-13-352. April 5, 2013.
    2013 Annual Report: Actions Needed to Reduce Fragmentation, 
Overlap, and Duplication and Achieve Other Financial Benefits. 
GAO-13-279SP. April 9, 2013.
    President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief: Shift toward 
Partner- Country Treatment Programs Will Require Better 
Information on Results. GAO-13-460. April 12, 2013.
    Strategic Sourcing: Leading Commercial Practices Can Help 
Federal Agencies Increase Savings When Acquiring Services. GAO-
13-417. April 15, 2013.
    Managing For Results: Agencies Have Elevated Performance 
Management Leadership Roles, but Additional Training Is Needed. 
GAO-13-356. April 16, 2013.
    Grants Management: Oversight of Selected States' 
Disbursement of Federal Funds Addresses Timeliness and 
Administrative Allowances. GAO-13-392. April 16, 2013.
    Medicare: Legislative Modifications Have Resulted in 
Payment Adjustments for Most Hospitals. GAO-13-334. April 17, 
2013.
    Prescription Drugs: Comparison of DOD and VA Direct 
Purchase Prices. GAO-13-358. April 19, 2013.
    Managing For Results: Agencies Should More Fully Develop 
Priority Goals under the GPRA Modernization Act. GAO-13-174. 
April 19, 2013.
    Data Center Consolidation: Strengthened Oversight Needed to 
Achieve Cost Savings Goal. GAO-13-378. April 23, 2013.
    President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief: Drug Supply 
Chains Are Stronger, but More Steps Are Needed to Reduce Risks. 
GAO-13-483. April 26, 2013.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Lobbying 
Policies and Monitoring for Program to Reduce Obesity and 
Tobacco Use. GAO-13-477R. April 30, 2013.
    Social Security Administration: Preliminary Observations on 
the Death Master File. GAO-13-574T. May, 8, 2013.
    Medicare Program Integrity: Few Payments in 2011 Exceeded 
Limits under One Kind of Prepayment Control, but Reassessing 
Limits Could Be Helpful. GAO-13-430. May 9, 2013.
    Federal Reserve Banks: Areas for Improvement in Information 
Systems Controls. GAO-13-419R. May 9, 2013.
    Bureau of the Public Debt: Areas for Improvement in 
Information Systems Controls. GAO-13-416R. May 9, 2013.
    Management Report: Improvements Are Needed to Enhance the 
Internal Revenue Service's Internal Controls. GAO-13-420R. May 
13, 2013.
    DOD Financial Management: Significant Improvements Needed 
in Efforts to Address Improper Payment Requirements. GAO-13-
227. May 13, 2013.
    Financial Audit: Congressional Award Foundation's Fiscal 
Years 2012 and 2011 Financial Statements. GAO-13-554. May 15, 
2013.
    Nuclear Nonproliferation: IAEA Has Made Progress in 
Implementing Critical Programs but Continues to Face 
Challenges. GAO-13-139. May 16, 2013.
    Government Efficiency and Effectiveness: Opportunities to 
Reduce Fragmentation, Overlap, and Duplication through Enhanced 
Performance Management and Oversight. GAO-13-590T. May 22, 
2013.
    Grants Management: Improved Planning, Coordination, and 
Communication Needed to Strengthen Reform Efforts. GAO-13-383. 
May 23, 2013.
    UN Compensation: United Nations Should Clarify the Process 
and Assumptions Underlying Secretariat Professional Salaries. 
GAO-13-526. May 29, 2013.
    Corporate Income Tax: Effective Tax Rates Can Differ 
Significantly from the Statutory Rate. GAO-13-520. May 30, 
2013.
    Managing for Results: Leading Practices Should Guide the 
Continued Development of Performance.gov. GAO-13-517. June 6, 
2013.
    Information Technology: OMB and Agencies Need to Focus 
Continued Attention on Eliminating Duplicative Investments. 
GAO-13-685T. June 11, 2013.
    Information Technology: Additional Executive Review 
Sessions Needed to Address Troubled Projects. GAO-13-524. June 
13, 2013.
    Personnel Security Clearances: Further Actions Needed to 
Improve the Process and Realize Efficiencies. GAO-13-728T. June 
20, 2013.
    Grants Performance: Justice and FEMA Collect Performance 
Data for Selected Grants, but Action Needed to Validate FEMA 
Performance Data. GAO-13-552. June 24, 2013.
    U.S. Postal Service: Opportunities to Increase Revenue 
Exist with Competitive Products; Reviewing Long-Term Results 
Could Better Inform Promotions Decisions. GAO-13-578. June 25, 
2013.
    National Preparedness: FEMA Has Made Progress, but 
Additional Steps Are Needed to Improve Grant Management and 
Assess Capabilities. GAO-13-637T. June 25, 2013.
    Program Evaluation: Strategies to Facilitate Agencies' Use 
of Evaluation in Program Management and Policy Making. GAO-13-
570. June 26, 2013.
    Managing For Results: Executive Branch Should More Fully 
Implement the GPRA Modernization Act to Address Pressing 
Governance Challenges. GAO-13-518. June 26, 2013.
    Managing for Results: 2013 Federal Managers Survey on 
Organizational Performance and Management Issues. (GAO-13-
519SP, June 2013), an E-supplement to GAO-13-518, GAO-13-519SP. 
June 26, 2013.
    Medicare: Ownership Status of Inpatient Prospective Payment 
System Hospitals That Qualify for Payment Adjustments. GAO-13-
667R. June 27, 2013.
    Management Report: Improvements Needed in Controls over the 
Preparation of the U.S. Consolidated Financial Statements. GAO-
13-540. June 28, 2013.
    Grant Workforce: Agency Training Practices Should Inform 
Future Government-wide Efforts. GAO-13-591. June 28, 2013.
    Federal Telework: Office of Personnel Management's 2012 
Telework Report Shows Opportunities for Improvement. GAO-13-
298R. June 28, 2013.
    President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief: Millions Being 
Treated, but Better Information Management Needed to Further 
Improve and Expand Treatment. GAO-13-688. July 8, 2013.
    Strategic Sourcing: Improved and Expanded Use Could Provide 
Significant Procurement Savings. GAO-13-765T. July 15, 2013.
    Department of Homeland Security: Oversight and Coordination 
of Research and Development Efforts Could Be Strengthened. GAO-
13-766T. July 17, 2013.
    U.S. Postal Service: Proposed Health Plan Could Improve 
Financial Condition, but Impact on Medicare and Other Issues 
Should Be Weighed before Approval. GAO-13-658. July 18, 2013.
    Medicare Program Integrity: Increasing Consistency of 
Contractor Requirements May Improve Administrative Efficiency. 
GAO-13-522. July 23, 2013.
    Overstay Enforcement: Additional Actions Needed to Assess 
DHS's Data and Improve Planning for a Biometric Air Exit 
Program. GAO-13-683. July 30, 2013.
    Agricultural Trade: USDA Is Monitoring Market Development 
Programs as Required but Could Improve Analysis of Impact. GAO-
13-740. July 31, 2013.
    DOD Financial Management: Ineffective Risk Management Could 
Impair Progress toward Audit-Ready Financial Statements. GAO-
13-123. August 2, 2013.
    Health Care Workforce: Federally Funded Training Programs 
in Fiscal Year 2012. GAO-13-709R. August 15, 2013.
    Disability Insurance: Work Activity Indicates Certain 
Social Security Disability Insurance Payments Were Potentially 
Improper. GAO-13-635. August 15, 2013.
    Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government: 
2013 Exposure Draft. GAO-13-830SP. September 3, 2013.
    Space: Defense and Civilian Agencies Request Significant 
Funding for Launch-Related Activities. GAO-13-802R. September 
9, 2013.
    Small Business Administration: Review of 7(a) Guaranteed 
Loans to Select Franchisees. GAO-13-759. September 10, 2013.
    Security Clearances: Additional Mechanisms May Aid Federal 
Tax-Debt Detection. GAO-13-733. September 10, 2013.
    National Archives and Records Administration: Actions 
Needed to Ensure Facilities That Store Federal Records Meet 
Standards. GAO-13-668. September 10, 2013.
    Information Technology: Key Federal Agencies Need to 
Address Potentially Duplicative Investments. GAO-13-718. 
September 12, 2013.
    Federal Data Transparency: Opportunities Remain to 
Incorporate Lessons Learned as Availability of Spending Data 
Increases. GAO-13-758. September 12, 2013.
    Supply Chain Security: DHS Could Improve Cargo Security by 
Periodically Assessing Risks from Foreign Ports. GAO-13-764. 
September 16, 2013.
    DHS Recruiting and Hiring: DHS Is Generally Filling 
Mission-Critical Positions, but Could Better Track Costs of 
Coordinated Recruiting Efforts. GAO-13-742. September 17, 2013.
    Federal Real Property: Greater Transparency and Strategic 
Focus Needed for High-Value GSA Leases. GAO-13-744. September 
19, 2013.
    U.S. Postal Service: Health and Pension Benefits Proposals 
Involve Trade-offs. GAO-13-872T. September 26, 2013.
    Federal Information Security: Mixed Progress in 
Implementing Program Components; Improved Metrics Needed to 
Measure Effectiveness. GAO-13-776. September 26, 2013.
    Department of Homeland Security: Opportunities Exist to 
Enhance Visibility over Collaborative Field Mechanisms. GAO-13-
734. September 27, 2013.
    Nuclear Terrorism Response Plans: Major Cities Could 
Benefit from Federal Guidance on Responding to Nuclear and 
Radiological Attacks. GAO-13-736. September 30, 2013.
    Health Care Workforce: HRSA Action Needed to Publish Timely 
National Supply and Demand Projections. GAO-13-806. September 
30, 2013.
    Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program: Indicators 
Provide Information on Program Accomplishments, but Assessing 
Program Effectiveness is Difficult. GAO-13-746. September 30, 
2013.
    DHS Financial Management: Additional Efforts Needed to 
Resolve Deficiencies in Internal Controls and Financial 
Management Systems. GAO-13-561. September 30, 2013.
    Civil Support: Actions Are Needed to Improve DOD's Planning 
for a Complex Catastrophe. GAO-13-763. September 30, 2013.
    Federal Real Property: Selected Agencies Plan to Use 
Workforce Mobility to Reduce Space, but Most Efforts Are Too 
New to Have Realized Savings. GAO-14-41. October 17, 2013.
    Electronic Health Records: Number and Characteristics of 
Providers Awarded Medicare Incentive Payments for 2011-2012. 
GAO-14-21R. October 24, 2013.
    Medicare Program Integrity: Contractors Reported Generating 
Savings, but CMS Could Improve Its Oversight. GAO-14-111. 
October 25, 2013.
    2020 Census: Additional Actions Could Strengthen Future 
Census Test Designs, GAO-14-26. October 25, 2013.
    Federal Real Property: Improved Standards Needed to Ensure 
That Agencies' Reported Cost Savings Are Reliable and 
Transparent. GAO-14-12. October 29, 2013.
    Personnel Security Clearances: Full Development and 
Implementation of Metrics Needed to Measure Quality of Process. 
GAO-14-157T. October 31, 2013.
    Federal Real Property: GSA Should Clarify Savings Goals for 
the National Broker Contract Program. GAO-1414. October 31, 
2013.
    Information Technology: Agencies Need to Strengthen 
Oversight of Multibillion Dollar Investments in Operations and 
Maintenance. GAO-14-66. November 6, 2013.
    Information Technology: Additional OMB and Agency Actions 
Are Needed to Achieve Portfolio Savings. GAO-14-65. November 6, 
2013.
    GPS Disruptions: Efforts to Assess Risks to Critical 
Infrastructure and Coordinate Agency Actions Should Be 
Enhanced. GAO-14-15. November 6, 2013.
    Federal Employees Health Benefits Program: Oversight of 
Carriers' Fraud and Abuse Programs. GAO-14-39. November 14, 
2013.
    Personnel Security Clearances: Actions Needed to Help 
Ensure Correct Designations of National Security Positions. 
GAO-14-139T. November 20, 2013.
    Federal Autism Activities: Better Data and More 
Coordination Needed to Help Avoid the Potential for Unnecessary 
Duplication. GAO-14-16. November 20, 2013.
    2020 Census: Bureau Needs to Improve Scheduling Practices 
to Enhance Ability to Meet Address List Development Deadlines. 
GAO-14-59. November 21, 2013.
    National Preparedness: Actions Taken by FEMA to Implement 
Select Provisions of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management 
Reform Act of 2006. GAO-14-99R. November 26, 2013.
    Social Security Death Data: Additional Action Needed to 
Address Data Errors and Federal Agency Access. GAO-14-46. 
November 27, 2013.
    Health Resources and Services Administration: Review of 
Internal Communication Mechanisms, Staffing, and Use of 
Contracts. GAO-14-52. December 3, 2013.
    DHS Management and Administration Spending: Reliable Data 
Could Help DHS Better Estimate Resource Requests. GAO-14-27. 
December 4, 2013.
    Telecommunications: GSA Needs to Share and Prioritize 
Lessons Learned to Avoid Future Transition Delays. GAO-14-63. 
December 5, 2013.
    Border Security: DHS's Efforts to Modernize Key Enforcement 
Systems Could be Strengthened. GAO-14-62. December 5, 2013.
    Medicaid: CMS Should Ensure That States Clearly Report 
Overpayments. GAO-14-25. December 6, 2013.
    Internal Controls: Corrective Actions Under Way to Address 
Control Deficiencies at the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. 
Udall Foundation. GAO-14-95. December 6, 2013.
    Reverse Auctions: Guidance Is Needed to Maximize 
Competition and Achieve Cost Savings. GAO-14-108. December 9, 
2013.
    Information Security: Agency Responses to Breaches of 
Personally Identifiable Information Need to Be More Consistent. 
GAO-14-34. December 9, 2013.
    Fiscal Year 2013 Agreed-Upon Procedures: Excise Tax 
Distributions to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and the 
Highway Trust Fund. GAO-14-162R. December 9, 2013.
    IT Dashboard: Agencies Are Managing Investment Risk, but 
Related Ratings Need to Be More Accurate and Available. GAO-14-
64. December 12, 2013.
    Financial Audit: IRS's Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 Financial 
Statements. GAO-14-169. December 12, 2013.
    Financial Audit: Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal 
Years 2013 and 2012 Schedules of Federal Debt. GAO-14-173. 
December 12, 2013.
    Homeland Security: Federal Protective Service Continues to 
Face Challenges with Contract Guards and Risk Assessments at 
Federal Facilities. GAO-14-235T. December 17, 2013.
    IRS's Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program: 2009 
Participation by State and Location of Foreign Bank Accounts. 
GAO-14-265R. January 6, 2014.
    Federal Real Property: Actions Needed to Improve How 
Agencies Manage Structures. GAO-14-87. January 6, 2014.
    U.S. Postal Service: Actions Needed to Strengthen the 
Capital Investment Process. GAO-14-155. January 7, 2014.
    Department of Homeland Security: Ammunition Purchases Have 
Declined since 2009. GAO-14-119. January 13, 2014.
    Computer Matching Act: OMB and Selected Agencies Need to 
Ensure Consistent Implementation. GAO-14-44. January 13, 2014.
    Federal Real Property: Improved Transparency Could Help 
Efforts to Manage Agencies' Maintenance and Repair Backlogs. 
GAO-14-188. January 23, 2014.
    Recovery Act: Grant Implementation Experiences Offer 
Lessons for Accountability and Transparency. GAO-14-219. 
January 24, 2014.
    Civilian Intelligence Community: Additional Actions Needed 
to Improve Reporting on and Planning for the Use of Contract 
Personnel. GAO-14-204. January 29, 2014.
    Federal Contracting: Commercial Item Test Program 
Beneficial, but Actions Needed to Mitigate Potential Risks. 
GAO-14-178. February 4, 2014.
    Commercial Space Launches: FAA's Risk Assessment Process Is 
Not Yet Updated. GAO-14-328T. February 4, 2014.
    Medicare: Nurse Anesthetists Billed for Few Chronic Pain 
Procedures; Implementation of CMS Payment Policy Inconsistent. 
GAO-14-153. February 7, 2014.
    K-12 Education: Characteristics of the Investing in 
Innovation Fund. GAO-14-211R. February 7, 2014.
    DOD Business Systems Modernization: Air Force Business 
System Schedule and Cost Estimates. GAO-14-152. February 7, 
2014.
    Extreme Weather Events: Limiting Federal Fiscal Exposure 
and Increasing the Nation's Resilience. GAO-14-364T. February 
12, 2014.
    Civilian Intelligence Community: Additional Actions Needed 
to Improve Reporting on and Planning for the Use of Contract 
Personnel. GAO-14-257T. February 13, 2014.
    Managing for Results: Implementation Approaches Used to 
Enhance Collaboration in Interagency Groups. GAO-14-220. 
February 14, 2014.
    Contingency Contracting: State and USAID Made Progress 
Assessing and Implementing Changes, but Further Actions Needed. 
GAO-14-229. February 14, 2014.
    Financial Audit: U.S. Government's Fiscal Years 2013 and 
2012 Consolidated Financial Statements. GAO-14-319R. February 
27, 2014.
    Defense Transportation: DOD Can Better Ensure That Federal 
Agencies Fully Reimburse for Using Military Aircraft. GAO-14-
189. February 27, 2014.
    Army Workload and Performance System: Actions Needed to 
Complete Assessment of Unnecessary Overlap with Logistics 
Modernization Program. GAO-14-266. February 28, 2014.
    The Air Force's Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle 
Competitive Procurement. GAO-14-377R. March 4, 2014.
    Nuclear Nonproliferation: Stronger Planning and Evaluation 
Needed for Radiological Security Zone Pilot Project. GAO-14-
209. March 6, 2014.
    Federal Student Loans: Better Oversight Could Improve 
Defaulted Loan Rehabilitation. GAO-14256. March 6, 2014.
    Electronic Health Record Programs: Participation Has 
Increased, but Action Needed to Achieve Goals, Including 
Improved Quality of Care. GAO-14-207. March 6, 2014.
    Federal Rulemaking: Regulatory Review Processes Could Be 
Enhanced. GAO-14-423T. March 11, 2014.
    Government Efficiency and Effectiveness: Views on the 
Progress and Plans for Addressing Government-wide Management 
Challenges. GAO-14-436T. March 12, 2014.
    Capital Financing: Alternative Approaches to Budgeting for 
Federal Real Property. GAO-14239. March 12, 2014.
    Large Partnerships: Characteristics of Population and IRS 
Audits. GAO-14-379R. March 19, 2014.
    Electronic Health Records: HHS Strategy to Address 
Information Exchange Challenges Lacks Specific Prioritized 
Actions and Milestones. GAO-14-242. March 24, 2014.
    Federal Contracting: Noncompetitive Contracts Based on 
Urgency Need Additional Oversight. GAO-14-304. March 26, 2014.
    Critical Infrastructure Protection: Observations on Key 
Factors in DHS's Implementation of Its Partnership Approach. 
GAO-14-464T. March 26, 2014.
    Major Automated Information Systems: Selected Defense 
Programs Need to Implement Key Acquisition Practices. GAO-14-
309. March 27, 2014.
    Electricity Markets: Demand-Response Activities Have 
Increased, but FERC Could Improve Data Collection and Reporting 
Efforts. GAO-14-73. March 27, 2014.
    Defense Logistics: Actions Needed to Improve Department-
Wide Management of Conventional Ammunition Inventory. GAO-14-
182. March 31, 2014.
    Information Security: Federal Agencies Need to Enhance 
Responses to Data Breaches. GAO-14-487T. April 2, 2014.
    2020 Census: Prioritized Information Technology Research 
and Testing Is Needed for Census Design Decisions. GAO-14-389. 
April 3, 2014.
    Information Security: IRS Needs to Address Control 
Weaknesses That Place Financial and Taxpayer Data at Risk. GAO-
14-405. April 8, 2014.
    2014 Annual Report: Additional Opportunities to Reduce 
Fragmentation, Overlap, and Duplication and Achieve Other 
Financial Benefits. GAO-14-343SP. April 8, 2014.
    Inspectors General: Oversight of Small Federal Agencies and 
the Role of the Inspectors General. GAO-14-503T. April 10, 
2014.
    Reexamining Regulations: Agencies Often Made Regulatory 
Changes, but Could Strengthen Linkages to Performance Goals. 
GAO-14-268. April 11, 2014.
    Defense Contracting: DOD's Use of Class Justifications for 
Sole-Source Contracts. GAO-14-427R. April 16, 2014.
    Information Security: SEC Needs to Improve Controls over 
Financial Systems and Data. GAO-14-419. April 17, 2014.
    Homeland Security Acquisitions: DHS Could Better Manage Its 
Portfolio to Address Funding Gaps and Improve Communications 
with Congress. GAO-14-332. April 17, 2014.
    Foster Children: Additional Federal Guidance Could Help 
States Better Plan for Oversight of Psychotropic Medications 
Administered by Managed-Care Organizations. GAO-14-362. April 
28, 2014.
    DOD Financial Management: Actions Under Way Need to Be 
Successfully Completed to Address Long-standing Funds Control 
Weaknesses. GAO-14-94. April 29, 2014.
    Information Security: Agencies Need to Improve Cyber 
Incident Response Practices, GAO-14-354. April 30, 2014.
    Information Technology: Agencies Need to Establish and 
Implement Incremental Development Policies. GAO-14-361. May 1, 
2014.
    NASA: Actions Needed to Improve Transparency and Assess 
Long-Term Affordability of Human Exploration Programs. GAO-14-
385. May 8, 2014.
    Information Technology: Implementing Best Practices and 
Reform Initiatives Can Help Improve the Management of 
Investments. GAO-14-596T. May 8, 2014.
    Management Report: Improvements Needed in SEC's Internal 
Controls and Accounting Procedures. GAO-14-416R. May 12, 2014.
    DOD Financial Management: Effect of Continuing Weaknesses 
on Management and Operations and Status of Key Challenges. GAO-
14-576T. May 13, 2014.
    Disaster Resilience: Actions Are Underway, but Federal 
Fiscal Exposure Highlights the Need for Continued Attention to 
Longstanding Challenges. GAO-14-603T. May 14, 2014.
    Critical Infrastructure Protection: Observations on DHS 
Efforts to Implement and Manage its Chemical Security Program. 
GAO-14-608T. May 14, 2014.
    School-Meals Programs: USDA Has Enhanced Controls, but 
Additional Verification Could Help Ensure Legitimate Program 
Access. GAO-14-262. May 15, 2014.
    Financial Audit: Congressional Award Foundation's Fiscal 
Years 2013 and 2012 Financial Statements. GAO-14-540. May 15, 
2014.
    State Department: Process to Track Responses to 
Congressional Correspondence Can Be Improved. GAO-14-424. May 
20, 2014.
    Medicaid: Financial Characteristics of Approved Applicants 
and Methods Used to Reduce Assets to Qualify for Nursing Home 
Coverage. GAO-14-473. May 22, 2014.
    Federal Software Licenses: Better Management Needed to 
Achieve Significant Savings Government-Wide. GAO-14-413. May 
22, 2014.
    2013 Lobbying Disclosure: Observations on Lobbyists' 
Compliance with Disclosure Requirements. GAO-14-485. May 28, 
2014.
    Virtual Currencies: Emerging Regulatory, Law Enforcement, 
and Consumer Protection Challenges GAO-14-496 May 29, 2014.
    Trusted Travelers: Programs Provide Benefits, but 
Enrollment Processes Could Be Strengthened. GAO-14-483. May 30, 
2014.
    DOD Financial Management: Improvements Needed in Army's 
Efforts to Ensure the Reliability of Its Statement of Budgetary 
Resources. GAO-14-60. May 30, 2014.
    Maritime Security: Progress and Challenges with Selected 
Port Security Programs. GAO-14-636T. June 4, 2014.
    DHS Intelligence Analysis: Additional Actions Needed to 
Address Analytic Priorities and Workforce Challenges. GAO-14-
397. June 4, 2014.
    Nuclear Nonproliferation: Additional Actions Needed to 
Increase the Security of U.S. Industrial Radiological Sources. 
GAO-14-293. June 6, 2014.
    Managing for Results: OMB Should Strengthen Reviews of 
Cross-Agency Goals. GAO-14-526. June 10, 2014.
    Information Technology: Reform Initiatives Can Help Improve 
Efficiency and Effectiveness. GAO-14-671T. June 10, 2014.
    Nuclear Nonproliferation: Additional Actions Needed to 
Increase the Security of U.S. Industrial Radiological Sources. 
GAO-14-681T. June 12, 2014.
    Management Report: Areas for Improvement in the Federal 
Reserve Banks' Information Systems Controls. GAO-14-691R. June 
18, 2014.
    Civilian Intelligence Community: Additional Actions Needed 
to Improve Reporting on and Planning for the Use of Contract 
Personnel. GAO-14-692T. June 18, 2014.
    Management Report: Improvements Needed in Controls over the 
Processes Used to Prepare the U.S. Consolidated Financial 
Statements. GAO-14-543. June 19, 2014.
    DOD Financial Management: The Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service Needs to Fully Implement Financial 
Improvements for Contract Pay. GAO-14-10. June 23, 2014.
    Transportation Security Information Sharing: Stakeholder 
Satisfaction Varies; TSA Could Take Additional Actions to 
Strengthen Efforts. GAO-14-506. June 24, 2014.
    Transportation Security Information Sharing: Results of 
GAO's Survey of Stakeholder Satisfaction with TSA Products and 
Mechanisms (GAO-14-488SP, June 2014), an E-supplement to GAO-
14-506. GAO-14-488SP. June 24, 2014.
    Information Security: Additional Oversight Needed to 
Improve Programs at Small Agencies. GAO-14-344. June 25, 2014.
    United Nations: Key Compensation Elements Should Be 
Reviewed to Address Costs and Sustainability. GAO-14-546. June 
26, 2014.
    Prescription Drugs: Comparison of DOD, Medicaid, and 
Medicare Part D Retail Reimbursement Prices. GAO-14-578. June 
30, 2014.
    Data Transparency: Oversight Needed to Address 
Underreporting and Inconsistencies on Federal Award Website. 
GAO-14-476. June 30, 2014.
    Management Report: Improvements Are Needed to Enhance the 
Internal Revenue Service's Internal Controls. GAO-14-433R. July 
2, 2014.
    USDA Farm Programs: Farmers Have Been Eligible for Multiple 
Programs and Further Efforts Could Help Prevent Duplicative 
Payments. GAO-14-428. July 8, 2014.
    Export-Import Bank: Information on Export Credit Agency 
Financing Support for Wide-Body Jets. GAO-14-642R. July 8, 
2014.
    New Markets Tax Credit: Better Controls and Data Are Needed 
to Ensure Effectiveness, GAO-14-500. July 10, 2014.
    Electricity Markets: Actions Needed to Expand GSA and DOD 
Participation in Demand-Response Activities. GAO-14-594. July 
11, 2014.
    Supplemental Security Income: Wages Reported for Recipients 
Show Indications of Possible SSN Misuse. GAO-14-597. July 16, 
2014.
    Medicare Program Integrity: Increased Oversight and 
Guidance Could Improve Effectiveness and Efficiency of 
Postpayment Claims Reviews. GAO-14-474. July 18, 2014.
    Management Report: Improvements Are Needed in the Bureau of 
the Fiscal Service's Information Systems Controls. GAO-14-693R. 
July 18, 2014.
    State Department: Implementation of Grants Policies Needs 
Better Oversight. GAO-14-635. July 21, 2014.
    Managing for Results: Enhanced Goal Leader Accountability 
and Collaboration Could Further Improve Agency Performance. 
GAO-14-639. July 22, 2014.
    Large Partnerships: Growing Population and Complexity 
Hinder Effective IRS Audits. GAO-14-746T. July 22, 2014.
    World Trade Center Health Program: Approach Used to Add 
Cancers to List of Covered Conditions Was Reasonable, but Could 
Be Improved. GAO-14-606. July 23, 2014.
    Space Launch System: Resources Need to be Matched to 
Requirements to Decrease Risk and Support Long Term 
Affordability. GAO-14-631. July 23, 2014.
    Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Preliminary 
Results of Undercover Testing of Enrollment Controls for Health 
Care Coverage and Consumer Subsidies Provided Under the Act. 
GAO-14-705T. July 23, 2014.
    Information Management: The National Technical Information 
Service's Dissemination of Technical Reports Needs Attention. 
GAO-14-781T. July 23, 2014.
    Federal Emergency Management Agency: Opportunities to 
Achieve Efficiencies and Strengthen Operations. GAO-14-687T. 
July 24, 2014.
    Security Clearances: Tax Debts Owed by DOD Employees and 
Contractors. GAO-14-686R. July 28, 2014.
    Healthcare.gov: Ineffective Planning and Oversight 
Practices Underscore the Need for Improved Contract Management. 
GAO-14-694. July 30, 2014.
    Federal Grants: Agencies Performed Internal Control 
Assessments Consistent with Guidance and Are Addressing 
Internal Control Deficiencies. GAO-14-539. July 30, 2014.
    Contractor Performance: Actions Taken to Improve Reporting 
of Past Performance Information. GAO-14-707. August 7, 2014.
    Information Security: Agencies Need to Improve Oversight of 
Contractor Controls. GAO-14-612. August 8, 2014.
    Crop Insurance: Considerations in Reducing Federal Premium 
Subsidies. GAO-14-700. August 8, 2014.
    Federally Funded Research Centers: Agency Reviews of 
Employee Compensation and Center Performance. GAO-14-593. 
August 11, 2014.
    Bureau of Prisons: Management of New Prison Activations Can 
Be Improved. GAO-14-709. August 22, 2014.
    Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Largest Issuers 
of Health Coverage Participated in Most Exchanges, and Number 
of Plans Available Varied. GAO-14-657. August 29, 2014.
    Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government. 
GAO-14-704G. September 10, 2014.
    DHS Training: Improved Documentation, Resource Tracking, 
and Performance Measurement Could Strengthen Efforts. GAO-14-
688. September 10, 2014.
    Federal Rulemaking: Agencies Included Key Elements of Cost-
Benefit Analysis, but Explanations of Regulations' Significance 
Could Be More Transparent [Reissued on September 12, 2014]. 
GAO-14-714. September 11, 2014.
    Healthcare.gov: Actions Needed to Address Weaknesses in 
Information Security and Privacy Controls. GAO-14-730. 
September 16, 2014.
    8(a) Subcontracting Limitations: Continued Noncompliance 
with Monitoring Requirements Signals Need for Regulatory 
Change. GAO-14706. September 16, 2014.
    Large Partnerships: With Growing Number of Partnerships, 
IRS Needs to Improve Audit Efficiency. GAO-14-732. September 
18, 2014.
    Federal Real Property: DHS and GSA Need to Strengthen the 
Management of DHS Headquarters Consolidation. GAO-14-648. 
September 19, 2014.
    Federal Real Property: DHS and GSA Need to Strengthen the 
Management of DHS Headquarters Consolidation. GAO-14-864T. 
September 19, 2014.
    Health Resources and Services Administration: Action Taken 
to Train and Oversee Grantee Monitoring Staff, but Certain 
Guidance Could Be Improved. GAO-14-800. September 23, 2014.
    Federal Software Licenses: Most Agencies Have Reported 
Planned Actions to Address Our Prior Recommendations on 
Software License Management. GAO-14-835R. September 23, 2014.
    U.S. Postal Service: Information on Recent Changes to 
Delivery Standards, Operations, and Performance. GAO-14-828R. 
September 25, 2014.
    Data Center Consolidation: Reporting Can Be Improved to 
Reflect Substantial Planned Savings. GAO-14-713. September 25, 
2014.
    Cloud Computing: Additional Opportunities and Savings Need 
to Be Pursued. GAO-14-753. September 25, 2014.
    Managing for Results: Agencies' Trends in the Use of 
Performance Information to Make Decisions. GAO-14-747. 
September 26, 2014.
    Federal Real Property: More Useful Information to Providers 
Could Improve the Homeless Assistance Program. GAO-14-739. 
September 30, 2014.
    DOD Business Systems Modernization: Additional Enhancements 
Are Needed for Army Business System Schedule and Cost Estimates 
to Fully Meet Best Practices. GAO-14-470. September 30, 2014.
    Disability Compensation: Review of Concurrent Receipt of 
Department of Defense Retirement, Department of Veterans 
Affairs Disability Compensation, and Social Security Disability 
Insurance. GAO-14-854R. September 30, 2014.
    2020 Census: Census Bureau Can Improve Use of Leading 
Practices When Choosing Address and Mapping Sources. GAO-15-21. 
October 2, 2014.
    Market Research: Better Documentation Needed to Inform 
Future Procurements at Selected Agencies. GAO-15-8. October 9, 
2014.
    Federal Paid Administrative Leave: Additional Guidance 
Needed to Improve OPM Data. GAO-15-79. October 17, 2014.
    Health Care Transparency: Actions Needed to Improve Cost 
and Quality Information for Consumers. GAO-15-11. October 20, 
2014.
    Labor Relations Activities: Actions Needed to Improve 
Tracking and Reporting of the Use and Cost of Official Time. 
GAO-15-9. October 23, 2014.
    Managing for Results: Selected Agencies Need to Take 
Additional Efforts to Improve Customer Service. GAO-15-84. 
October 24, 2014.
    Government Efficiency and Effectiveness: Inconsistent 
Definitions and Information Limit the Usefulness of Federal 
Program Inventories. GAO-15-83. October 31, 2014.
    Information Sharing: DHS Is Assessing Fusion Center 
Capabilities and Results, but Needs to More Accurately Account 
for Federal Funding Provided to Centers. GAO-15-155. November 
4, 2014.
    Fiscal Year 2014 Agreed-Upon Procedures: Excise Tax 
Distributions to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and the 
Highway Trust Fund. GAO-15-152R. November 6, 2014.
    Financial Audit: Office of Financial Stability (Troubled 
Asset Relief Program) Fiscal Years 2014 and 2013 Financial 
Statements. GAO-15-132R. November 7, 2014.
    Financial Audit: Bureau of the Fiscal Service's Fiscal 
Years 2014 and 2013 Schedules of Federal Debt. GAO-15-157. 
November 10, 2014.
    Program Evaluation: Some Agencies Reported that Networking, 
Hiring, and Involving Program Staff Help Build Capacity. GAO-
15-25. November 13, 2014.
    Financial Audit: Securities and Exchange Commission's 
Fiscal Years 2014 and 2013 Financial Statements. GAO-15-166R. 
November 17, 2014.
    Consumer Product Safety Oversight: Opportunities Exist to 
Strengthen Coordination and Increase Efficiencies and 
Effectiveness. GAO-15-52. November 19, 2014.

                      VI. OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS

    During the 113th Congress, 964 official communications were 
referred to the Committee. Of these, 956 were Executive 
Communications, and 8 were Petitions or Memorials. Of the 
official communications, 347 dealt with the District of 
Columbia.

                        VII. LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS

    During the 113th Congress, the Committee reported 
significant legislation that was approved by Congress and 
signed into law by the President.
    The following are brief legislative histories of measures 
to the Committee and, in some cases, drafted by the Committee, 
which (1) became public law or (2) were favorably reported from 
the Committee and passed by the Senate, but did not become law. 
In addition to the measures listed below, the Committee 
received during the 113th Congress numerous legislative 
proposals that were not considered or reported, or that were 
reported but not passed by the Senate. Additional information 
on these measures appears in the Committee's Legislative 
Calendar for the 113th Congress, S. Prt. 113-63, Government 
Printing Office (December 31, 2011).

                       MEASURES ENACTED INTO LAW

    The following measures considered by the Committee were 
enacted into Public Law. The descriptions following the signing 
date of each measure note selected provisions of the text, and 
are not intended to serve as section-by-section summaries.
    H.R. 1171.--Formerly Owned Resources for Veterans to 
Express Thanks for Service Act of 2013 or FOR VETS Act of 2013. 
(Public Law 113-26). August 9, 2013.
    Authorizes the transfer of Federal surplus property to a 
state agency for distribution through donation within the state 
for purposes of education or public health for organizations 
whose membership comprises substantially veterans and whose 
representatives are recognized by the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs (VA) in the preparation, presentation, and prosecution 
of claims under laws administered by the Secretary.
    H.R. 1233.--Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments 
of 2014. (Public Law 113-187). November 26, 2014.
    (Sec. 2) Amends the Presidential Records Act to require the 
Archivist of the United States, upon determining to make 
publicly available any presidential record not previously made 
available, to: (1) promptly provide written notice of such 
determination to the former President during whose term of 
office the record was created, to the incumbent President, and 
to the public; and (2) make such record available to the public 
within 60 days, except any record with respect to which the 
Archivist receives notification from a former or incumbent 
President of a claim of constitutionally-based privilege 
against disclosure. Prohibits the Archivist from making a 
record that is subject to such a claim publicly available 
unless: (1) the incumbent President withdraws a decision 
upholding the claim, or (2) the Archivist is otherwise directed 
to do so by a final court order that is not subject to appeal. 
Prohibits the Archivist from making available any original 
presidential records to anyone claiming access to them as a 
designated representative of a President or former President if 
that individual has been convicted of a crime relating to the 
review, retention, removal, or destruction of the records of 
the Archives. Prohibits the President, the Vice President, or a 
covered employee (i.e., the immediate staff of the President 
and Vice President or office advising and assisting the 
President or Vice President) from creating or sending a 
presidential or vice presidential record using a non-official 
electronic messaging account unless the President, Vice 
President, or covered employee: (1) copies an official 
electronic messaging account of the President, Vice President, 
or covered employee in the original creation or transmission of 
the presidential or vice presidential record; or (2) forwards a 
complete copy of the presidential record to an official 
electronic messaging account of the President, Vice President, 
or covered employee not later than 20 days after the original 
creation or transmission of the presidential or vice 
presidential record. (Sec. 3) Provides that the transfer to the 
Archivist of records by a Federal agency that have historical 
significance shall take place as soon as practicable but not 
later than 30 years after the creation or receipt of such 
records by an agency. Expands the authority of the Archivist 
with respect to the creation and preservation of audio and 
visual records. (Sec. 5) Revises the definition of "records" 
for purposes of this Act to include all recorded information, 
regardless of form or characteristics. Makes the Archivist's 
determination of whether recorded information is a record 
binding on all Federal agencies. (Sec. 6) Directs the Archivist 
to prescribe internal procedures to prevent the unauthorized 
removal of classified records from the National Archives and 
Records Administration (NARA) or the destruction or damage of 
such records, including when such records are accessed 
electronically. Requires such procedures to: (1) prohibit any 
person, other than personnel with appropriate security 
clearances (covered personnel), from viewing classified records 
in any room that is not secure, except in the presence of NARA 
personnel or under video surveillance, from being left alone 
with classified records unless under video surveillance, or 
from conducting any review of classified records while in the 
possession of any personal communication device; (2) require 
all persons seeking access to classified records to consent to 
a search of their belongings upon conclusion of their records 
review; and (3) require all writings prepared by persons, other 
than covered personnel, during the course of a review of 
classified records to be retained by NARA in a secure facility 
until such writings are determined to be unclassified, are 
declassified, or are securely transferred to another secure 
facility. (Sec. 7) Repeals provisions authorizing the National 
Study Commission on Records and Documents of Federal Officials. 
(Sec. 9) Transfers responsibility for records management from 
the Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA) 
to the Archivist. Requires the transfer of records from Federal 
agencies to the National Archives in digital or electronic form 
to the greatest extent possible. (Sec. 10) Prohibits an officer 
or employee of an executive agency from creating or sending a 
record using a non-official electronic messaging account unless 
such officer or employee: (1) copies an official electronic 
messaging account of the officer or employee in the original 
creation or transmission of the record, or (2) forwards a 
complete copy of the record to an official electronic messaging 
account of the officer or employee not later than 20 days after 
the original creation or transmission of the record. Provides 
for disciplinary action against an agency officer or employee 
for an intentional violation of such prohibition.
    H.R. 2952.--Cybersecurity Workforce Assessment Act. (Public 
Law 113-246). December 18, 2014.
    Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security, within 180 days 
and annually thereafter for three years, to conduct an 
assessment of the cybersecurity workforce of the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS), which shall include information on:

     LThe readiness and capacity of such workforce to 
meet its cybersecurity mission;
     LWhere cybersecurity workforce positions are 
located within DHS;
     LWhich such positions are performed by permanent 
full-time equivalent DHS employees, by independent contractors, 
and by individuals employed by other Federal agencies;
     LWhich such positions are vacant;
     LThe percentage of individuals within each 
Cybersecurity Category and Specialty Area who received 
essential training to perform their jobs; and
     LIn cases in which such training was not received, 
what challenges were encountered regarding the provision of 
such training.
    Directs the Secretary to develop, maintain, and update a 
comprehensive workforce strategy to enhance the readiness, 
capacity, training, recruitment, and retention of DHS's 
cybersecurity workforce, which shall include a description of:

     LA multi-phased recruitment plan,
     LA 5-year implementation plan,
     LA 10-year projection of the cybersecurity 
workforce needs of DHS,
     LAny obstacle impeding the hiring and development 
of such workforce, and
     LAny gap in the existing DHS cybersecurity 
workforce and a plan to fill such gap.
    Requires the Secretary to submit to the appropriate 
congressional committees: (1) annual updates on such assessment 
and on the Secretary's progress in carrying out such strategy; 
and (2) a report on the feasibility, cost, and benefits of 
establishing a Cybersecurity Fellowship Program to offer a 
tuition payment plan for individuals pursuing undergraduate and 
doctoral degrees who agree to work for DHS for an agreed-upon 
period.
    H.R. 4007.--Protecting and Securing Chemical Facilities 
from Terrorist Attacks Act of 2014. (Public Law 113-263). 
December 18, 2014.
    (Sec. 2) Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to 
reestablish the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards 
(CFATS) Program in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 
and to authorize appropriations for such Program for FY2015-
FY2017. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, under such 
Program, to: (1) establish risk-based performance standards 
designed to protect covered chemical facilities from acts of 
terrorism and other security risks; and (2) require such 
facilities to submit security vulnerability assessments and 
develop and implement site security plans. Authorizes the 
Secretary to approve an alternative security program 
established by a private sector entity or a Federal, State, or 
local authority that meets the requirements of this Act. 
Requires the Secretary to:

     LReview and approve or disapprove each such 
assessment and plan using the risk assessment policies and 
procedures developed under this Act;
     LConduct the audit and inspection of covered 
chemical facilities, including by using a non-government 
entity, to determine compliance with this Act;
     LPrescribe standards for the training and 
retraining of DHS or non-governmental auditors and inspectors; 
and
     LProvide written notification (including a clear 
explanation of any deficiency in the security vulnerability 
assessment or site security plan) to the owner or operator of a 
covered facility determined to not be in compliance with this 
Act; and
     LIssue to the owner or operator of such a facility 
an order to comply with this Act.
    Authorizes the Secretary to issue an order assessing a 
civil penalty or requiring such a facility to cease operations 
if the owner or operator fails to comply. Defines: (1) a 
"covered chemical facility" to mean a chemical facility that 
the Secretary designates as a facility of interest and 
determines meets specified risk criteria, and (2) a "chemical 
facility of interest" to mean a facility that holds a chemical 
of interest at a threshold quantity that meets relevant risk-
related criteria developed under this Act. Excepts certain 
chemical facilities, including Department of Defense (DOD) and 
Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. Requires the Secretary 
to carry out a Personnel Surety Program that provides a 
participating facility owner or operator with feedback about 
individuals based on vetting against the terrorist screening 
database. Authorizes a covered chemical facility to use such a 
Federal screening program in order to satisfy the requirements 
of a risk-based performance standard that address personnel 
surety. Requires the Secretary to direct DHS's Security 
Screening Coordination Office to coordinate with the National 
Protection and Programs Directorate to expedite the development 
of a common credential that screens against the terrorist 
screening database on a recurrent basis. Directs the Secretary 
to: (1) consult with the heads of other Federal agencies, 
states and political subdivisions, and relevant business 
associations to identify all chemical facilities of interest; 
and (2) develop a risk assessment approach and corresponding 
tiering methodology that incorporates all relevant elements of 
risk, including threat, vulnerability, and consequence. 
Requires the criteria for determining the security risk of 
terrorism associated with a facility to include: (1) the 
relevant threat information, (2) the potential economic 
consequences and the potential loss of human life in the event 
of the facility being subject to a terrorist attack, and (3) 
the vulnerability of the facility to a terrorist attack. 
Requires: (1) information developed pursuant to this Act to be 
protected from public disclosure, but permits the sharing of 
such information with state and local government officials 
possessing the necessary security clearances; and (2) 
information submitted to or obtained by the Secretary under 
this Act to be treated as classified material in any proceeding 
to enforce this Act. Sets forth civil penalties for violations 
of orders issued under this Act. Directs the Secretary to 
publish, including on the DHS website, the whistleblower 
protections that an individual providing information under this 
Act would have. Requires: (1) the Secretary to submit to 
Congress, within 18 months after enactment of this Act, a 
report on the CFATS Program, including certifications that the 
Secretary has made significant progress in the identification 
of all chemical facilities of interest and has developed a risk 
assessment approach and corresponding tiering methodology and 
an assessment of DHS's implementation of any recommendations 
made by the Homeland Security Studies and Analysis Institute as 
outlined in the Institute's Tiering Methodology Peer Review; 
and (2) the Comptroller General (GAO) to submit a semiannual 
assessments of the implementation of this Act. Authorizes the 
Secretary to: (1) provide guidance and tools, methodologies, or 
computer software to assist small covered chemical facilities 
(covered facilities having fewer than 350 employees) in 
developing their physical security; and (2) submit a report on 
best practices that may assist small chemical facilities. 
Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish an outreach 
implementation plan to identify chemical facilities of interest 
and make available compliance assistance materials and 
information on education and training, (2) commission a third-
party study to assess vulnerabilities to acts of terrorism 
associated with the Program, and (3) submit a plan for the 
utilization of metrics to assess the effectiveness of the 
Program to reduce the risk of a terrorist attack or other 
security risk to citizens and communities surrounding covered 
chemical facilities.
    H.R. 4194.-- Government Reports Elimination Act of 2014. 
(Public Law 113-188). November 26, 2014.
    Provides for the elimination or modification of reporting 
and notification requirements of specified Federal agencies and 
departments. Title I: Department of Agriculture--Eliminates: 
(1) peanut base acres data collection and publication under the 
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008; (2) the report on 
export credit guarantees to emerging markets; (3) the 
evaluation of the rural development, business and industry 
guaranteed loan program financing of locally or regionally 
produced food products; (4) quarterly reports on export 
assistance provided by the Commodity Credit Corporation and the 
Secretary of Agriculture; (5) annual progress reports in 
achieving benchmarks established in the regional investment 
strategy of the Rural Collaborative Investment Program; and (6) 
the annual report on the foreign market development cooperator 
program. Title II: Department of Commerce--Eliminates: (1) the 
annual report on efforts and progress of colleges, 
universities, institutions, associations, and alliances to be 
designated as Sea Grant Colleges or Institutes; (2) the annual 
report on Enterprise Integration Standardization and 
Implementation activities under the Enterprise Integration Act 
of 2001; (3) the biennial report on efforts to ensure equal 
access to the Sea Grant Fellowship Program; (4) the annual 
reports on activities of the Technology Innovation Program 
(TIP) and on the Technology Innovation Program Advisory Board; 
and (5) the annual report on activities of the Northwest 
Atlantic Fisheries Commission and related entities. Title III: 
Corporation for National and Community Service--Eliminates: (1) 
the reporting requirements of Federal agencies and departments 
to the Corporation for National and Community Service, and (2) 
the impact study and report on service-learning activities. 
Title IV: Department of Defense (DOD)--Eliminates: (1) the 
requirement for submission with the annual DOD budget of a 
display that covers all programs and activities of the Air 
Sovereignty Alert Mission of the Air Force, and (2) the annual 
report on the reliability of DOD financial statements. Title V: 
Department of Education--Eliminates the report of the Secretary 
of Education justifying the award of school facility emergency 
and modernization grants. Title VI Department of Energy (DOE)--
Eliminates reports on: (1) the science and engineering 
education pilot program, (2) the development of strategic 
unconventional fuels, and (3) energy efficiency standards for 
industrial equipment. Title VII: Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA)--Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
(commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to eliminate the 
comprehensive report on Great Lakes management. Title VIII: 
Executive Office of the President--Eliminates the notification 
requirement and the report on waivers of sanctions by the 
President against North Korea. Title IX: Government 
Accountability Office (GAO)--(Sec. 901) Eliminates reports on: 
(1) expenditures of local educational agencies under the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and (2) the use 
of funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
2009 by states and local governments. Amends the Help America 
Vote Act of 2002 to eliminate the mandatory audit of all funds 
provided by such Act. Amends the Small Business Jobs Act of 
2010 to eliminate the audits and reports on the state small 
business credit initiative and the small business lending fund 
program. Amends the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 
to eliminate the audit and report on assistance to the Housing 
Assistance Council. (Sec. 902) Amends the Patient Protection 
and Affordable Care Act to make the Secretary of Health and 
Human Resources (HHS) (currently, the Secretary and the 
Comptroller General) responsible for surveying the public with 
respect to health and health care. Requires the Comptroller 
General to publish on the GAO website (currently, deliver to 
Congress) lists of GAO reports. Amends the Congressional Award 
Act to provide for a independent public accountant (currently, 
the Comptroller General) to conduct the annual audit of the 
financial records of the Congressional Award Board. Requires 
the Comptroller General to review, and report on, each annual 
audit. Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act 
to terminate at the end of 2014 the review by the Comptroller 
General of the threshold amount for injury-related liabilities 
under Medicare. Title X: Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS)--Eliminates: (1) reporting requirements under the Tariff 
Act of 1930 relating to the prohibition on importation of 
products made with dog or cat fur, (2) the biennial Port of 
Entry Infrastructure Assessment Study, (3) the biennial 
National Land Border Security Plan, (4) reporting requirements 
with respect to fees for customs services, and (5) the status 
report on the modernization of the National Distress and 
Response System. Title XI: Department of the Interior--
Eliminates reporting requirements of the program on oil and gas 
royalties in-kind. Title XII: Department of Labor--Eliminates 
the continuing study by the Secretary of Labor on the impact of 
the Andean trade preference on U.S. labor. Title XIII: Office 
of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI)--Eliminates the 
report on the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. 
Title XIV: Department of State--Eliminates the annual State 
Department report on nuclear proliferation in South Asia and 
efforts to achieve a regional agreement on nuclear non-
proliferation. Title XV: Department of Transportation (DOT)--
(Sec. 1601) Eliminates: (1) the reporting requirements of the 
Air Traffic Services Committee, (2) the annual summaries of 
airport financial reports, (3) the annual report on pipeline 
safety information grants to communities, (4) the annual report 
on the pilot program for innovative financing of air traffic 
control equipment and the reports on justifications for air 
defense identification zones under the Vision 100--Century of 
Aviation Reauthorization Act, and (5) the annual report on the 
application of new standards or technologies to reduce aircraft 
noise levels under the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and 
Reform Act for the 21st Century. (Sec. 1502) Eliminates the 
requirement for an annual evaluation and audit of the programs 
and expenditures of the National Transportation Safety Board 
(NTSB), allowing such evaluation and audit to be conducted as 
determined necessary by the Comptroller General. Title XVI: 
Department of the Treasury--Eliminates: (1) the annual report 
on the North American Development Bank, (2) the annual report 
on loans considered by the Boards of Executive Directors of 
international financial institutions engaged in activities to 
promote the cause of human rights, (3) the report on new 
International Monetary Fund (IMF) borrowing arrangements 
regarding rates and maturities, and (4) the requirement for 
notification to Congress of any significant modifications in 
the auction process for issuing Treasury obligations. Title 
XVII: Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)--Eliminates the 
annual report on procurement of health care items by VA medical 
facilities.
    H.R. 4197.--All Circuit Review Extension Act (Public Law 
113-170). September 26, 2014.
    Extends from two to five years after the effective date of 
the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (i.e., 
December 27, 2012), the period allowed for: (1) filing a 
petition for judicial review of Merit Systems Protection Board 
decisions in whistleblower cases, and (2) any review of such a 
decision by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management 
(OPM).
    S. 231.--Multinational Species Conservation Funds 
Semipostal Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2013. (Public Law 113-
165). September 19, 2014.Amends the Multinational Species 
Conservation Funds Semipostal Stamp Act of 2010 to require such 
stamp to be made available to the public for an additional four 
years.
    S. 994.--Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 
2014 or the DATA Act. (Public Law 113-101). May 9, 2014.
    (Sec. 2) States as the purposes of this Act to: (1) expand 
the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 
by disclosing direct Federal agency expenditures and linking 
Federal contract, loan, and grant spending information to 
Federal programs to enable taxpayers and policy makers to track 
Federal spending more effectively; (2) establish government-
wide data standards for financial data and provide consistent, 
reliable, and searchable government-wide spending data that is 
displayed accurately for taxpayers and policy makers on 
USASpending.gov; (3) simplify reporting for entities receiving 
Federal funds by streamlining reporting requirements and 
reducing compliance costs while improving transparency; (4) 
improve the quality of data submitted to USASpending.gov by 
holding Federal agencies accountable for the completeness and 
accuracy of the data submitted; and (5) apply approaches 
developed by the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board 
to spending across the Federal Government. (Sec. 3) Amends the 
Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 to 
define ``Federal agency,'' for purposes of such Act, to mean an 
executive department, a government corporation, or an 
independent establishment. Directs the Secretary of the 
Treasury, not later than three years after the enactment of 
this Act and monthly, when practicable, but not less than 
quarterly thereafter, to ensure that information on funds made 
available to or expended by a Federal agency is posted online, 
in a searchable, downloadable format. Directs the Secretary and 
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to 
establish government-wide financial data standards for Federal 
funds and entities receiving such funds. Requires such data 
standards, to the extent reasonable and practicable, to: (1) 
incorporate widely-accepted common data elements and a widely-
accepted, nonproprietary, searchable, platform-independent, 
computer-readable format; (2) include government-wide universal 
identifiers for Federal awards and entities; (3) be consistent 
with and implement applicable accounting principles; (4) be 
capable of being continually updated; (5) produce consistent 
and comparable data; and (6) establish a standard method of 
conveying the reporting period, reporting entity, unit of 
measure, and other associated attributes. Requires the 
Secretary and the Director to issue guidance to Federal 
agencies on such data standards and consult with public and 
private stakeholders in establishing such standards. Requires 
the Director to review the information required to be reported 
by recipients of Federal awards to identify: (1) common 
reporting elements across the Federal Government, (2) 
unnecessary duplication in financial reporting, and (3) 
unnecessarily burdensome reporting requirements for recipients 
of Federal awards. Requires the Director to establish a two-
year pilot program to develop recommendations for: (1) 
standardized reporting elements across the Federal Government, 
(2) the elimination of unnecessary duplication in financial 
reporting, and (3) the reduction of compliance costs for 
recipients of Federal awards. Requires such pilot program to 
include: (1) a combination of Federal contracts, grants, and 
subawards, with an aggregate value of not less than $1 billion 
and not more than $2 billion; (2) a diverse group of recipients 
of Federal awards; (3) recipients who receive awards from 
multiple programs across multiple agencies; and (4) data 
collected during a 12-month reporting cycle. Requires the 
Director, not later than 90 days after the termination of the 
pilot program, to submit a report to the House Committees on 
the Budget and Oversight and Government Reform and the Senate 
Committees on the Budget and Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs that includes: (1) a description of the data collected 
under the pilot program, its usefulness, and the cost to 
collect the data from other recipients; and (2) 
recommendations. Directs the Inspector General of each Federal 
agency to: (1) review a statistically valid sampling of the 
spending data submitted under this Act by the Federal agency; 
and (2) submit to Congress and make publicly available a report 
assessing the completeness, timeliness, quality, and accuracy 
of the data sampled and the implementation and use of data 
standards by the Federal agency. Directs the Comptroller 
General (GAO) to submit a publicly available report to Congress 
assessing and comparing the data completeness, timeliness, 
quality, and accuracy of the data submitted under this Act by 
Federal agencies and the implementation and use of data 
standards by Federal agencies. Authorizes the Secretary to 
establish a data analysis center, or expand an existing 
service, to provide data, analytic tools, and data management 
techniques to support: (1) the prevention and reduction of 
improper payments, and (2) the improvement of efficiency and 
transparency in Federal spending. Transfers assets of the 
Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board to the 
Department of the Treasury upon the establishment of the data 
analysis center. Declares that nothing in this Act: (1) shall 
require disclosure to the public of information protected from 
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or 
information protected under the Privacy Act of 1974 or the 
Internal Revenue Code; and (2) shall be construed to create a 
private right of action. (Sec. 4) Requires the OMB Director to 
make available on the OMB website a financial management status 
report and government-wide five-year financial management plan. 
(Sec. 5) Requires a Federal agency to notify the Secretary of 
the Treasury of any legally enforceable non-tax debt owed to 
such agency that is over 120 (currently, 180) days delinquent 
so that the Secretary can offset such debt administratively. 
Requires the Secretary to notify Congress of any instance in 
which an agency fails to notify the Secretary of such a debt.
    S. 1348.--Congressional Award Program Reauthorization Act 
of 2013. (Public Law 113-43). October 4, 2013.
    Amends the Congressional Award Act to extend the date for 
termination of the Congressional Award Board from October 1, 
2013, to October 1, 2018.
    S. 1691.--Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act of 2014. 
(Public Law 113-277). December 18, 2014.
    (Sec. 2) States as the purposes of this Act: (1) 
strengthening U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and 
ensuring that border patrol agents are sufficiently ready to 
conduct necessary work and will perform overtime hours in 
excess of a 40-hour workweek based on the needs of CBP, and (2) 
ensuring CBP has the flexibility to cover shift changes and 
retains the right to assign scheduled and unscheduled work for 
mission requirements and planning based on operational need. 
Requires a border patrol agent, not later than 30 days before 
the first day of each year beginning after the enactment of 
this Act, to make an election whether such agent shall, for 
that year, be assigned to: (1) the level 1 border patrol rate 
of pay (i.e., hourly rate of pay equal to 1.25 times the 
otherwise applicable hourly rate of basic pay); (2) the level 2 
border patrol rate of pay (i.e., the hourly rate of pay equal 
to 1.125 times the otherwise hourly rate of basic pay); or (3) 
the basic border patrol rate of pay, with additional overtime 
as needed by CBP. Requires: (1) the Office of Personnel 
Management (OPM) to promulgate regulations establishing 
procedures for such elections, and (2) CBP to provide each 
border patrol agent with information on each type of election 
available and how to make an election. Exempts from such 
limitation agents working at CBP headquarters or a CBP training 
location. Provides that an agent who fails to elect a pay level 
or an agent who is assigned a canine shall  be assigned to the 
level 1 rate of pay. Requires CBP to: (1) assign an agent to 
the basic border patrol rate of pay until it determines that 
the agent is able to perform scheduled overtime on a daily 
basis, and (2) take such action to ensure that not more than 10 
percent of the agents stationed at a location are assigned to 
the level 2 border patrol rate of pay or the basic border 
patrol rate of pay. Allows CBP to waive the 10 percent 
limitation if it determines that it may do so and adequately 
fulfill its operational requirements. Requires CBP to develop, 
implement, and report on, a plan to ensure that the assignment 
of a border patrol agent during the three years of service 
before such agent becomes eligible for immediate retirement are 
consistent with the average border patrol rate of pay level to 
which the agent has been assigned during the course of his or 
her career. Requires the Comptroller General (GAO) to report to 
Congress on the effectiveness of the plan in ensuring that 
agents are not able to artificially enhance their retirement 
annuities. Specifies the terms and conditions of level 1 and 2 
border patrol rates of pay, premium pay, eligibility for leave 
without pay, overtime, and compensatory time off. Requires CBP 
to avoid the use of scheduled overtime work by border patrol 
agents to the maximum extent practicable. Includes supplemental 
pay from levels 1 and 2 rates of pay as part of a border patrol 
agent's basic pay for purposes of calculating retirement 
annuities. Requires: (1) CBP to conduct a comprehensive 
analysis that examines the staffing requirements for CBP and 
estimates the cost of such requirements and submit a report on 
such analysis to GAO, and (2) GAO to report on the methodology 
used by CBP to carry out its analysis and whether GAO concurs 
with the findings in the CBP report. States that nothing in 
this Act shall be construed to: (1) limit the right of CBP to 
assign both scheduled and unscheduled work to a border patrol 
agent based on the needs of the agency in excess of the hours 
of work normally applicable under the election made by the 
agent; (2) require compensation of an agent for other than for 
hours during which the agent is actually performing work or 
using approved leave; or (3) exempt an agent from any 
limitations on pay, earnings, or compensation prescribed by 
law. Requires OPM to promulgate regulations to carry out this 
Act. (Sec. 3) Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to 
authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to: (1) establish 
positions in the excepted service in which the incumbent 
performs, manages, or supervises functions that execute the 
responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 
relating to cybersecurity (qualified positions), including 
positions formerly identified as senior level positions and 
positions in the Senior Executive Service (SES); and (2) 
appoint an individual to such a qualified position. Requires 
the Secretary to fix the rates of basic pay for any qualified 
position in relation to the rates of pay provided for 
comparable positions in the Department of Defense (DOD) and 
allows the Secretary to provide such employees with additional 
compensation, incentives, and allowances. Requires the 
Secretary to annually submit to Congress for five years a 
report that: (1) discusses the process used in accepting 
applications and accessing candidates for qualified positions, 
ensuring adherence to veteran preferences; (2) describes how 
the Secretary plans to fulfill the critical need of DHS to 
recruit and retain employees in a qualified position; (3) 
discusses how such planning is integrated into the strategic 
workforce of DHS; (4) provides information on the number of 
employees, including veterans, hired and the number of 
separations and retirements of employees in qualified 
positions; and (5) describes the training provided to 
supervisors of employees in qualified positions on the use of 
new authorities. Establishes a probationary period of three 
years for all employees hired. Directs the National Protection 
and Programs Directorate to report to Congress on the 
availability of, and benefits of using, cybersecurity personnel 
and facilities outside of the National Capital Region. (Sec. 4) 
Homeland Security Cybersecurity Workforce Assessment Act--
Requires the Secretary to: (1) identify all cybersecurity 
workforce positions within DHS; (2) determine the primary 
cybersecurity work category and specialty area of all DHS 
cybersecurity workforce positions; (3) assign the corresponding 
data element code, as set forth in OPM's Guide to Data 
Standards, that is aligned with the National Initiative for 
Cybersecurity Education's National Cybersecurity Workforce 
Framework report; (4) establish procedures to identify open 
positions that include cybersecurity functions; and (5) assign 
the appropriate employment code to each such position. Directs 
the Secretary, annually through 2021, to: (1) identify 
cybersecurity work categories and specialty areas of critical 
need in the DHS cybersecurity workforce, and (2) submit a 
report to the OPM Director that describes such categories and 
areas and substantiates the critical need designations. 
Requires: (1) the OPM Director to provide the Secretary with 
guidance for identifying cybersecurity work categories and 
specialty areas of critical need, including areas with acute 
skill and emerging skill shortages; and (2) the Secretary to 
identify specialty areas of critical need in DHS's 
cybersecurity workforce and submit a progress report to 
Congress. Directs GAO to analyze, monitor, and report on the 
implementation of DHS cybersecurity workforce measures.
    S. 2519.--National Cybersecurity Protection Act of 2014. 
(Public Law 113-282). December 18, 2014.
    (Sec. 3) Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to 
establish a national cybersecurity and communications 
integration center in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 
to carry out the responsibilities of the DHS Under Secretary 
responsible for overseeing critical infrastructure protection, 
cybersecurity, and related DHS programs. Requires the center to 
be the Federal civilian interface for sharing cybersecurity 
risks, incidents, analysis, and warnings for Federal and non-
Federal entities. Directs the center to: (1) enable real-time, 
integrated, and operational actions across Federal and non-
Federal entities; (2) facilitate cross-sector coordination to 
address risks and incidents that may be related or could have 
consequential impacts across multiple sectors; (3) conduct and 
share analysis; and (4) provide technical assistance, risk 
management, and security measure recommendations. Directs the 
center to ensure: (1) continuous, collaborative, and inclusive 
coordination across sectors and with sector coordinating 
councils, information sharing and analysis organizations, and 
other appropriate non-Federal partners; (2) development and use 
of technology-neutral, real-time mechanisms for sharing 
information about risks and incidents; and (3) safeguards 
against unauthorized access. Provides the Under Secretary with 
unreviewable discretion as to whether governmental or private 
entities are included in the center or are provided assistance 
or information. (Sec. 4) Requires the DHS Secretary to submit 
to Congress recommendations regarding how to expedite 
implementation of information-sharing agreements for 
cybersecurity purposes between the center and non-Federal 
entities. (Sec. 5) Directs the Secretary to report annually to 
Congress concerning: (1) the number of non-Federal 
participants, the length of time taken to resolve requests to 
participate in the center, and the reasons for any denials of 
such requests; (2) DHS's information sharing with each critical 
infrastructure sector; and (3) privacy and civil liberties 
safeguards. (Sec. 6) Requires a Comptroller General (GAO) 
report on the effectiveness of the center. (Sec. 7) Directs the 
Under Secretary to develop, maintain, and exercise adaptable 
cyber incident response plans to address cybersecurity risks to 
critical infrastructure. Requires the Secretary to make the 
application process for security clearances relating to a 
classified national security information program available to 
sector coordinating councils, sector information sharing and 
analysis organizations, and owners and operators of critical 
infrastructure. Directs the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) to ensure that data breach notification policies require 
affected agencies, after discovering an unauthorized 
acquisition or access, to notify: (1) Congress within 30 days, 
and (2) affected individuals as expeditiously as practicable. 
Allows the Attorney General (DOJ), heads of elements of the 
intelligence community, or the Secretary to delay notice to 
affected individuals for purposes of law enforcement 
investigations, national security, or security remediation 
actions. Requires OMB to assess agency implementation of data 
breach notification policies. (Sec. 8) Prohibits this Act from 
being construed to: (1) grant the Secretary any authority to 
promulgate regulations or set standards relating to the 
cybersecurity of private sector critical infrastructure that 
was not in effect on the day before the enactment of this Act, 
or (2) require any private entity to request the Secretary's 
assistance or to implement any recommendation suggested by the 
Secretary in response to such a request.
    S. 2521.--Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 
2014. (Public Law 113-283). December 18, 2014.
    Amends the Federal Information Security Management Act of 
2002 (FISMA) to: (1) reestablish the oversight authority of the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) with 
respect to agency information security policies and practices, 
and (2) set forth authority for the Secretary of Homeland 
Security (DHS) to administer the implementation of such 
policies and practices for information systems. Requires the 
Secretary to develop and oversee implementation of operational 
directives requiring agencies to implement the Director's 
standards and guidelines for safeguarding Federal information 
and systems from a known or reasonably suspected information 
security threat, vulnerability, or risk. Authorizes the 
Director to revise or repeal operational directives that are 
not in accordance with the Director's policies. Requires the 
Secretary (currently, the Director) to ensure the operation of 
the Federal information security incident center (FISIC). 
Directs the Secretary to administer procedures to deploy 
technology, upon request by an agency, to assist the agency to 
continuously diagnose and mitigate against cyber threats and 
vulnerabilities. Requires the Director's annual report to 
Congress regarding the effectiveness of information security 
policies to assess agency compliance with OMB data breach 
notification procedures. Provides for OMB's information 
security authorities to be delegated to the Director of 
National Intelligence (DNI) for certain systems operated by an 
element of the intelligence community. Directs the Secretary to 
consult with and consider guidance developed by the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to ensure that 
operational directives do not conflict with NIST information 
security standards. Directs agency heads to ensure that: (1) 
information security management processes are integrated with 
budgetary planning; (2) senior agency officials, including 
chief information officers, carry out their information 
security responsibilities; and (3) all personnel are held 
accountable for complying with the agency-wide information 
security program. Provides for the use of automated tools in 
agencies' information security programs, including for periodic 
risk assessments, testing of security procedures, and 
detecting, reporting, and responding to security incidents. 
Requires agencies to include offices of general counsel as 
recipients of security incident notices. Requires agencies to 
notify Congress of major security incidents within seven days 
after there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a major 
incident has occurred. Directs agencies to submit an annual 
report regarding major incidents to OMB, DHS, Congress, and the 
Comptroller General (GAO). Requires such reports to include: 
(1) threats and threat actors, vulnerabilities, and impacts; 
(2) risk assessments of affected systems before, and the status 
of compliance of the systems at the time of, major incidents; 
(3) detection, response, and remediation actions; (4) the total 
number of incidents; and (5) a description of the number of 
individuals affected by, and the information exposed by, major 
incidents involving a breach of personally identifiable 
information. Authorizes GAO to provide technical assistance to 
agencies and inspectors general, including by testing 
information security controls and procedures. Requires OMB to 
ensure the development of guidance for: (1) evaluating the 
effectiveness of information security programs and practices, 
and (2) determining what constitutes a major incident. Directs 
FISIC to provide agencies with intelligence about cyber 
threats, vulnerabilities, and incidents for risk assessments. 
Directs OMB, during the two-year period after enactment of this 
Act, to include in an annual report to Congress an assessment 
of the adoption by agencies of continuous diagnostics 
technologies and other advanced security tools. Requires OMB to 
ensure that data breach notification policies require agencies, 
after discovering an unauthorized acquisition or access, to 
notify: (1) Congress within 30 days, and (2) affected 
individuals as expeditiously as practicable. Allows the 
Attorney General, heads of elements of the intelligence 
community, or the DHS Secretary to delay notice to affected 
individuals for purposes of law enforcement investigations, 
national security, or security remediation actions. Requires 
OMB to amend or revise OMB Circular A-130 to eliminate 
inefficient and wasteful reporting. Directs the Information 
Security and Privacy Advisory Board to advise and provide 
annual reports to DHS.
    S. 2651.--DHS OIG Mandates Revision Act of 2014. (Public 
Law 113-284). December 18, 2014.
    Repeals requirements that the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS) Inspector General: (1) conduct an annual 
evaluation of the Cargo Inspection Targeting System pursuant to 
the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004, (2) 
conduct an annual review of Coast Guard Performance pursuant to 
the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA), and (3) conduct an 
annual review of grants to states and high-risk urban areas 
under HSA.

                          POSTAL NAMING BILLS

    H.R. 43--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 14 Red River Avenue North in Cold 
Spring, Minnesota, as the ``Officer Tommy Decker Memorial Post 
Office.'' (Public Law 113-204). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 78--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 4110 Almeda Road in Houston, Texas, 
as the ``George Thomas `Mickey' Leland Post Office Building.'' 
(Public Law 113-205). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 451--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 500 North Brevard Avenue in Cocoa 
Beach, Florida, as the ``Richard K. Salick Post Office.'' 
(Public Law 113-206). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 606--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 815 County Road 23 in Tyrone, New 
York, as the ``Specialist Christopher Scott Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-147). August 8, 2014.
    H.R. 1036--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 103 Center Street West in Eatonville, 
Washington, as the ``National Park Ranger Margaret Anderson 
Post Office.'' (Public Law 113-110). June 9, 2014.
    H.R. 1228--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 123 South 9th Street in De Pere, 
Wisconsin, as the ``Corporal Justin D. Ross Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-111). June 9, 2014.
    H.R. 1376--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in 
Jersey City, New Jersey, as the ``Judge Shirley A. Tolentino 
Post Office Building.'' (Public Law 113-139). July 25, 2014.
    H.R. 1391--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 25 South Oak Street in London, Ohio, 
as the ``London Fallen Veterans Memorial Post Office.'' (Public 
Law 113-207). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 1451--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 14 Main Street in Brockport, New 
York, as the ``Staff Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-112). June 9, 2014.
    H.R. 1671--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 6937 Village Parkway in Dublin, 
California, as the ``James `Jim' Kohnen Post Office.'' (Public 
Law 113-148). August 8, 2014.
    H.R. 1707--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 302 East Green Street in Champaign, 
Illinois, as the ``James R. Burgess Jr. Post Office Building.'' 
(Public Law 113-208). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 1813--To redesignate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 162 Northeast Avenue in Tallmadge, 
Ohio, as the ``Lance Corporal Daniel Nathan Deyarmin, Jr., Post 
Office Building.'' (Public Law 113-140). July 25, 2014.
    H.R. 2112--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 787 State Route 17M in Monroe, New 
York, as the ``National Clandestine Service of the Central 
Intelligence Agency NCS Officer Gregg David Wenzel Memorial 
Post Office.'' (Public Law 113-209). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 2223--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, 
as the ``Elizabeth L. Kinnunen Post Office Building.'' (Public 
Law 113-211). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 2291--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 450 Lexington Avenue in New York, New 
York, as the ``Vincent R. Sombrotto Post Office.'' (Public Law 
113-149). August 8, 2014.
    H.R. 2391--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 5323 Highway N in Cottleville, 
Missouri as the ``Lance Corporal Phillip Vinnedge Post 
Office.'' (Public Law 113-113). June 9, 2014.
    H.R. 2678--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 10360 Southwest 186th Street in 
Miami, Florida, as the ``Larcenia J. Bullard Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-213). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 3027--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 442 Miller Valley Road in Prescott, 
Arizona, as the ``Barry M. Goldwater Post Office.'' (Public Law 
113-247). December 18, 2014.
    H.R. 3060--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 232 Southwest Johnson Avenue in 
Burleson, Texas, as the ``Sergeant William Moody Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-115). June 9, 2014.
    H.R. 3085--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 3349 West 111th Street in Chicago, 
Illinois, as the ``Captain Herbert Johnson Memorial Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-214). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 3472--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 13127 Broadway Street in Alden, New 
York, as the ``Sergeant Brett E. Gornewicz Memorial Post 
Office.'' (Public Law 113-151). August 8, 2014.
    H.R. 3534--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 113 West Michigan Avenue in Jackson, 
Michigan, as the ``Officer James Bonneau Memorial Post 
Office.'' (Public Law 113-216). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 3765--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 198 Baker Street in Corning, New 
York, as the ``Specialist Ryan P. Jayne Post Office Building.'' 
(Public Law 113-153). August 8, 2014.
    H.R. 3957--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 218-10 Merrick Boulevard in 
Springfield Gardens, New York, as the ``Cynthia Jenkins Post 
Office Building.'' (Public Law 113-218). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 4189--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 4000 Leap Road in Hilliard, Ohio, as 
the ``Master Sergeant Shawn T. Hannon, Master Sergeant Jeffrey 
J. Rieck and Veterans Memorial Post Office Building.'' (Public 
Law 113-219). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 4416--To redesignate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 161 Live Oak Street in Miami, 
Arizona, as the ``Staff Sergeant Manuel V. Mendoza Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-528). December 18, 2014.
    H.R. 4443--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 90 Vermilyea Avenue, in New York, New 
York, as the ``Corporal Juan Mariel Alcantara Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-220). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 4651--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 601 West Baker Road in Baytown, 
Texas, as the ``Specialist Keith Erin Grace, Jr. Memorial Post 
Office.'' (Public Law 113-259). December 18, 2014.
    H.R. 4919--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 715 Shawan Falls Drive in Dublin, 
Ohio, as the ``Lance Corporal Wesley G. Davids and Captain 
Nicholas J. Rozanski Memorial Post Office.'' (Public Law 113-
222). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 4939--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 2551 Galena Avenue in Simi Valley, 
California, as the ``Neil Havens Post Office.'' (Public Law 
113-224). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 5030--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 13500 SW 250 Street in Princeton, 
Florida, as the ``Corporal Christian A. Guzman Rivera Post 
Office Building.'' (Public Law 113-225). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 5106--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 100 Admiral Callaghan Lane in 
Vallejo, California, as the ``Philmore Graham Post Office 
Building.'' (Public Law 113-226). December 16, 2014.
    H.R. 5331--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 73839 Gorgonio Drive in Twentynine 
Palms, California, as the ``Colonel M.J. `Mac' Dube, USMC Post 
Office Building.'' (Public Law 113-266). December 18, 2014.
    H.R. 5562--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 801 West Ocean Avenue in Lompoc, 
California, as the ``Federal Correctional Officer Scott J. 
Williams Memorial Post Office Building.'' (Public Law 113-267). 
December 18, 2014.
    H.R. 5687--To designate the facility of the United States 
Postal Service located at 101 East Market Street in Long Beach, 
California, as the ``Juanita Millender-McDonald Post Office.'' 
(Public Law 113-268). December 18, 2014.
    S. 885--A bill to designate the facility of the United 
States Postal Service located at 35 Park Street in Danville, 
Vermont, as the ``Thaddeus Stevens Post Office.'' (Public Law 
113-189). November 26, 2014.
    S. 1093--A bill to designate the facility of the United 
States Postal Service located at 130 Caldwell Drive in 
Hazlehurst, Mississippi, as the ``First Lieutenant Alvin 
Chester Cockrell, Jr. Post Office Building.'' (Public Law 113-
191). November 26, 2014.
    S. 1499--A bill to designate the facility of the United 
States Postal Service located at 278 Main Street in Chadron, 
Nebraska, as the ``Sergeant Cory Mracek Memorial Post Office.'' 
(Public Law 113-192). November 26, 2014.
    S. 1512--A bill to designate the facility of the United 
States Postal Service located at 1335 Jefferson Road in 
Rochester, New York, as the ``Specialist Theodore Matthew 
Glende Post Office.'' (Public Law 113-193). November 26, 2014.
                 VIII. ACTIVITIES OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES


                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE EFFICIENCY AND


                   EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS


                       AND THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE


                      Chairman: Jon Tester (D-MT)


                   Ranking Member: Rob Portman (R-OH)


                              I. Authority

    The Subcommittee on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of 
Federal Programs and the Federal Workforce oversees the 
management, efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of all 
agencies and departments in the Federal Government, including 
the Federal workforce and Federal programs. The Subcommittee 
has a broad authority for conducting oversight across the 
Federal Government and for seeking to improve the efficiency of 
Federal programs. In addition, the Subcommittee is responsible 
for exploring policies that promote a skilled, efficient, and 
effective Federal workforce which will, in turn, work to ensure 
efficient and effective management of Federal programs.

                              II. Activity

    During the 113th Congress, the Subcommittee on the 
Efficiency and Effectiveness of Federal Programs and the 
Federal Workforce held 10 hearings and introduced, or joined as 
original co-sponsor, nine related pieces of legislation.

    A. Hearings

Health Care in Rural America: Developing the Workforce and Building 
        Partnerships. May 23, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-512)

    The purpose of the hearing was to discuss efforts by the 
Federal health care workforce to address the needs of rural 
America, including veterans and Native Americans in those 
communities. The hearing sought to identify some of the 
challenges of this task, including efforts to recruit and 
retain a quality Federal health care workforce, and to 
highlight opportunities for collaboration and cost-sharing, 
including stronger partnerships between agencies, local 
individuals, and the private sector. In addition, the hearing 
provided an opportunity to discuss how individuals in rural 
communities are affected by a lack of access to health care 
services, specifically mental health care, and what can be done 
to improve access for these individuals.
    Witnesses: Hon. Robert A. Petzel, Under Secretary for 
Health, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; Hon. Yvette 
Roubideaux, Director, Indian Health Service, U.S. Department of 
Health and Human Services; Tom Morris, Associate Administrator 
for Rural Health Policy, Health Resources and Services 
Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 
Matt Kuntz, Executive Director, National Alliance on Mental 
Illness for Montana; Ralph Ibson, National Policy Director; 
Wounded Warrior Project.

Safeguarding our Nation's Secrets: Examining the Security Clearance 
        Process. June 20, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-316)

    The purpose of the joint subcommittee hearing was to review 
how the Federal Government conducts investigations to determine 
whether Federal employees and contractors are eligible for 
access to classified information. The hearing examined the 
management and oversight of the Federal employees and 
contractors responsible for planning, conducting and reviewing 
investigations, and issuing security clearances. The hearing 
also examined the efficiency and effectiveness of the security 
clearance process.
    Witnesses: Hon. Patrick E. McFarland, Inspector General, 
U.S. Office of Personnel Management; Merton W. Miller, 
Associate Director of Investigations, Federal Investigative 
Services, U.S. Office of Personnel Management; Stephen F. 
Lewis, Deputy Director, Security Directorate, Office of the 
Under Secretary of Defense (Intelligence), U.S. Department of 
Defense; Brenda S. Farrell, Director, Defense Capabilities and 
Management, U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Protecting our Northern Border: Enhancing Collaboration and Building 
        Local Partnerships. July 12, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-537)

    The purpose of the field hearing in Havre, Montana was to 
identify some of the challenges confronting that task, 
including overlapping jurisdictions of government agencies that 
could impede our efforts and potentially create critical gaps 
in security along the border. The hearing also sought to 
identify and highlight various opportunities for collaboration 
and cost-sharing, including stronger partnerships between 
agencies, local officials, tribes, and the private sector to 
secure our border and preserve the cross-border commerce that 
is critical to economic development and job creation.
    Witnesses: Don Brostrom, Sheriff of Hill County, Montana; 
Nathan Burr, Havre Sector Vice President and U.S. Border Patrol 
Agent, National Border Patrol Council; Debbie Vandeberg, 
Executive Director, Havre Chamber of Commerce; Kumar Kibble, 
Special Agent in Charge, Denver, U.S. Immigrations and Customs 
Enforcement; Christopher Richards, Havre Sector Chief Patrol 
Agent, U.S. Border Patrol; Robert Desrosier, Homeland Security 
Director, Blackfeet Nation.

Strengthening Government Oversight: Examining the Roles and 
        Effectiveness of Oversight Positions Within the Federal 
        Workforce. November 19, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-367)

    The purpose of the hearing was to examine the various 
positions within the Federal Government tasked with oversight 
duties, including Inspectors General, privacy officers, and the 
Office of Special Counsel. It hit upon some of the obstacles 
currently preventing the performance of thorough and effective 
oversight--whether it be the number of vacant oversight 
positions across the government, a lack of resources devoted to 
oversight or the lack of authority or access provided to 
positions of oversight--and sought to identify potential 
solutions to such obstacles.
    Witnesses: Hon. Peggy E. Gustafson, Inspector General, U.S. 
Small Business Administration; Hon. Michael Horowitz, Inspector 
General, U.S. Department of Justice; Hon. Carolyn Lerner, 
Special Counsel, U.S. Office of Special Counsel; Karen Neuman, 
Chief Privacy and Freedom of Information Act Officer, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Wendy Ginsberg, Ph.D., 
Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.

Safeguarding Our Nation's Secrets: Examining the National Security 
        Workforce. November 20, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-368)

    This hearing followed up on a previous subcommittee hearing 
on security clearance reform. The focus was on the designation 
of Federal positions as ``national security sensitive,'' as 
well as the requirements for personnel to have access to 
classified information. The hearing sought to examine the 
impact these policies have on background investigations and the 
adjudication of security clearances, as well as implications 
for Federal employee rights and subsequent costs to the 
taxpayer.
    Witnesses: Brian A. Prioletti, Assistant Director, Special 
Security Directorate, National Counterintelligence Executive, 
Office of the Director of National Intelligence; Tim Curry 
Deputy Associate Director for Partnership and Labor Relations, 
Office of Personnel Management; Brenda Farrell, Director, 
Defense Capabilities and Management, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office; David Borer, General Counsel, The 
American Federation of Government Employees; Angela Canterbury, 
Director of Public Policy, Project on Government Oversight.

Examining the Use and Abuse of Administratively Uncontrollable Overtime 
        at the Department of Homeland Security. January 28, 2014. (S. 
        Hrg. 113-369)

    The purpose of the hearing was to examine the instances of 
Administratively Uncontrollable Overtime (AUO) abuse raised in 
the Special Counsel's Report, and to learn more about how DHS 
and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are responding to 
the recent investigative report, what disciplinary actions are 
being taken, and what additional cases of payroll fraud have 
been discovered. On October 31, 2013, the U.S. Office of 
Special Counsel (OSC) issued a report to the President 
detailing ``long-standing abuse of overtime payments by the 
Department of Homeland Security.'' The report reveals that, for 
years, Homeland Security employees have abused a fund meant to 
compensate workers who must sometimes stay on duty beyond 
normal business hours, such as law enforcement officers 
responding to criminal activity. Despite a 2008 investigation 
and subsequent pledge from DHS officials to rein in on the 
misuse of AUO, the OSC report shows that numerous agencies 
within the department continue to allow their employees to 
illegally claim overtime pay. It is estimated that the practice 
is costing taxpayers millions of dollars each year.
    Witnesses: Hon. Carolyn Lerner, Special Counsel, U.S. 
Office of Special Counsel; Ron Vitiello, Deputy Chief, U.S. 
Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Catherine 
Emerson, Chief Human Capital Officer, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security; Brandon Judd, President, National Border 
Patrol Council.

A More Efficient and Effective Government: Improving the Regulatory 
        Framework. March 11, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-371)

    The purpose of the hearing was to review progress made and 
challenges faced by the Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs in reviewing proposed rules and regulations. The 
hearing also examined current and potential efforts to 
streamline and reform the regulatory process.
    Witnesses: Hon. Angus J. King, Jr., U.S. Senate; Hon. 
Howard Shelanski, Administrator, Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, The Office of Management and Budget; Hon. 
C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates, 
PLLC; Katherine McFate, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
Center for Effective Government; Michelle Sager, Director, 
Strategic Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.

A More Efficient and Effective Government: Cultivating the Federal 
        Workforce. May 6, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-507)

    The purpose of the hearing was to examine the state of the 
Federal workforce, and the impact of factors such as the 
Federal Government shutdown, sequestration, and hiring and pay 
freezes on employee morale, productivity and efficiency, and 
agency recruitment and retention efforts. It also discussed 
ongoing efforts by agencies with the highest and lowest job 
satisfaction rates, as well as innovative programs and actions 
by agencies to overcome the ongoing challenges of recruiting 
and retaining a highly capable and qualified workforce.
    Witnesses: Hon. Katherine Archuleta, Director, U.S. Office 
of Personnel Management; Hon. Carol Waller Pope, Chairman, 
Federal Labor Relations Authority; Jeri L. Buchholz, Assistant 
Administrator for Human Capital Management, National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration; Paige Hinkle-Bowles, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel 
Policy, U.S. Department of Defense; J. David Cox, National 
President, American Federation of Government Employees; Colleen 
M. Kelley, National President, National Treasury Employees 
Union; Carol A. Bonosaro, President, Senior Executives 
Association; Max Stier, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
Partnership for Public Service.

A More Efficient and Effective Government: Examining Federal IT 
        Initiatives and the IT Workforce. June 10, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-
        534)

    This hearing examined the state of major Federal 
information technology projects, as well as the process through 
which they are solicited and coordinated government-wide. 
Through this discussion, the Subcommittee identified ways to 
improve the process, reduce waste, and increase collaboration 
and cost-sharing. The hearing also examined the state of the 
Federal IT workforce and the qualifications and capacity of 
information technology professionals within the Federal 
Government.
    Witnesses: Luke J. McCormack, Chief Information Officer, 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Stephen W. Warren, 
Executive in Charge of Information and Technology, U.S. 
Department of Veterans Affairs; Donna K. Seymour, Chief 
Information Officer, U.S. Office of Personnel Management; David 
A. Powner, Director, Information Technology Management Issues, 
U.S. Government Accountability Office; Christopher A. Miller, 
Program Executive Officer, DOD Healthcare Management Systems, 
U.S. Department of Defense.

A More Efficient and Effective Government: Examining Efforts to Address 
        Law Enforcement, Infrastructure and Human Capital Needs in the 
        Bakken. September 26, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-587)

    This field hearing held in Sidney, Montana examined how 
local, State, and Federal officials are coordinating their law 
enforcement efforts (including human and drug trafficking) and 
addressed the infrastructure and human capital needs of the 
region. The hearing also addressed how improved coordination 
between local, State, tribal, and Federal officials can be 
facilitated, and to highlight various proposals to address the 
most urgent needs of local communities and the region.
    Witnesses: Hon. A.T. ``Rusty'' Stafne, Chairman, 
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation; Hon. 
Angela McLean, Lieutenant Governor, State of Montana; Leslie 
Messer, Executive Director, Richland Economic Development 
Corp.; Hon. Rick Norby, Mayor, Sidney, Montana; Hon. Michael W. 
Cotter, United States Attorney, District of Montana; Michael 
Gottleib, National High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas 
(HIDTA) Director, Office of National Drug Control Policy; Scott 
Vito, Assistant Special Agent In Charge, Salt Lake City 
Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation; Hon. Tim Foxx, 
Attorney General, State of Montana; Hon. Craig Anderson, 
Sheriff, Dawson County, Montana; Anthony Preite, State 
Director, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Montana Office of 
Rural Development; Mike Tooley, Director, Montana Department of 
Transportation; John Dynneson, Deputy, Richland County 
Sheriff's Office; Paul Groshart, Director, Richland County 
Housing Authority; Loren Young, Chairman, Richland County 
Commission.

                            III. Legislation

    The following bills were considered by the Subcommittee on 
the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Federal Programs and the 
Federal Workforce during the 113th Congress:
    S. 1120--The Land Management Workforce Flexibility Act--
Allows temporary seasonal Federal land management workers the 
ability to compete for vacant permanent seasonal positions 
identical to those they are already performing.
    S. 1276--The Security Clearance Oversight and Reform 
Enhancement Act--Increases accountability and oversight over 
how the government conducts background investigations and 
awards security clearances.
    S. 1691--The Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act of 2013--
Ensures predictability of U.S. Border Patrol's pay system and 
to improve the use of overtime and increase border patrol 
manpower.
    S. 1744--The Security Clearance Accountability, Reform, and 
Enhancement Act--Requires action against misconduct relating to 
background investigations and directs the President to review 
and update guidance regarding security clearances.
    S. 1809--Security Workforce and Whistleblower Protection 
Act--Restores Merit Systems Protection Board access for 
employees in sensitive positions.
    S. 1953--Oversight Workforce Improvement Act--Expands 
privacy protections over more oversight cases, makes oversight 
officials more independent and clarifies that Inspectors 
General may be paid at the same level as senior government 
officials.
    S. 2061--Preventing Conflicts of Interest with Contractors 
Act--Prohibits the U.S. Office of Personnel Management from 
awarding contracts to conduct final quality reviews to the same 
contractor conducting background investigations.
    S. 2541--Competitive Service Act--Allows Federal agencies 
to share certification lists of well-qualified applicants for 
similar jobs, allowing agencies to hire off each other's 
certification lists and tap into talent across agencies is both 
cost-effective and more efficient.
    S. 3001--Wounded Warriors Federal Leave Act--Ensures that 
first-year Federal employees with service-related disabilities 
can get the medical care they need without being forced to take 
unpaid leave.

                            IV. GAO Reports

    On January 15, 2014, Senator Tester sent a letter to the 
Government Accountability Office, requesting it report how the 
Postal Service measures delivery times and adheres to service 
standards.
    On July 10, 2013, Senator Tester sent a letter to the 
Government Accountability Office, requesting that it assess how 
Federal agencies are adhering to quality standards in the 
background investigation process and how the awarding of 
security clearances across Federal agencies can be improved. 
GAO accepted the Tester request and the report is to be 
published in February of 2015.
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL AND CONTRACTING OVERSIGHT


                   Chairman: Claire McCaskill (D-MO)


                   Ranking Member: Ron Johnson (R-WI)


                              I. Authority

    The Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight has 
broad oversight over all aspects of Federal financial 
management, Federal contracting, and policies to prevent the 
waste, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer dollars.

                              II. Activity

    During the 113th Congress, the Subcommittee on Financial 
and Contracting Oversight held 18 hearings or roundtables, 
authorized 32 investigations. Currently, the Subcommittee has 
16 ongoing investigations.
    The following is a summary of the major activities of the 
Subcommittee, organized by topic.

                           A. Army Recruiting

    The Subcommittee initiated new two investigations and held 
two hearings on the management and oversight of Army 
recruiting. The hearings focused on the Recruiting Assistance 
Program and marketing and sponsorship contracts.

1. Investigation: Army Recruiting Assistance Programs

    On September 13, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Secretary of the Army requesting information and documents 
regarding Army Recruiting Assistance Programs (ARAP). Chairman 
McCaskill requested that the Army provide a copy of the report 
on its investigation into an ARAP contractor called Document 
and Packaging, Inc. (Docupak) and the allegations that funds 
were fraudulently distributed to Army Reserve and Army National 
Guard recruiters. In addition to a copy of the report, Chairman 
McCaskill requested a briefing on the findings in the report, 
including whether the Army had considered suspending and 
debarring Docupak from future contracts.
    On November 1, 2013, and January 13, 2014, following the 
Army briefing to Subcommittee Staff regarding ARAP and the 
Army's reliance on Docupak, Chairman McCaskill requested 
information and documents from the Army regarding the Army 
Recruiting Assistance Program, the Army Reserve Recruiting 
Assistance Program, and the National Guard Recruiting Program. 
On November 1, 2013, Chairman McCaskill also sent a letter to 
Docupak requesting a briefing detailing Docupack's operation 
and oversight of ARAP, the internal reviews that were conducted 
following the discontinuation of ARAP, and providing 
information on other government contracts held by Docupak.

2. Fraud and Abuse in Army Recruiting Contracts (S. Hrg. 113-377) 
        (February 4, 2014)

    This hearing focused on the creation and management of the 
Recruiting Assistance Programs (RAP) operated by the Army 
National Guard, Army, and Army Reserve. The hearing also 
addressed the role of Docupak, the contractor responsible for 
RAP, accountability for military officials involved with the 
program, and the ongoing Army investigation of potentially 
fraudulent activity. Specifically, the hearing examined 
fraudulent payments under RAP, potentially involving over 1,200 
recruiters and not limited to service members. There was also a 
discussion of Army audits that found significant mistakes by 
the National Guard in designing and implementing RAP.
    Witnesses: Lt. Gen. William T. Grisoli, Director of the 
Army Staff, U.S. Army; Maj. Gen. David E. Quantock, Commanding 
General, U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command and Army 
Corrections Command; Joseph P. Bentz, Principal Deputy Auditor 
General, U.S. Army Audit Agency; Lt. Gen. Clyde A. Vaughn 
(ret.), former Director, Army National Guard; Col. Michael L. 
Jones (ret.), former Division Chief, Army National Guard 
Strength Maintenance Division; Philip Crane, President, 
Docupak; and Lt. Col. Kay Hensen (ret.), Corporate Compliance 
Officer, Docupak.

3. Investigation: Army and National Guard Marketing and Sponsorship 
        Contracts

    Following the February 4, 2014 hearing on ``Fraud and Abuse 
in Army Recruiting Contracts,'' Chairman McCaskill sent a 
letter to the Secretary of the Army on February 27, 2014 
requesting regular updates regarding the Recruiting Assistance 
fraud cases being pursued by the Criminal Investigative 
Command. Chairman McCaskill also requested additional 
information regarding other National Guard recruiting and 
marketing contracts within which there appeared to be evidence 
of waste and abuse.
    On March 31, 2014, Chairman McCaskill then sent letters to 
the Coast Guard, Navy and Air Force, requesting information and 
documents regarding their current fraud investigations as well 
as their current recruiting and marketing contracts. On April 
8, 2014 and April 11, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent letters to 
the Secretary of the Army requesting additional information and 
documents regarding the Army recruiting and marketing 
contracts, specifically with respect to sponsorships, 
recruiting promotional items, and conferences.
    Following the May 8, 2014 hearing on National Guard 
Marketing and Recruiting contracts, Chairman McCaskill sent a 
letter to the Army on June 13, 2014, requesting a copy of the 
Army Inspector General's Report in the alleged failure of 
senior Army officials to perform proper oversight of Recruiting 
Assistance Programs. The Subcommittee had been assured that the 
report would be completed first in January of 2014, and then in 
May of 2014. As of June 13, 2014, the Subcommittee had not 
received a copy of the completed report. Chairman McCaskill 
requested that the Army provide a copy of the report, and if 
the report was still incomplete, a status report on its 
progress.
    On June 19, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Acting Director of the Army National Guard requesting a copy of 
the analysis that Army National Guard Staff conducted on the 
Army National Guard's current sports marketing program and a 
briefing for Subcommittee staff regarding the Army National 
Guard's plans for professional sports contracts in 2015.

4. Waste and Abuse in National Guard Sponsorship and Marketing 
        Contracts (S. Hrg. 113-412) (May 8, 2014)

    This hearing focused on reports of waste and abuse in Army 
National Guard sponsorship and marketing contracts. In 
particular, the hearing examined reports that National Guard 
spending on NASCAR and other sports sponsorships--a significant 
portion of its advertising budget--is an ineffective recruiting 
tool. Maj. Gen. Judd Lyons testified that the National Guard's 
oversight over the NASCAR spending was inadequate, and a review 
of its sports marketing programs was underway.
    The National Guard announced on August 6, 2014 that it 
would end its NASCAR and IndyCar sponsorships. The Guard 
acknowledged that in spite of committing $88 million over 3 
years to sponsor NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt Jr. and with a 
heavy presence in NASCAR, the National Guard failed to generate 
any recruits through the program.
    Witnesses: Major General Judd H. Lyons, Acting Director, 
Army National Guard; and Kathy A. Salas, Principal Assistant 
Responsible for Contracting, National Guard Bureau.

                     B. Alaska Native Corporations

    The Subcommittee continued its oversight of Alaska Native 
Corporations.

1. Investigation: Fort Greely Renovation

    After receiving information from whistleblowers alleging 
waste and abuse during the renovation of a building in Ft. 
Greely, Alaska by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 
Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the Small Business 
Administration (SBA) on March 28, 2014, requesting that the SBA 
conduct a review of the renovation process, and, if necessary, 
perform an audit of the acquisition process to determine 
whether the acquisition was conducted in compliance with 
applicable Federal laws and best practices.
    On June 30, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
USACE regarding USACE's actions during the acquisition process 
for the renovation of Building660 in Ft. Greely, Alaska. In 
light of information provided by the Small Business 
Administration's Office of Inspector General (SBA OIG) that 
raised concerns about USACE's actions during the acquisition 
process, Chairman McCaskill requested documents from USACE, 
including correspondence between USACE and SBA regarding the 
Ft. Greely renovation project.

2. Investigation: Small Business Administration's 8(a) Program

    On April 18, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Comptroller General for the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) requesting that GAO review how Federal agencies monitor 
the work performed by subcontractors under 8(a) contracts.
    On June 30, 2014 Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Small Business Administration (SBA) requesting information 
regarding the SBA's review of the participation of Alaska 
Native Corporations (ANCs) in the 8(a) small and disadvantaged 
business contracting program. In particular, Chairman McCaskill 
requested a list of joint ventures awarded under the 8(a) 
program, reports filed by ANC's detailing the benefits flowing 
back to their communities, and information regarding SBA's 
oversight of the new rules related to joint ventures and 
follow-up contracts for ANCs and tribal entities.

                      C. Administration Oversight

    The Subcommittee continued its oversight of the Obama 
Administration's management and oversight of Federal 
contracting activities.

1. Investigation: Department of Veterans Affairs Accreditation

    On January 14, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs requesting a briefing on the 
Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) accreditation process. The 
Chairman's letter followed reports of fraud and negligent 
representation of veterans by individuals who had received 
accreditation from the VA.
    On March 31, 2014, Chairman McCaskill wrote to the VA 
requesting copies of complaints regarding the accreditation 
process and details of any actions that the VA had taken 
related to those complaints. On July 30, 2014, Chairman 
McCaskill sent a second request for the information regarding 
complaints about the accreditation process. Although the VA 
provided some information following the March 31 request, it 
failed to provide all of the documents requested during the 
four intervening months. As of the end of the Congress, the VA 
had not yet provided the requested documents.

2. Investigation: Lifeline

    The Subcommittee continued its investigation of the 
Lifeline Program. On May 13, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a 
letter to the Comptroller General for the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) requesting an evaluation of the 
reforms put in place by the Federal Communication Commission 
(FCC) to combat fraud in the Universal Service Fund Low Income 
Program. In particular, Chairman McCaskill requested a forensic 
audit of the Low-Income program to pinpoint specific case study 
examples of fraud or abuse, identify additional reforms that 
might be beneficial to the program, and determine the extent to 
which the FCC's reforms have limited fraud with in the program. 
On September 11, 2014, Chairman McCaskill assisted GAO in their 
review of the Lifeline program by providing documents received 
from the FCC regarding contractors employed to manage the 
Lifeline program. GAO's review is expected to be complete in 
2015.

3. Management of Air Traffic Controller Training Contracts (S. Hrg. 
        113-323) (January 14, 2014)

    This hearing focused on areas of program and contract 
mismanagement by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) with 
regards to the Air Traffic Controller Optimum Training Solution 
(ATCOTS) program. The hearing also addressed the FAA's failure 
to adhere to recommendations from two separate audit reports 
issued by the Department of Transportation's Office of 
Inspector General. Additionally, the hearing sought to provide 
clarity on the need for and costs of air traffic controller 
training as well as the FAA's plans for improvement going 
forward.
    Witnesses: Mary Kay Langan-Feirson, Assistant Inspector 
General for Acquisition and Procurement Audits at the U.S. 
Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General; 
Patricia McNall, Chief Acquisition Officer and Deputy Assistant 
Administrator for Finance and Management at the Federal 
Aviation Administration; and Lynn Dugle, President of Raytheon 
Intelligence, Information, and Services.

4. Investigation: Department of Defense Contractor Inventory

    On May 22, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Secretary of the Army requesting a briefing regarding the 
Army's contractor inventory management practices. Chairman 
McCaskill was alerted to possible mismanagement of contractor 
inventory by a call to the Department of Defense Office of 
Inspector General (DOD IG) Hotline. Because of these concerns, 
Chairman McCaskill requested a briefing from the Army on its 
contract management practices as well as on how the DOD IG 
Hotline complaint was handled and investigated.
    On July 21, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Secretary of Defense requesting information regarding the 
Department of Defense's (DOD) failure to meet the statutory 
requirements to track service contracts cited in the Government 
Accountability Office' (GAO) report on defense acquisitions. 
GAO's report on defense acquisitions addressed concerns raised 
by Chairman McCaskill in a 2012 hearing on the use of 
contractors by government agencies.

5. Oversight of Contractor Performance Information (S. Hrg. 113-382) 
        (March 6, 2014)

    This hearing focused on how the Federal Government 
collects, manages, and uses information about contractor 
performance and integrity. The hearing reviewed how the Federal 
Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) 
has been implemented and used over its first four years. In 
addition to addressing issues with FAPIIS, the hearing also 
addressed shortcomings of the Past Performance Information 
Retrieval System (PPIRS) and the Contractor Performance 
Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).
    Witnesses: Captain Brian Drapp, Commanding Officer of the 
U.S. Navy Supply Corps at the Naval Sea Logistics Center; Kevin 
Youel Page, Assistant Commissioner of the U.S. General Services 
Administration Integrated Award Environment (IAE); and Beth 
Cobert, Deputy Director for Management of the Office of 
Management and Budget, was invited but did not attend.

                         D. Afghanistan & Iraq

    The Subcommittee held one hearing and continued its ongoing 
oversight of contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The hearing 
focused on the implementation of the wartime contracting 
reforms passed into law in the Fiscal Year 2013 National 
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

1. Investigation: Justice Sector Support Program

    On February 15, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction 
(SIGAR) requesting that as a part of their review of Rule of 
Law Programs conducted by the State Department and the 
Department of Defense in Afghanistan that they review the State 
Department's Justice Sector Support Program (JSSP). Chairman 
McCaskill requested the review due to concerns regarding the 
effectiveness of JSSP, given the apparent absence of consistent 
performance measures and the lack of State Department input or 
oversight of contractor objectives.
    In their January 2014 audit of the JSSP program, SIGAR 
found that the State Department's Bureau of International 
Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs' (INL) management and 
oversight of the JSSP contract had failed to adequately assess 
contractor performance and program efficacy. SIGAR recommended 
that the State Department include in future JSSP and/or 
successor program contracts, specific provisions to hold 
contractors accountable for the successful completion of goals, 
complete and share additional evaluations of JSSP, renegotiate 
contractor agreements to ensure the right of the U.S. 
Government to audit and inspect records, and finalize the 
updates to the 2009 U.S. Government Rule of Law Strategy.

2. Investigation: DynCorp

    On April 10, 2013, Chairman McCaskill wrote to the 
Commanding General and Chief of Engineers for the United States 
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regarding USACE's review of the 
settlement agreement with DynCorp International, LLC. Chairman 
McCaskill wrote to request materials related to the settlement 
that USACE agreed to provide the Subcommittee during a meeting 
the Army's settlement with DynCorp.
    In April 2013, USACE provided the Subcommittee their review 
of the settlement. They acknowledged that the settlement was 
not ideal and could have resulted in terms more favorable to 
the government. However, the review recognized that the USACE 
team that settled the contract did so out of reasonable 
concerns that it faced a poor litigating position against 
DynCorp. USACE did make process changes in light of their 
review, and established a team with better skills and knowledge 
to handle contract terminations and settlements. Given that 
USACE recognized mistakes on their part, that there were 
reasonable conditions that lead the USACE team to release 
DynCorp, and the new processes that were implemented by USACE 
in light of the incident, we concluded our investigation.
    On July 24, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Secretary of State regarding recommendations made by the State 
Department Office of Inspector General (State OIG) to the 
Department of State (State) regarding contractor DynCorp. 
Between 2004 and 2014, the State OIG published 18 reports 
related to contracts held by DynCorp, finding problems and 
inefficiencies and making several recommendations to State. 
Chairman McCaskill requested that State provide details on how 
they are implementing the recommendations made by State OIG.
    The State Department provided satisfactory responses to 
Chairman McCaskill's request for additional details regarding 
the implementation of changes recommended by State OIG. The 
majority of State OIG's recommendations concerned (1) creating 
better policies and procedures for contract administration and 
Economy Act reimbursement and (2) providing reimbursements to 
DOD and retrieving funds from DynCorp. In response, State has 
published various reimbursement policies and procedures in 
2012, 2013, and 2014. Additionally, DOD will receive a transfer 
of approximately $25 million by the end of the 2014. State will 
also be required to wait for the final report from the Defense 
Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) before adopting a negotiating 
position to retrieve money from DynCorp. State has indicated 
that DynCorp disagreed with the OIG's report, which alleged 
that DynCorp owed State money.
    Disagreements between the State and State OIG arose from 
two separate allegations that State owed DOD money. State 
alleged that their original agreement with DOD supported their 
view. When State determined that the agreement did not 
sufficiently document this belief, State renegotiated the 
agreement with DOD alleviating the need to return any money.

3. Implementation of Wartime Contracting Reforms (Hrg. 113-424) (July 
        16, 2013)

    This hearing focused on the implementation of the wartime 
contracting reforms passed into law in the Fiscal Year 2013 
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The hearing assessed 
steps taken by the Defense Department, State Department, and 
USAID to comply with the law, including requirements for the 
management of service contracts, responsibility for contingency 
contracting support, and use of risk assessments for private 
security contracting functions.
    Witnesses: Richard Ginman, Director of Defense Procurement 
and Acquisition Policy, U.S. Department of Defense; Patrick 
Kennedy, Under Secretary of State for Management, Department of 
State; and Aman Djahanbani, Senior Procurement Executive and 
Director, Office of Acquisition and Assistance, U.S. Agency for 
International Development (USAID).

4. Investigation: Embassy Security

    On September 11, 2013, Chairman McCaskill and Ranking 
Member Johnson sent a letter to the Under Secretary for 
Management at the Department of State regarding the performance 
of Aegis, a contractor employed by the Department of State to 
perform security functions at the U.S. embassy in Kabul. Prior 
to sending the letter, the Subcommittee became aware of 
evidence that embassy security was inadequate and that 
testimony given by the Under Secretary during a 2013 hearing 
was inconsistent with facts later discovered regarding 
contractor performance and security measures. The letter 
requested that the Under Secretary correct and explain any 
inconsistencies in his testimony and provide additional 
information regarding the role and performance of Aegis. On 
September 17, 2013, the Under Secretary responded in a letter 
addressing the inconsistencies in his testimony and providing 
explanations for the changes that were made.
    On November 19, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Under Secretary for Management at the Department of State, 
following the Inspector General's report on the contract for 
security services at the embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. 
Chairman McCaskill requested a briefing from State regarding 
the Inspector General's finding of numerous deficiencies in the 
management of the security contract, and detailing State's 
failure to address the Inspector General's concerns.

5. Investigation: Afghan Ministries Assessment

    On January 29, 2014, Chairman McCaskill wrote to 
Administrator Rajiv Shah from U.S. Agency for International 
Development (USAID) requesting information from USAID regarding 
their assessment of the systems and internal controls for 
receiving direct assistance from the United States government 
within Afghan ministries. This request for information from 
USAID followed a report from the Special Inspector General for 
Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) which revealed that controls 
need to be implemented to manage donor funds and mitigate risk. 
On February 21, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a second request 
for information and documents related to USAID's assessment of 
the internal controls and systems used by Afghan ministries to 
manage donor funds.
    On April 30, 2014, Chairman McCaskill spoke with Dr. Shah 
regarding USAID's assistance in Afghanistan. Following this 
conversation, USAID provided the subcommittee with figures that 
had been previously redacted which related to USAID's 
assessment and expenditures in Afghanistan. USAID's assessments 
showed significant vulnerabilities at the Afghan ministries, 
including everything from unlocked filing cabinets to 
opportunities for fraud and corruption that place taxpayer 
dollars at risk.

                        E. Campus Sexual Assault

    The Subcommittee initiated one investigation and held three 
roundtables related to campus sexual assault. The Subcommittee 
also released a report summarizing the results of its 
investigation into how colleges and universities handle reports 
of sexual assault.

1. Investigation: Campus Sexual Assault

    On April 1, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent letters to the 
Department of Education and the Department of Justice 
requesting information, documents, and a briefing to 
Subcommittee staff regarding their efforts to ensure accurate 
reporting of sexual assault incidents and to ensure 
accountability for the perpetrators who commit the offences and 
the institutions that fail to comply with Federal law.
    On April 16, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent an unprecedented 
survey to hundreds of colleges and universities across the 
country to gather information on how each institution conducts 
outreach to students and staff on policies and procedures 
related to sexual assault and sexual harassment, how incidents 
are reported and investigated, how these reports are reviewed 
and handled, and how students are notified about available 
crisis and mental health services.
    Following the dispersal of the survey, Chairman McCaskill 
received information that the American Counsel of Education 
(ACE) planned to hold a webinar for Colleges and Universities 
instructing them on how to manage Congressional investigations 
and the survey sent by Chairman McCaskill. On May 12, 2014, 
Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to ACE regarding their 
webinar, and on May 28, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter 
to ACE requesting the materials used in the webinar.
    On July 9, 2014, the Subcommittee issued a report that 
included the results of the survey. The results demonstrated a 
disturbing failure by many institutions to comply with the law 
and with best practices in how they handle sexual violence 
against students. The 440 institutions represented in the 
survey are currently educating more than five million students 
across the country. The survey's key findings included the fact 
that more than 40 percent of schools have not conducted a 
single investigation in 5 years, and 21 percent of schools 
provide no training to faculty and staff on how to handle 
sexual violence. More than 10 percent of institutions surveyed 
do not have a Title IX coordinator, as required by law. The 
survey also found that law enforcement officials at 30 percent 
of institutions receive no training on how to respond to 
reports of sexual violence.
    On July 24, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) regarding the 
oversight of campus sexual assault by its member institutions 
and encouraging the NCAA to explore how it can help its member 
institutions address the problem of sexual assault on campus.

2. Complying with and Enforcing the Clery Act and the Campus SaVE Act 
        (May 19, 2014)

    This roundtable focused on the challenges involved with 
rules and regulations related to the Clery and Campus SaVE 
Acts. In particular, the roundtable was framed by a discussion 
about how to simplify the complex labyrinth that exists among 
SaVE, Clery, and Title IX legislation, as well as the different 
state statutes and standards of proof. The roundtable also 
examined the utility of certain tools for estimating the scope 
of the problem of sexual violence, such as Clery data and 
climate surveys.
    Participants: Laura Dunn, Executive Director of 
SurvJustice; Caroline Fultz-Carver, Compliance Officer for 
Title IX and the Clery Act at the University of South Florida; 
Eric Heath, Chief of Police at George Mason University; Alison 
Kiss, Executive Director of the Clery Center for Security on 
Campus; Lynn Mahaffie, Director of Policy in the Office of 
Postsecondary Education in the U.S. Department of Education; 
Holly Rider-Milkovich, Director of the Sexual Assault 
Prevention and Awareness Center (SAPAC) in the University of 
Michigan; and Tracey Vitchers, Communications Coordinator for 
Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER).

3. Campus Sexual Assault--The Role of Title IX (June 2, 2014)

    This roundtable focused on the role of Title IX and related 
legislation in addressing sexual violence on college campuses. 
The roundtable examined realistic ways to enforce Title IX in 
the context of sexual violence and harassment, without unfairly 
punishing innocent students through unreasonable penalties. 
Ways to make campus sexual assault policies simpler and more 
transparent were also discussed, as was the possibility of 
streamlining or centralizing the government's ability to 
investigate Title IX violations.
    Participants: Cat Riley, Title IX Coordinator for the 
University of Texas Medical Branch; Katie Eichele, Director for 
the Aurora Center for Advocacy and Education; Jocelyn Samuels, 
the Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights 
Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ); Anne Hedgepeth 
with the American Association of University Women; John Kelly, 
Special Project Organizer for Know Your IX; Dana Bolger, 
Founding Co-Director of Know Your IX; Lindy Aldrich, Deputy 
Director for the Victim Rights Law Center; and Deborah Noble-
Triplett, Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs for the 
University of Missouri.

4. Campus Sexual Assault--The Administrative Process and the Criminal 
        Justice System (June 23, 2014)

    This roundtable focused on different ways for campus 
administrators, law enforcement officials, and prosecutors to 
coordinate their efforts to combat sexual assault on college 
campuses. The roundtable examined the different obstacles to 
such coordination, as well as successful models that have 
overcome these obstacles. Some options that were discussed 
included increased training for campus officials and law 
enforcement, the creation of memoranda of understanding (MOUs) 
between local and campus police officers, and making policies 
both simpler and more victim-centric.
    Participants: Katharina Booth, Chief Trial Deputy in the 
Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Unit in the office of the 
District Attorney of the 20th District in Boulder, Colorado; 
Alexandra Brodsky, co-founder at Know Your IX and law student 
at Yale University; Nancy Chi Cantalupo, research fellow at the 
Victim Rights Law Center and Adjunct Professor at Georgetown 
Law School; Paul Denton, Chief of the Ohio State University 
Police Division; Darcie Folsom, Director of Sexual Violence 
Prevention and Advocacy at Connecticut College; Jennifer 
Gaffney, Deputy Chief of the Special Victim's Bureau of the New 
York District Attorney's Office; Carrie Hull, a detective in 
the Ashland, Oregon Police Department; Mike Jungers, Dean of 
Students at Missouri State University; Jessica Ladd-Webert, 
Director of the Office of Victim Assistance at the University 
of Colorado, Boulder; Rebecca O'Connor, Vice President of 
Public Policy at RAINN (Rape, Abuse, and Incest National 
Network); and Kathy Zoner, Chief of Police at the Cornell 
University Police Department.

5. Investigation: The Collection of Crime Data

    On September 11, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Comptroller General for the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) requesting that GAO review crime data collected by 
the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, and the Department of Homeland Security. 
Chairman McCaskill requested that GAO specifically review the 
sources of the crime data, the data collection methods, the 
subject matter of the data, the challenges posed by different 
data collection methods, and the efforts being taken by these 
agencies to improve data collection.

       F. Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Threats

    The Subcommittee initiated two investigations into the 
management and oversight of contracts related to chemical, 
biological, radiological, and nuclear threats.

1. Investigation: Anthrax

    On June 18, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Deputy Inspector General for the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS) asking them to review the circumstances under 
which DHS determined that drug-resistant anthrax constituted a 
material threat to the United States. This letter followed 
reports regarding the role of Richard Danzig, biodefense 
advisor to the government and Director of the company what made 
the antitoxin for Anthrax, in the decision to classify drug-
resistant Anthrax as a material threat.
    On June 18, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Defense 
(DOD IG) requesting that DOD IG review the circumstances under 
which the Department of Defense (DOD) awarded contracts to 
Richard Danzig for the provision of biodefense-related 
consulting services. Chairman McCaskill was concerned that Mr. 
Danzig had improper influence over the decision to heavily fund 
the development and stockpiling of Anthrax antitoxin due to his 
positions as a former Secretary of the Navy and at the time of 
the contract award, biodefense advisor to the government and 
member of the Board of Directors of Human Genome Sciences, 
Inc., the developer of the antitoxin.
    On November 13, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response for the 
department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regarding Project 
BioShield, a program designed to promote the expeditious 
creation of medical countermeasures for use against chemical, 
biological, radiological, and nuclear agents. This program 
authorized HHS to procure contracts for countermeasures through 
limited competition and sole source contracts between 2004 and 
2014. Chairman McCaskill requested information regarding these 
contracts and the contracting process to determine whether 
funds were being judiciously spent and whether waste, fraud, or 
abuse took place during their procurement.

2. Investigation: BioWatch

    On January 28, 2014, Chairman McCaskill and Senator Coburn 
sent a letter to the Comptroller General of the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) asking to co-request the review of 
the technical capabilities of the Department of Homeland 
Security's BioWatch program requested by members of the House 
Committee on Energy and Commerce.

                          G. Counternarcotics

    The Subcommittee continued its oversight of 
counternarcotics contracts. On May 30, 2014, Chairman McCaskill 
sent a letter to the Secretary of Defense requesting 
information regarding the Department of Defense's (DOD) 
counternarcotics contracts. The Chairman's request followed 
reports by the Department of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) 
that one counternarcotics contractor, Northrop Grumman, 
improperly charged the U.S. Government more than $100 million 
over almost 6 years. Chairman McCaskill requested a briefing 
from DOD that would include an explanation of how the 
overbilling occurred and how DOD plans to recover the charges.
    In the wake of the DOD IG's report on counternarcotics 
contracts management, Chairman McCaskill wrote to the Inspector 
General for the Department of State (State IG) on May 30, 2014, 
requesting that the State IG review the State Department's 
(State) counternarcotics contracts. The predecessor of the 
Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight, the 
Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, then chaired by Senator 
McCaskill, released a report in 2011 that reviewed State's 
counternarcotics contracts and found a lack of contract 
oversight. Given the DOD IG's report on DOD counternarcotics 
contracts and that several of State's counternarcotics 
contracts were with the same subcontractor used by Northrop 
Grumman, Chairman McCaskill requested that the State IG conduct 
a review to ensure that similar overbilling and waste had not 
occurred.

                             H. Duplication

    The Subcommittee held two hearings focusing on overlap and 
duplication among Federal agencies.

1. A More Efficient Government: Streamlining Overseas Trade and 
        Development Agencies (S. Hrg. 113-256) (December 11, 2013)

    This hearing focused on ways to examine opportunities to 
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Overseas Private 
Investment Corporation (OPIC), and the U.S. Trade and 
Development Agency (TDA). The hearing examined the lack of 
independent oversight of both agencies, the agencies' 
functions, the level to which OPIC's investments comport with 
its development mission, and the apparent lack of transparency 
of TDA's awards. The hearing also addressed what opportunities 
may exist to streamline or combine the functions of OPIC and 
TDA, including financial management and oversight, with other 
Federal agencies.
    Witnesses: Elizabeth Littlefield, President; and CEO, 
Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and Leocadia Zak, 
Director, U.S. Trade and Development Agency.

2. A More Efficient and Effective Government: The National Technical 
        Information Service (S. Hrg. 113-511) (July 23, 2014)

    This hearing focused on the role of the National Technical 
Information Service (NTIS), a little-known agency whose 
valuable mission to maintain a database of technical government 
documents has become largely obsolete with the advent of the 
internet. The hearing also examined the NTIS's strategy of 
selling services to other government agencies, draining Federal 
money, in order to maintain its database. The proposed 
bipartisan ``Let Me Google that for You'' Act, which would 
allow the government to more efficiently maintain the core 
services provided by NTIS without inefficient duplication, was 
also discussed.
    Witnesses: Valerie Melvin, Director of Information 
Management and Technology Resource Issues at GAO; and the 
Honorable Bruce Borzino, Director of the National Technical 
Information Service.

                     I. Energy Department Contracts

    The Subcommittee continued its oversight of contract 
management and oversight at the Department of Energy.

1. Investigation: Department of Energy

    On September 13, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent Senator 
Wyden, Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources, information regarding the Department of Energy's 
(DOE) reimbursement of contractors' legal fees for defending 
against whistleblower reprisal claims, for the committee's use 
in their oversight of DOE.
    On June 24, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter 
requesting DOE's response to the questions for the record that 
were provided on March 26, 2014.
    On October 20, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
DOE regarding DOE IG's allegation that they could not reach a 
conclusion regarding the termination of Donna Busche because 
DOE contractors had refused to adequately respond and provide 
documents. Chairman McCaskill requested that DOE provide a 
briefing to Subcommittee staff detailing DOE's plans to address 
the contractor's lack of cooperation with DOE IG's request.

2. Contract Management by the Department of Energy (S. Hrg. 113-294) 
        (June 27, 2013)

    This hearing examined the Department of Energy's long 
history of poor oversight in the Office of Environmental 
Management. The hearing examined the Department's oversight of 
environmental remediation at active cleanup sites, including 
its ability to manage and control the projects' costs, 
schedules, and safety. The hearing also assessed the 
Department's reliance on cost-based contracts and examined a 
handful of contractors who continue to be awarded contracts at 
multiple facilities despite a record of mismanagement.
    Witnesses: Gregory H. Friedman, Inspector General, 
Department of Energy Office of Inspector General; Joseph F. 
Bader, Board Member, U.S. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety 
Board; J.E. ``Jack'' Surash, Deputy Assistant Secretary, 
Acquisition and Project Management, Office of Environmental 
Management, U.S. Department of Energy; Michael Graham, 
Principal Vice President, Bechtel National, Inc.; Michael 
McKelvy, President and Division Chief, Executive Government, 
Environment, and Infrastructure Division, CH2M HILL; and Frank 
Sheppard, Jr., Vice President and Deputy Project Manager, 
Parsons Corporation.

3. Whistleblower Retaliation at the Hanford Nuclear Site (S. Hrg. 113-
        370) (March 11, 2014)

    This hearing focused on safety culture and whistleblower 
retaliation by Department of Energy (DOE) contractors at the 
Hanford Waste Treatment Plant (WTP). The hearing examined a 
litany of cost overruns and schedule delays in connection with 
the plant, as well as allegations that DOE and its contractors 
engaged in retaliation against employees who raised concerns 
about the safety of the WTP's design and construction. The 
firing of whistleblowers who raised safety concerns reflected a 
chilled atmosphere regarding safety at the WTP.
    Witnesses: Bill Eckroade, Deputy Chief of Operations, 
Office of Health Safety and Security, U.S. Department of 
Energy; Matt Moury, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Safety, 
Security and Quality Programs, Environmental Management, U.S. 
Department of Energy; James Taylor, Senior Vice President, 
Global Management and Operations Services, URS Corporation; 
Michael Graham, Principal Vice President, Bechtel National, 
Inc.

4. Whistleblower Retaliation at the Hanford Nuclear Site (March 11, 
        2014)

    This roundtable focused on the safety culture at the 
Hanford Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) and the allegations of 
whistleblower retaliation that resulted when safety and 
technical concerns were brought to the attention of the 
Department of Energy (DOE) and contractor management. The 
roundtable also examined the large legal fees that can be 
racked up in whistleblower lawsuits, with taxpayers footing 
bills for millions of dollars while whistleblowers are slowly 
ground down in a barrage of filings.
    Participants: Former WTP Manager for Environmental and 
Nuclear Safety; Donna Busche, former WTP Manager of Research 
and Technology Dr. Walter L. Tamosaitis; and Executive Director 
of Hanford Challenge Tom Carpenter.

5. Investigation: ORISE Fellowship Program

    While conducting oversight of POW/MIA accounting, Chairman 
McCaskill became aware that a Department of Defense component 
known as the Joint Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Accounting 
Command (JPAC) relies heavily on members of the Oak Ridge 
Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) fellowship program 
to accomplish its mission, and that a significant portion of 
what JPAC pays for fellows goes towards overhead. On September 
13, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the Department of 
Energy (DOE) and Oak Ridge Associated Universities requesting 
information about the ORISE fellowship program. In addition to 
requesting information about the rules and nature of the 
fellowship program, Chairman McCaskill requested a briefing to 
better understand the extent to which there exists oversight of 
the program by government officials.
    On January 16, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the President and Chief Executive Office of Oak Ridge 
Associated Universities requesting that he investigate 
allegations that an ORISE Fellow working at the JPAC, named 
Paul Cole, had harassed several individuals while at JPAC.
    On January 31, 2014, after conducting a review of the ORISE 
program, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the Comptroller 
General for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
requesting that GAO review the ORISE fellowship program to 
determine the cost of the ORISE fellowship program, the 
benefits afforded to ORISE fellows, and what oversight, if any, 
exists for the program.

                   J. Federal Housing Administration

    The Subcommittee initiated one investigation into the 
Federal Housing Administration's Real Estate Owned Properties 
Program.
    On July 7, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Assistant Secretary for Housing at the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development regarding the Federal Housing 
Administration's (FHA) Real Estate-Owned (REO) properties 
program. This request followed a Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) report that found that FHA's divided property 
custody approach between mortgage services and REO contractors 
had jeopardized billions of dollars in potential savings. To 
conduct oversight of the REO program, Chairman McCaskill 
requested information related to Field Service Managers, Asset 
Managers, and REO disposition practices.
    On December 5, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Acting Assistant Secretary and Federal Housing 
Administration Commissioner, expressing gratitude that FHA was 
beginning to address the deficiencies in contract management 
outlined by GAO. Chairman McCaskill encouraged FHA to continue 
its oversight of contractors, and to use all available tools to 
ensure that contractors continue to perform satisfactorily.

                      K. Durable Medical Equipment

    The Subcommittee initiated one investigation and held one 
hearing to review oversight of durable medical equipment 
reimbursements under Medicare Part B by the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services, including its efforts to 
control costs and detect and prevent abusive practices and 
improper payments.

1. Oversight and Business Practices of Durable Medical Equipment 
        Companies, Part I (S. Hrg. 113-322) (April 24, 2013)

    This hearing reviewed payments by the Centers for Medicare 
& Medicaid Services (CMS) under Medicare Part B to suppliers of 
medical products such as diabetic testing equipment, CPAP 
machines, power mobility devices, and back braces, also known 
as durable medical equipment (DME). The hearing also examined 
the promotion and marketing of these types of products by DME 
companies to patients and their doctors. The hearing assessed 
CMS' oversight of DME reimbursements under Medicare Part B, 
including its efforts to control costs and detect and prevent 
abusive practices and improper payments.
    Witnesses: Invited but Failed to appear: Jon Letko, U.S. 
Healthcare Supply, LLC; Invited: Dr. Steve Silverman, Med-Care 
Diabetic and Medical Supplies; Peter Budetti, Deputy 
Administrator and Director, Center for Program Integrity, 
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; Laurence Wilson, 
Director, Chronic Care Policy Group, Center for Medicare, 
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Charlene Stanley, 
Zone Program Integrity Contractor Operations Director, 
AdvanceMed Corporation.

2. Oversight and Business Practices of Durable Medical Equipment 
        Companies, Part II (S. Hrg. 113-322) (May 22, 2013)

    This hearing was a continuation of the Subcommittee's April 
24, 2013 hearing on durable medical equipment (DME). Two 
witnesses invited by the Subcommittee to provide testimony at 
that hearing failed to appear. The Subcommittee subpoenaed 
these witnesses to appear and answer questions regarding their 
marketing practices.
    The witness representing U.S. Healthcare Supply, LLC 
asserted his Fifth Amendment right and was excused from the 
hearing. The witness from Med-Care Diabetic & Medical Supplies 
answered questions regarding his company's sale and 
reimbursement of DME to Medicare beneficiaries under Medicare 
Part B. He also discussed the promotion and marketing of DME to 
Medicare beneficiaries, including his compliance with 
applicable statutes and regulations. Further, he responded to 
inquiries about audits and closed investigations relating to 
the sale of DME under Medicare Part B.
    Witnesses: Jon Letko, U.S. Healthcare Supply, LLC; and Dr. 
Steve Silverman, Med-Care Diabetic and Medical Supplies.

3. Investigation: Durable Medical Equipment Follow-up

    On June 19, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), providing a list 
of companies about which the Subcommittee had received 
complaints for HHS to review and, if warranted, conduct 
investigations into wrongdoing.

4. Investigation: Healthcare.gov

    In response to information provided by whistleblowers, 
Chairman McCaskill sent a letter on May 15, 2014 to the 
Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General (HHS 
IG) requesting that the HHS IG review allegations of wrongdoing 
on the Healthcare.gov contract by Cognosante, a subcontractor 
of the prime contractor Serco.
    On November 22, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Comptroller General for the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) requesting a review of the award, management, and 
oversight of contracts for websites related to the 
Healthcare.gov platform. Following a 2010 Subcommittee hearing 
regarding the management and oversight of contracts awarded by 
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), reports 
surfaced that CMS was not following the recommendations set 
forth in the related GAO report. Chairman McCaskill, therefore, 
requested that GAO review all aspects of contract management 
and oversight for the Healthcare.gov platform, including those 
contracts awarded by CMS.

                         L. Inspectors General


1. Investigation: Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector 
        General

    On June 27, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
Deputy Inspector General for the Department of Homeland 
Security, Charles Edwards, informing him of allegations of 
misconduct that had been brought to the Subcommittee's 
attention by several whistleblowers. Chairman McCaskill's 
letter laid out the allegations against Edwards and requested 
information and documents that would help the Subcommittee in 
its investigation. On October 30, 2013, Chairman McCaskill and 
Ranking Member Johnson wrote a second letter to Deputy 
Inspector Edwards re-requesting the information and documents 
requested on June 27, 2013. As of June 27, 2013, Edwards had 
produced partial responses to the requests made by Chairman 
McCaskill and several employees had refused interviews.
    On April 23, 2014, Chairman McCaskill and Ranking Member 
Johnson sent a letter to the Chair of the Council of the 
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency informing the 
council that the Subcommittee had concluded its bipartisan 
investigation of Deputy Inspector General Charles Edwards, and 
had found that Mr. Edwards jeopardized the independence of the 
Office of the Inspector General and abused agency resources. 
The letter provided a copy of the report produced by the 
Subcommittee and requested that the council conduct an 
investigation into the allegations of wrong doing, as required 
by the Inspector General Act.
    On June 13, 2014, in response to the request by Ranking 
Member Zoe Lofgren for information regarding the Subcommittee's 
investigation into Deputy Inspector General Charles Edwards, 
Chairman McCaskill and Ranking Member Johnson provided a copy 
of the relevant portion of the interview transcript referred to 
in the report by the Subcommittee.

2. Investigation: The Denali Commission

    On September 23, 2013, Chairman McCaskill and Chairman Issa 
sent a letter to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
regarding the independence of the Denali Commission's Office of 
Inspector General. This letter responded to reports that the 
Denali Commission planned to apply a provision of the Dodd-
Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to the 
Denali Commission, which would change the head of the Denali 
Commission and compromise the independence of the Inspector 
General. Chairmen McCaskill and Chairman Issa requested that 
OMB provide guidance by responding in writing to the Denali 
Commission and the Inspector General, and publish the List of 
Designated Federal Entities in the Federal Register.
    On December 2, 2013, OMB responded to Chairmen McCaskill 
and Chairman Issa's concerns regarding the Denali Commission, 
informing McCaskill that the Denali Commission had received the 
necessary guidance. OMB published its list of Designated 
Federal Entities in on January 10, 2014 for the first time in 
four years.

3. Oversight of Small Agencies (S. Hrg. 113-409) (April 10, 2014)

    This hearing focused on the processes and mechanisms by 
which small agencies and other Federal entities without 
statutory inspectors general receive oversight. The hearing 
examined the challenges faced by both large and small IG 
offices in providing oversight to small agencies. The hearing 
also examined potential legislative actions to improve the 
oversight of small agencies.
    Witnesses: Hon. Peggy E. Gustafson, Inspector General of 
the U.S. Small Business Administration; Hon. Osvaldo L. 
Gratacos, Inspector General of the Export-Import Bank of the 
United States; Hubert Sparks, Inspector General of the 
Appalachian Regional Commission; Michael G. Carroll, Acting 
Inspector General of the U.S. Agency for International 
Development; and Beryl Davis, Director of Financial Management 
and Assurance of the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

                        M. Police Militarization


1. Investigation: Police Militarization

    In August 2014, Subcommittee staff began an investigation 
into the militarization of police forces, and the means by 
which local law enforcement agencies receive military-grade 
equipment and weapons. On August 27, 2014, Chairman McCaskill 
sent letters to DOD, DOJ, and DHS requesting information and 
documents regarding the programs that they have that allow 
local law enforcement to receive military-grade equipment. As a 
part of this investigation, the Subcommittee staff also met 
with stakeholders in the law enforcement community, community 
activists, DOJ, DHS, and DOD officials to discuss their views 
and concerns.
    This investigation culminated in a full committee hearing 
on September 9, 2014, chaired by Senator McCaskill, entitled 
``Oversight of Federal Programs for Equipping State and Local 
Law Enforcement.'' This hearing included witnesses from DHS, 
DOD, DOJ, the Police Foundation, The National Tactical Officers 
Association, and the National Association for the Advancement 
of Colored People, as well as a photojournalist who was present 
during the protests that took place in Ferguson, MO, and an 
academic who has specialized in studying the militarization of 
police forces.
    The hearing revealed that 36 percent of the equipment sent 
to local police departments through the Department of Defense 
(DOD) was either never or little used by the military, that 
more than 450 guns have been lost by state and local police 
departments that were sent as part of the DOD programs, and 
that local police departments in 49 of 50 states have more 
Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAPs) than their 
state's National Guard units.

                           N. Postal Service


1. Investigation: Postal Service

    On February 4, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Postmaster General requesting information and documents to 
help the Subcommittee's investigation into the relationship 
between the United States Postal Service (USPS), United Parcel 
Service (UPS), and FedEx, as it relates to ``last mile'' 
delivery services or Parcel Select contracts undertaken by 
USPS.
    On February 4, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Comptroller General for the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) requesting that GAO review USPS agreements with 
FedEx and UPS and conduct a cost study to assess the accuracy 
of the annual costs attributable to the Parcel Select mail 
class.
    On August 1, 2014 Chairman McCaskill and Ranking Member 
Johnson sent a letter to members of the Committee on 
Appropriations requesting that they include language in any 
omnibus appropriations legislation or continuing resolution 
that would prevent USPS from closing or consolidating mail 
processing facilities during Fiscal Year 2015.

                               O. POW/MIA

    The Subcommittee initiated an investigation and held a 
hearing on the management and oversight of POW/MIA recovery 
activities at the Department of Defense.

1. Investigation: POW/MIA

    On July 8, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Commander of the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC) 
regarding allegations of waste, fraud and abuse at JPAC that 
had been investigated in an internal JPAC report. Chairman 
McCaskill requested a copy of the internal JPAC report, a 
briefing on the findings, and JPAC's response, related 
communications, evaluations, or findings related to the report.
    Following the hearing entitled ``Mismanagement of POW/MIA 
Accounting'' Chairman McCaskill and Senator Ayotte sent a 
letter on September 13, 2013 to the Secretary of Defense 
discussing the findings of the hearing and the Department of 
Defense's (DOD) plans to implement changes to improve the 
organizational structure and communication within the Joint 
Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Accounting Command (JPAC) and 
the Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Person Personnel Office 
(DPMO). Chairman McCaskill and Senator Ayotte requested that 
DOD provide detailed information regarding their plan to 
implement changes recommended by the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) and assurances that DOD would investigate 
whistleblower claims and protect whistleblowers from 
retaliation.
    On September 13, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General (DOD IG) 
urging the investigation of alleged hostile work environments 
within the POW/MIA accounting community and the review of the 
POW/MIA accounting community as a whole.
    On October 25, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Secretary of Defense regarding reports that the DOD was 
staging ``arrival'' ceremonies for recovered remains that were 
already at the JPAC Central Identification Laboratory (CIL). 
Chairman McCaskill requested detailed information and documents 
regarding these ceremonies and all representations made to the 
families of the identified service members by DOD. Chairman 
McCaskill also requested a briefing regarding the DOD's 
progress implementing recommended changes to DOD's management 
of POW/MIA accounting practices.
    On January 9, 2014, Chairman McCaskill and Senator Ayotte 
sent a letter to the Secretary of Defense regarding DOD's 
efforts to implement reforms, including a review by Cost 
Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE). While pleased that 
reform was taking place, the Senators remained concerned that 
DOD was not adequately addressing serious problems in the 
accounting community such as transparency, infrequent 
reporting, and the absence of honest accountability. Chairman 
McCaskill and Senator Ayotte alerted DOD of the new reporting 
requirements included in the 2014 National Defense 
Authorization Act, and requested a briefing following the 
completion of the CAPE evaluation.

2. Mismanagement of POW/MIA Accounting (S. Hrg. 113-293) (August 1, 
        2013)

    This hearing focused on the Defense Department's financial 
management and oversight of its accounting mission. It examined 
the roles of JPAC, DPMO, CIL, and LSEL. The hearing examined 
the discrepancy between increased funds allocated for the 
identification of missing personnel and the lack of any 
significant increase in identifications. The hearing also 
involved a discussion of the role of communication and 
coordination within the Department of Defense, the operational 
responsibilities of the various agencies, and the steps that 
can be taken to help the Department better fulfill its 
accounting mission.
    Witnesses: Major General Kelly K. McKeague, Commander, 
Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC); Major General W. 
Montague Winfield, (Ret.), Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for POW/Missing Personnel Affairs and Director, Defense 
Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO); and John A. 
Goines, Chief, Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory (LSEL), 
United States Air Force.

       P. Access to Classified Information and Secure Facilities

    The Subcommittee continued its oversight of how government 
agencies allow access to classified information and secure 
facilities.

1. Investigation: Security Clearances

    On July 10, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Comptroller General for the Government Accountability Office 
(GAO), requesting that GAO evaluate the differences in the 
quality and depth of security clearance background 
investigations that agencies use to allow access to classified 
national security information.
    On December 9, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Chair of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity 
and Efficiency (CIGIE) requesting that CIGIE review the role of 
Inspectors General in the security clearance review process and 
evaluate the procedures used by the Inspectors General to 
ensure that relevant information is shared with security 
clearance review offices. Chairman McCaskill additionally 
requested that CIGIE prepare and disseminate guidelines and 
best practices for Inspectors General participation in the 
security clearance process.
    On April 7, 2014, Chairman McCaskill and Senators Collins, 
Ayotte, and Heitkamp sent a letter to Chairman Carper and 
Ranking Member Coburn urging the mark up of the bill introduced 
on October 30, 2013, entitled ``The Enhanced Security Clearance 
Act of 2013.''
    On July 21, 2014, Chairman McCaskill and Chairman Carper 
sent a letter to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS) regarding U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services' 
(USCIS) decision to award a $190 million contract to U.S. 
Investigation Services, Inc., (USIS). USUS is a contractor that 
was joined in a lawsuit on behalf of the Department of Justice 
alleging a systematic failure by USIS to adequately conduct 
security clearance investigations. Chairmen McCaskill and 
Carper requested information and a briefing regarding the DHS's 
acquisition process including the nature of the services 
contracted from USIS and the source selection procedures used.

2. Safeguarding Our Nation's Secrets: Examining the Security Clearance 
        Process (S. Hrg. 113-316) (June 20, 2013)

    This joint hearing, held with the Subcommittee on the 
Efficiency and Effectiveness of Federal Program and the Federal 
Workforce, reviewed how the Federal government conducts 
investigations to determine whether Federal employees and 
contractors are eligible for access to classified information. 
The hearing examined the management and oversight of the 
Federal employees and contractors responsible for planning, 
conducting, and reviewing investigations and issuing security 
clearances. The hearing also examined the efficiency and 
effectiveness of the security clearance process.
    Witnesses: Hon. Patrick E. McFarland, Inspector General for 
the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) accompanied by 
Michelle B. Schmitz, Associate Inspector General for 
Investigations for OPM; Merton W. Miller, Associate Director of 
Investigations of the Federal Investigative Services (FIS) for 
OPM; Stephen F. Lewis, Deputy Director for the Security 
Directorate Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Intelligence) for the U.S. Department of Defense accompanied 
by Stanley L. Sims, Director of the Defense Security Service 
for the U.S. Department of Defense; and Brenda S. Farrell, 
Director of Defense Capabilities and Management for the U.S. 
Government Accountability Office (GAO).

3. Investigation: Navy Yard Shooting

    On September 16, 2013, Chairman McCaskill received an 
advance copy of the Defense Department's Office of Inspector 
General's (DOD IG) report which revealed the Navy's failure to 
adequately manage and oversee the contract associated with the 
Navy Commercial Access Control System (NCACS), which was 
responsible for background checks for contractor personnel. In 
particular, this report revealed that Eid Passport, the 
contractor charged with the administration of the NCACS 
program, failed to prevent access to military installations 
before background checks were completed. On September 17, 2013, 
in the wake of the September 16 shooting at the Navy Yard 
complex in Washington, DC, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Secretary of the Navy regarding the Navy's management and 
oversight of contractor access to Navy installations. Chairman 
McCaskill requested a briefing detailing the Navy's management 
and oversight of contractor access to Navy installations under 
both the NCACS and all alternative systems.
    On September 18, 2013, Chairman McCaskill, Ranking Member 
Johnson, and Senators Tester and Portman sent a letter to the 
Inspector General for the Office of Personnel Management (OPM 
IG) requesting a review of the security clearance background 
investigation conducted for Aaron Alexis, the perpetrator of 
the Navy Yard shooting.
    On October 28, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent letters to the 
Secretary of the Army, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, and 
the Administrator of NASA requesting that each respective 
department review their contracts for the use of Eid Passport's 
Rapidgate system.

                     Q. State Department Contracts

    The Subcommittee continued its oversight of the State 
Department's management and oversight of contracts.
    On April 29, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Secretary of State regarding the State Department's decision to 
solicit a contract for ``Congressional Training'' to provide 
training for senior level officials within the State Department 
on how to give effective congressional testimony and briefings. 
The Chairman requested information and documents regarding the 
contract solicitation to assist the Subcommittee in its 
oversight of State Department contracting. On June 19, 2014, 
Chairman McCaskill sent a second letter to the Secretary of 
State regarding the State Department's solicitation of a 
contract for ``Congressional Training.'' This June 19th letter 
reiterated the request for information and added a request for 
copies of all course material used in the congressional 
training sessions.
    On April 9, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Under Secretary for management at the State Department 
regarding the State Department Inspector General's (State IG) 
report which identified ``significant vulnerabilities'' in 
contract management at the State Department. Chairman McCaskill 
requested that the State Department provide information 
regarding their plans to implement changes in their contract 
management to conform with State IG's management-related 
recommendations.

                            R. Student Loans

    The Subcommittee initiated an investigation into the 
Department of Education's management and oversight of contracts 
related to student loans.
    On July 8, 2014, Chairman McCaskill along with Senators 
Warren, Tester, Baldwin, Murray, Durbin, Reed, Brown, and 
Blumenthal sent a letter to the Secretary of Education 
regarding the Department of Education's (DOE) contracts for the 
origination, disbursement, and servicing of student loans. The 
letter expressed concerns over the DOE's planning, management, 
and competition of student loan servicing contracts. The 
Senators expressed particular concern for the DOE's choice to 
re-negotiate a contract with Navient Inc., a loan servicer that 
was formerly part of Sallie Mae, and that has agreed to pay 
nearly $100 million to settle allegations that they improperly 
charged U.S. service members for their student loans. The 
Senators requested information and documents to assist in the 
Subcommittee's oversight of the DOE's contracting process. The 
Subcommittee's investigation is ongoing.

      S. Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Veterans' Mental Health

    The Subcommittee initiated an investigation into the 
National Guard's management and oversight of contracts for 
mental health service personnel.
    The Subcommittee received information revealing that the 
National Guard's management and oversight of contracts for 
mental health service personnel coordination may have resulted 
in inadequate mental health care for service members of the 
National Guard. On June 19, 2013, Chairman McCaskill sent a 
letter to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau requesting 
information and documents regarding the National Guard's 
contracts for the coordination of mental health services 
personnel at both Air National Guard and National Guard bases 
across the country. On July 29, 2013 Chairman McCaskill sent 
letters to National Guard mental health contractors Global 
Consulting Alliance, Goldbelt Glacier Health Services, MHN, 
Serco, Inc., and Skyline Ultd Inc., requesting information and 
documents regarding the contract management for their work in 
coordinating mental health services and mental health personnel 
for the National Guard.
    On December 12, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to 
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau thanking them for their 
responses and cooperation with the Subcommittee's 
investigation. As a result of the Subcommittee's investigation, 
the National Guard is currently addressing many of the 
deficiencies cited by the Subcommittee; including taking 
measures to make formerly contracted positions Federal 
positions and expanding its psychological health program.

                           T. Whistleblowers

    The Subcommittee continued its ongoing oversight of the 
protections afforded to whistleblowers.
    On February 4, 2014, Chairman McCaskill and Senator 
Grassley sent a letter to the Comptroller General for the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting that GAO 
conduct a review of whistleblower reprisal investigations 
conducted by the Department of Defense's Office of Inspector 
General (DOD IG), with a particular focus on investigations 
conducted by the inspectors general of the military services. 
The report is expected to be completed in spring 2015.
    On September 18, 2014, Chairman McCaskill, along with 
Ranking Member Johnson, Senators Carper, Coburn, Levin, and 
Representatives Smith, Issa, and Cummings, sent a letter to the 
DOD IG regarding the DOD IG's interpretation of the protections 
afforded to whistleblowers in the 2008 and 2013 National 
Defense Authorization Acts. The members of Congress strongly 
disagreed with the DOD IG's interpretation of the whistleblower 
protection provisions, stating that DOD IG's interpretation 
``disregards both the plain language and the spirit of the 
legislation'' that was meant to protect government contractor 
and subcontractor whistleblowers. The members of Congress 
requested that the DOD IG review its interpretation and 
implementation of whistleblower protections to determine 
whether they had complied with the laws granting increased 
protection to government contractors and subcontractors and 
that DOD IG produce a report on their findings for review by 
the respective congressional Committees. On October 22, 2014, 
DOD IG sent a response stating that they were taking steps to 
implement changes to their interpretation of whistleblower 
protections.
    On June 19, 2014, Chairman McCaskill sent a letter to the 
Office of Special Counsel (OSC) requesting that OSC take prompt 
action in investigating and adjudicating the cases of alleged 
whistleblower retaliation at the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(VA), and requesting that OSC provide information to the 
Subcommittee regarding the alleged retaliation and the progress 
of OSC's investigation. On June 23, 2014, OSC provided its 
findings on whistleblower disclosures from the VA center in 
Jackson, Mississippi, and outlined recommendations and next 
steps including the designation of a high-level VA official to 
assess the conclusions found by OSC.

                            III. Legislation

    The Subcommittee's investigations and hearings have 
revealed the need for changes to existing law. During the 113th 
Congress, Chairman McCaskill introduced the following 
legislative proposals in her capacity as a Senator.

   A. A Bill to Prohibit Performance Awards in the Senior Executive 
              Service during Sequestration Periods (S.986)

    On May 16, 2013, Chairman McCaskill, along with co-sponsors 
Senator Coburn and Senator Johnson, introduced S. 986, A Bill 
to Prohibit Performance Awards in the Senior Executive Service 
during Sequestration Periods. The bill would prohibit a Federal 
agency from paying a performance award to an employee in a 
Senior Executive Service position during a sequestration period 
or any period during which a sequestration order is issued 
under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act. On 
May 16, 2013, the bill was referred to the Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

       B. Contracting and Tax Accountability Act of 2014 (S.2247)

    On April 10, 2014, Chairman McCaskill introduced S. 2247, 
the Contracting and Tax Accountability Act of 2014. The bill 
would require the head of any executive agency that issues an 
invitation for bids or a request for proposals for a contract, 
or that offers a grant, in an amount greater than the 
simplified acquisition threshold to require each person that 
submits a bid or proposal to submit with the bid or proposal a 
form certifying whether they have seriously delinquent tax 
debt, and authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to disclose 
information limited to whether the person has such debt. The 
bill was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs on April 10, 2014.

                 C. NSA Internal Watchdog Act (S. 2439)

    On June 5, 2014, Chairman McCaskill introduced S. 2439, the 
NSA Internal Watchdog Act. The bill would amend the Inspector 
General Act of 1978 to require the President to appoint, with 
advice and consent of the Senate, the Inspector General of the 
National Security Agency (NSA). Under the Inspector General Act 
of 1978, the NSA Inspector General was appointed by the NSA 
Director. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on 
Intelligence on June 5, 2014.

D. A bill to require the termination of any employee of the Department 
     of Veterans Affairs who is found to have retaliated against a 
                        whistleblower (S. 2606)

    On July 15, 2014, Chairman McCaskill introduced S. 2606, a 
bill to require the termination of any employee of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs who is found to have retaliated 
against a whistleblower. The bill was referred to the Committee 
on Veterans Affairs on July 15, 2014.

     E. National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2014 (H.R. 3304)

    The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal 
Year 2014 included an amendment proposed by Senator McCaskill 
aimed at reforming POW/MIA accounting within the Department of 
Defense (DOD). More specifically, under this amendment DOD is 
required to submit a formal plan for reorganizing and boosting 
accountability within the POW/MIA recovery program. That plan 
would include: an analysis of whether different segments of the 
recovery effort should be combined, such as the Joint POW/MIA 
Accounting Command (JPAC) and the Defense Prisoner of War/
Missing Person Personnel Office (DPMO); a determination as to 
which of these components should have direct responsibility for 
accounting activities; and an analysis of how other countries 
conduct POW/MIA accounting to identify best practices that 
could be adopted in the United States. Senator McCaskill's 
amendment also requires DOD to report on the actual number of 
POW/MIA, including: (1) the total current number of POW/MIA, 
including a break-out of these numbers by conflict, and 
specifically how many are believed to be located in North 
Korea, (2) the number of POW/MIA believed to be lost at sea or 
in a geographically inaccessible location by each conflict, (3) 
the number of remains in the custody of the Defense Department 
that are awaiting identification, and the number of remains 
that have been interred without identification, and (4) the 
number of cases in which next of kin have refused to provide 
DNA samples.

           F. National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2015 
                              (H.R. 3979)

    Several of the amendments to the National Defense 
Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2015, proposed by 
Senator McCaskill and based on her work with the Subcommittee, 
were adopted during the markup of the bill and signed into law 
by the President on December 19, 2014. These included 
provisions for improving the oversight of infrastructure 
projects in Afghanistan, increasing accountability for POW/MIA 
program management, strengthening whistleblower protections, 
and curbing waste in contractor response to congressional 
hearings and Army National Guard Advertising.

1. Afghan Ministries Infrastructure

    Section 1531 prohibits any funding authorized in the bill 
from being used for the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund. 
Section 1230 prohibits funding for construction projects in 
Afghanistan greater than $1 million that cannot be audited and 
physically inspected by U.S. Government personnel or designated 
representatives. This section also provides for a waiver based 
on factors that were included in the Senate version of the 
bill, including a determination that the project has been 
coordinated with the government of Afghanistan and that 
adequate arrangements have been made for the sustainment of 
projects.

2. POW/MIA

    Section 916 requires the establishment of a single defense 
agency responsible for POW/MIA efforts and requires the 
Department to report on policies and proposals for providing 
access to information and documents to the next of kin of 
missing service personnel.

3. Whistleblower Protections

    Section 856 extends whistleblower protections to Department 
of Defense contract grantees and sub-grantees.

4. Contractor Waste

    Section 857 prohibits the reimbursement of costs incurred 
by Federal contractors in connection with a congressional 
investigation or inquiry into an issue that is the subject 
matter of a proceeding resulting in a disposition.

5. Army National Guard Contracts

    The NDAA for FY 2015 cuts $13.8 million from the Army 
National Guard advertising budget.

                 G. S. Amendment 504 to S. CON. RES. 8

    On March 21, 2013, Chairman McCaskill submitted S.A. 504 to 
S. Con. Res. 8, a bill setting forth the congressional budget 
for the United States Government for Fiscal Year 2014. This 
amendment would allow the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
to revise the allocations of a committee that achieve savings 
through various means, including reform of acquisition policy, 
the use of scientific methodology for the elimination, reform, 
or consolidation of Federal agencies or programs, the sale of 
Federal property, a reduction of improper payments, an increase 
in the use of strategic sourcing, a reduction in the use of 
sole-source contracting, an increase in the use of fixed-price 
contracting, improved training and utilization of the 
acquisition workforce, or the removal of contracting 
preferences for Alaska Natives beyond those available to other 
participants in the program under section 8(a) of the Small 
Business Act, such as the ability to receive sole-source 
contracts above threshold amounts, and that reduce the deficit 
over a period of years.
                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT,


       INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA


                      Chairman: Mark Begich (D-AK)


                    Ranking Member: Rand Paul (R-KY)


                              I. Authority

    The Subcommittee on Emergency Management, Intergovernmental 
Relations, and the District of Columbia focuses on emergency 
management, disaster relief, and issues relating to the 
oversight of the District of Columbia. This Subcommittee is 
responsible for oversight of the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency (FEMA) and all of its emergency management 
responsibilities, including preparation for, response to, 
recovery from and mitigation against natural and man-made 
disasters. The Subcommittee also reviews the administration of 
post-disaster relief funds and oversight of financial 
assistance programs, like homeland security grants. In addition 
to these responsibilities, the subcommittee oversees the 
interrelationship between the Department of Homeland Security 
and states, localities, and first responders in preventing and 
responding to natural disasters, terrorism, and other man-made 
disasters. The Subcommittee is also responsible for all matters 
regarding the oversight of the District of Columbia, including 
the District court system.

                              II. Activity

    During the 113th Congress, the Subcommittee on Emergency 
Management, Intergovernmental Relations, and the District of 
Columbia held 12 hearings, authorized one investigation, and 
introduced, or joined as original co-sponsor, eight related 
pieces of legislation.
    The following is a summary of the activities of the 
Subcommittee, organized by topic.

                              A. HEARINGS


1. The Role of the Private Sector in Preparedness and Emergency 
        Response. May 8, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-216)

    The hearing was held in order to consider issues related to 
the inclusion of the private sector in disaster preparedness 
and response activities at the Federal, State, and local 
levels. The subcommittee hoped to examine how the private 
sector could best support community preparedness in response to 
natural and manmade disasters and explore the ways that FEMA 
and the Federal government reach out to the private sector. 
There was also to be some discussion regarding the budget 
efficiencies that could be achieved by empowering the private 
sector and non-profit organizations in the recovery process. 
Furthermore, the hearing was to focus on the value of 
mitigation from a business perspective and the importance of 
highlighting best practices while taking into account the 
lessons learned in regards to loss avoidance strategies that 
support economically resilient communities. It was anticipated 
that the hearing would develop an understanding of how the 
private sector could better prepare for disasters by developing 
plans, identifying priorities, engaging stakeholders, and 
reducing disaster cost.
    Witnesses: Elizabeth Zimmerman, Deputy Associate 
Administrator, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency; Michael Chodos, Associate 
Administrator, Office of Entrepreneurial Development, U.S. 
Small Business Administration; Chris Terzich, Chiar, Regional 
Consortium Coordinating Council; Michael Merwath, Senior Vice 
President and Chief Underwriter of the United Services 
Automobile Association; and Daniel Stoecker, Executive Director 
of the National Volunteer Organizations Active in Disasters.

2. Are We Prepared? Measuring the Impact of Preparedness Grants Since 
        9/11. June 25, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-217)

    The hearing focused on measuring of the impact of FEMA 
grants since 9/11 and the role Federal, State, and local 
governments play in developing metrics to assess preparedness 
for natural and manmade events. Since September 11, 2001, the 
nation has invested almost $40 billion in equipment, training, 
and exercising and in order to enhance and sustain essential 
capabilities, assessments must be done to determine our current 
level of preparedness and identify gaps that will inform future 
investment of tax-payer dollars.
    Witnesses: Hon. Timothy Manning, Deputy Administrator, 
Protection and National Preparedness, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Anne 
Richards, Assistant Inspector General for Audits, Office of 
Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; David 
Maurer, Director, Homeland Security Department and Justice 
Department, U.S. Government Accountability Office; John Madden, 
Director, Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency 
Management, National Emergency Management Association, National 
Governors Association; Hon. William Euille, Mayor, City of 
Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. Conference of Mayors; Josh Filler; 
Founder and President, Filler Security Strategies, Inc.; and 
Matt Mayer, Visiting Fellow, Heritage Foundation.

3. How Prepared is the National Capital Region for the Next Disaster? 
        July 31, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-218)

    The focus of the hearing was to: (1) examine the National 
Capital Region's emergency preparedness and response 
capabilities, (2) discuss regional coordination and information 
sharing challenges that are applicable to cities and states 
across the country, and (3) offer suggestions for how FEMA and 
other Federal agencies in the National Capital Region might 
prepare and respond to future disasters.
    Witnesses: Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Congresswoman for 
the District of Columbia; Christopher Geldart, Director, 
District of Columbia Homeland Security and Emergency Management 
Agency; Kenneth Mallette, Executive Director, Maryland 
Emergency Management Agency; Barbara Donnellan, County Manager, 
Arlington County, Virginia, Metropolitan Washington Council of 
Governments; James Schwartz, Fire Chief, Arlington County Fire 
Department.

4. Extreme Weather in Alaska: State and Federal Response to Imminent 
        Disasters in the Arctic. September 14, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-542)

    The focus of this field hearing was to examine the effects 
of erosion and flooding on at-risk communities throughout 
Alaska and highlight the challenges that must be addressed by 
the development of a long-term strategy for adaptation and 
mitigation in the face of increasingly extreme weather. The 
hearing also highlighted the challenges faced in the Arctic in 
regards to Federal and State agency coordination while drawing 
attention to the gaps that exist in Federal policy that, if 
addressed, could streamline actions taken to assess risk and 
protect critical infrastructure.
    Witnesses: Vivian Korthuis, Project Development Director, 
Alaska Association of Village Council Presidents; Thomas 
Ravens, Ph.D., Professor, University of Alaska at Anchorage; 
Melanie Bahnke, President, Kawerak, Inc.; David Miller, 
Associate Administrator, Federal Insurance and Mitigation 
Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Kenneth Murphy, Regional 
Administrator, Region X, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Colonel Christopher 
Lestochi, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Engineer 
District, Alaska; John Madden, Director, Alaska Division of 
Homeland Security and Emergency ManagementAlaska Department of 
Military and Veterans Affairs.

5. One Year Later: Examining the Ongoing Recovery from Hurricane Sandy. 
        November 6, 2013. (S. Hrg. 113-495)

    The focus of the hearing was to examine the response to and 
recovery from Hurricane Sandy, with particular emphasis on the 
challenges faced by affected communities as they navigated the 
various Federal agencies tasked with supporting the region 
following the storm. The hearing highlighted the critical gaps 
that exist in long-term recovery, including the barriers to 
rebuilding communities in a timely manner while incorporating 
innovative mitigation practices that reduce risk from future 
storms. The discussion focused on the lessons learned by areas 
hit hardest by Sandy and the gaps in Federal policy that may 
need to be addressed to fully incorporate innovative disaster 
relief programs across the country. Witnesses were asked to 
elaborate on the progress being made to spend the $60 billion 
provided to Sandy relief and the effort underway to track this 
spending to support efficiency across the affected region. 
Implementation of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act and the 
effectiveness of these new tools for future extreme weather 
events was also examined.
    Witnesses: Hon. Shaun L. S. Donovan, Secretary, U.S. 
Department of Housing and Urban Development; Hon. John D. 
Porcari, Deputy Secretary, Department of Transportation; Hon. 
W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency, Management 
Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Hon. Jo-Ellen 
Darcy, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), U.S. 
Department of the Army; Hon. Kathleen S. Tighe, Chair, The 
Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board;Cas F. Holloway, 
Deputy Mayor for Operations, City of New York.

6. Shutdown: Examining Federal Government Closure Impacts on the 
        District of Columbia. January 30, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-543)

    The hearing was held in order to examine the impacts of 
Federal Government shutdown, particularly the most recent 
closure in October 2013, on the District of Columbia. The 
subcommittee hoped to highlight the extent of any impacts on 
the city government's daily operations, particularly public 
service provision, and longer-term effects upon spending 
efficiency. Furthermore, the hearing served to review the 
effectiveness of measures undertaken by Congress and District 
government during the most recent shutdown to mitigate these 
impacts, as well as steps that might be taken to ensure that 
the disruption due to any future shutdown is minimized. This 
hearing allowed the opportunity to have a bipartisan panel of 
witnesses testify to the importance of passing DC budget 
autonomy.
    Witnesses: Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, D.C. 
Delegate to the United States House of Representatives; Hon. 
Tom Davis, Former Chairman, House Government Reform Committee; 
Allen Lew, City Administrator, The District of Columbia; Robert 
Vogel, Superintendent of the National Mall and Memorial Parks, 
National Park Service.

7. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's Budget Submission for 
        Fiscal Year 2015. March 13, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-496)

    The purpose of the hearing was to examine the President's 
Fiscal Year 2015 budget submission for FEMA and evaluate any 
programmatic proposals that may be included. Specifically, the 
Subcommittee is interested in specific details that can be 
provided on any structural changes the Administration may 
propose to the preparedness grants.
    Witness: Hon. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security.

8. Transparency and Training: Preparing our First Responders for 
        Emerging Threats and Hazards. March 25, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-317)

    The focus of the hearing was to examine the challenges 
posed to first responders by the transportation of hazardous 
materials. Given the dramatic increase in the transportation of 
a wide range of hazardous substances, the discussion 
highlighted the increased need for preparedness and training 
for first responders as well as the transparency needed to 
equip these responders with critical information. The hearing 
discussed the process for integration of emerging threats into 
emergency response planning and discussed opportunities for 
critical data to be shared during the planning process.
    Witnesses: Mike King, Acting Director of National Training 
and Education, Superintendent of the Center for Domestic 
Preparedness, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Tim McLean, Chief, Casselton 
Fire Department, Wheatland, North Dakota; Lisa Stabler, 
President, Transportation Technology Center, Inc.

9. Fifty Years Since the Great Alaska Earthquake: The Role of First 
        Responders in Catastrophic Disaster Planning. April 4, 2014. 
        (S. Hrg. 113-533)

    The purpose of this field hearing was to evaluate the role 
of first responders in catastrophic disaster planning. The 
hearing highlighted the critical relationships between Federal, 
State, and local emergency response officials and assessed the 
value of coordinated planning, training, and exercising. The 
hearing also examined any observations and lessons learned from 
recent national exercises and how they might be incorporated 
into future planning efforts.
    Witnesses: Hon. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; John Madden, Director, Alaska Division of Homeland 
Security and Emergency Management, Alaska Department of 
Military and Veterans Affairs; George Keeney, Fire Chief, 
Valdez Fire Department; Danita Koehler, MD, Chair, Rural 
Committee, National Association of Emergency Medical Services 
Physicians; Victor Joseph, President and Chairman, Tanana 
Chiefs Conference; Mike Abbott Assistant Superintendent, 
Anchorage School District.

10. The Role of Mitigation in Reducing Federal Expenditures for 
        Disaster Response. May 14, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-497)

    The focus of the hearing was to examine the potential 
relationship between investment in mitigation and disaster 
response and recovery expenditures, discuss the potential 
impact of mitigation investments on the sustainability and 
success of the National Flood Insurance Program, highlight 
innovative examples of mitigation incentives (including public 
private partnerships) across the country, and offer suggestions 
for how to overcome barriers that may prevent or deter 
mitigation from being utilized across the Federal Government.
    Witnesses: David Miller, Associate Administrator, Federal 
Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; 
Christopher Currie, Director, Emergency Management and National 
Preparedness Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office; 
Chad Berginnis, Executive Director, Association of State 
Floodplain Managers; Robert Detlefsen, Vice President of Public 
Policy, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, 
Testifying on behalf of the BuildStrong Coalition.

11. Wildfires: Assessing First Responder Training and Capabilities. 
        June 5, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-498)

    Given the increasing prevalence of wildfires, primarily in 
the Southwest and West, it is important that Congress takes a 
comprehensive look at the training and resources currently 
provided to firefighters and first responders in at-risk 
communities. The focus of the hearing was to bring together 
leaders from state, local, and Federal levels to assess present 
capabilities and discuss ways to ensure robust and adaptable 
fire prevention and response throughout the country.
    Witnesses: Jim Hubbard, Deputy Chief, U.S. Forest Service, 
U.S. Department of Agriculture; William Dougan, National 
President, National Federation of Federal Employees; Kevin 
O'Connor, Assistant to the General President for Public Policy, 
International Association of Firefighters; Hon. Mike Navarre, 
Mayor, Kenai Peninsula Borough

12. The Path to Efficiency: Making FEMA More Effective for Streamlined 
        Disaster Operations. July 24, 2014. (S. Hrg. 113-586)

    The focus of the hearing was to offer a systems-level 
examination of FEMA disaster-related programs. Specifically, 
the hearing discussed long-standing challenges to FEMA 
efficiency and performance, FEMA's recent efforts to find cost 
efficiencies and program improvements, as well as potential 
opportunities for additional improvements.
    Witnesses: Hon. John Roth, Inspector General, U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; Joseph Nimmich, Associate 
Administrator, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security; Christopher Currie, Director, Emergency Management 
and National Preparedness Issues, U.S. Government 
Accountability Office; Dr. Daniel Sutter, Professor of 
Economics, Johnson Center for Political Economy, Troy 
University.

                            III. Legislation

    The following bills were considered by the Subcommittee on 
Emergency Management, Intergovernmental Relations, and the 
District of Columbia during the 113th Congress:
    S. 1819--Emergency Information Improvement Act of 2013--A 
bill to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
Emergency Assistance Act to provide eligibility for public 
broadcasting facilities to receive certain disaster assistance, 
and for other purposes.
    S. 1396--A bill to authorize the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency to award mitigation financial assistance in 
certain areas by wildfire.

                            IV. GAO Reports

    The following reports were issued by the Government 
Accountability Office at the request of the Chairman/Ranking 
Member of the Subcommittee on Emergency Management, 
Intergovernmental Relations, and the District of Columbia 
during the 113th Congress:
    ``Federal Emergency Management Agency: Opportunities Exist 
to Strengthen Oversight of Administrative Costs for Major 
Disasters,'' GAO-15-65: Published: Dec 17, 2014.
    In addition, the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency 
Management, Intergovernmental Relations, and the District of 
Columbia requested/co-requested the following reports during 
the 113th Congress which are currently in progress:
    Review of the Federal Government's efforts to mitigate 
earthquake hazard risks; Co-request with Senators Carper and 
Feinstein.
    Review of State budgeting efforts for disaster relief; Co-
request with Senators Carper, Coburn, and McCaskill.
    Review of FEMA regulations and policies related to Federal 
recovery and disaster mitigation activities; Co-request with 
Senators Paul, Reed, Whitehouse, and Congressman Bennie 
Thompson.
    Review of the impact of post-Hurricane Katrina reforms on 
FEMA and disaster relief programs; Co-request with Senator 
Coburn, and Congressmen McCaul and Brooks.
                Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations


                          Chairman: Carl Levin


                  Ranking Minority Member: John McCain

    The following is the Activities Report of the Permanent 
Subcommittee on Investigations for the 113th Congress.

                        I. Historical Background


                      A. Subcommittee Jurisdiction

    The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations was originally 
authorized by Senate Resolution 189 on January 28, 1948. At its 
creation in 1948, the Subcommittee was part of the Committee on 
Expenditures in the Executive Departments. The Subcommittee's 
records and broad investigative jurisdiction over government 
operations and national security issues, however, actually 
antedate its creation, since it was given custody of the 
jurisdiction of the former Special Committee to Investigate the 
National Defense Program (the so-called ``War Investigating 
Committee'' or ``Truman Committee''), chaired by Senator Harry 
S. Truman during the Second World War and charged with exposing 
waste, fraud, and abuse in the war effort and war profiteering. 
Today, the Subcommittee is part of the Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\In 1952, the parent committee's name was changed to the 
Committee on Government Operations. It was changed again in early 1977, 
to the Committee on Governmental Affairs, and again in 2005, to the 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, its present 
title.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Subcommittee has had nine chairmen: Senators Homer 
Ferguson of Michigan (1948), Clyde R. Hoey of North Carolina 
(1949-1952), Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin (1953-1954), John 
L. McClellan of Arkansas (1955-1972), Henry M. Jackson of 
Washington (1973-1978), Sam Nunn of Georgia (1979-1980 and 
1987-1994), William V. Roth of Delaware (1981-1986 and 1995-
1996), Susan M. Collins of Maine (1997-2001); Norm Coleman of 
Minnesota (2003-2007); and Carl Levin of Michigan (2001-2002 
and 2007-2014).
    Until 1957, the Subcommittee's jurisdiction focused 
principally on waste, inefficiency, impropriety, and illegality 
in government operations. Its jurisdiction then expanded over 
time, today encompassing investigations within the broad ambit 
of the parent committee's responsibility for matters relating 
to the efficiency and economy of operations of all branches of 
the government, including matters related to: (a) waste, fraud, 
abuse, malfeasance, and unethical practices in government 
contracting and operations; (b) organized criminal activities 
affecting interstate or international commerce; (c) criminal 
activity affecting the national health, welfare, or safety, 
including investment fraud, commodity and securities fraud, 
computer fraud, and offshore abuses; (d) criminality or 
improper practices in labor-management relations; (e) the 
effectiveness of present national security methods, staffing 
and procedures, and U.S. relationships with international 
organizations concerned with national security; (f) energy 
shortages, energy pricing, management of government-owned or 
controlled energy supplies; and relationships with oil 
producing and consuming countries; and (g) the operations and 
management of Federal regulatory policies and programs. While 
retaining the status of a subcommittee of a standing committee, 
the Subcommittee has long exercised its authority on an 
independent basis, selecting its own staff, issuing its own 
subpoenas, and determining its own investigatory agenda.
    The Subcommittee acquired its sweeping jurisdiction in 
several successive stages. In 1957--based on information 
developed by the Subcommittee--the Senate passed a Resolution 
establishing a Select Committee on Improper Activities in the 
Labor or Management Field. Chaired by Senator McClellan, who 
also chaired the Subcommittee at that time, the Select 
Committee was composed of eight Senators--four of whom were 
drawn from the Subcommittee on Investigations and four from the 
Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. The Select Committee 
operated for 3 years, sharing office space, personnel, and 
other facilities with the Permanent Subcommittee. Upon its 
expiration in early 1960, the Select Committee's jurisdiction 
and files were transferred to the Subcommittee on 
Investigations, greatly enlarging the latter body's 
investigative authority in the labor-management area.
    The Subcommittee's jurisdiction expanded further during the 
1960s and 1970s. In 1961, for example, it received authority to 
make inquiries into matters pertaining to organized crime and, 
in 1963, held the famous Valachi hearings examining the inner 
workings of the Italian Mafia. In 1967, following a summer of 
riots and other civil disturbances, the Senate approved a 
Resolution directing the Subcommittee to investigate the causes 
of this disorder and to recommend corrective action. In January 
1973, the Subcommittee acquired its national security mandate 
when it merged with the National Security Subcommittee. With 
this merger, the Subcommittee's jurisdiction was broadened to 
include inquiries concerning the adequacy of national security 
staffing and procedures, relations with international 
organizations, technology transfer issues, and related matters. 
In 1974, in reaction to the gasoline shortages precipitated by 
the Arab-Israeli war of October 1973, the Subcommittee acquired 
jurisdiction to investigate the control and management of 
energy resources and supplies as well as energy pricing issues.
    In 1997, the full Committee on Governmental Affairs was 
charged by the Senate to conduct a special examination into 
illegal or improper activities in connection with Federal 
election campaigns during the 1996 election cycle. The 
Permanent Subcommittee provided substantial resources and 
assistance to this investigation, contributing to a greater 
public understanding of what happened, to subsequent criminal 
and civil legal actions taken against wrongdoers, and to 
enactment of campaign finance reforms in 2001.
    In 1998, the Subcommittee marked the fiftieth anniversary 
of the Truman Committee's conversion into a permanent 
subcommittee of the U.S. Senate.\2\ Since then, the 
Subcommittee has developed particular expertise in complex 
financial matters, examining the collapse of Enron Corporation 
in 2001, the key causes of the 2008 financial crisis, 
structured finance abuses, financial fraud, unfair credit 
practices, money laundering, commodity speculation, and a wide 
range of offshore and tax haven abuses. It has also focused on 
issues involving health care fraud, foreign corruption, and 
waste, fraud and abuse in government programs. In the half-
century of its existence, the Subcommittee's many successful 
investigations have made clear to the Senate the importance of 
retaining a standing investigatory body devoted to keeping 
government not only efficient and effective, but also honest 
and accountable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\This anniversary also marked the first date upon which internal 
Subcommittee records generally began to become available to the public. 
Unlike most standing committees of the Senate whose previously 
unpublished records open after a period of 20 years has elapsed, the 
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, as an investigatory body, may 
close its records for 50 years to protect personal privacy and the 
integrity of the investigatory process. With this 50th anniversary, the 
Subcommittee's earliest records, housed in the Center for Legislative 
Archives at the National Archives and Records Administration, began to 
open seriatim. The records of the predecessor committee--the Truman 
Committee--were opened by Senator Nunn in 1980.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     B. Subcommittee Investigations

    Armed with its broad jurisdictional mandate, the 
Subcommittee has conducted investigations into a wide variety 
of topics of public concern, ranging from financial misconduct, 
to commodities speculation, predatory lending, and tax evasion. 
Over the years, the Subcommittee has also conducted 
investigations into criminal wrongdoing, including money 
laundering, the narcotics trade, child pornography, labor 
racketeering, and organized crime activities. In addition, the 
Subcommittee has investigated a wide range of allegations of 
waste, fraud, and abuse in government programs and consumer 
protection issues, addressing problems ranging from unfair 
credit card practices to health care fraud. In the 113th 
Congress, the Subcommittee held eight hearings and issued ten 
reports on a wide range of issues, including bank misconduct, 
hidden offshore bank accounts, corporate tax avoidance, online 
advertising abuses, conflicts of interest affecting the stock 
market, missteps in processing 501(c)(4) applications for tax-
exempt status, defense acquisition problems, and inappropriate 
bank involvement with physical commodities.

(1) Historical Highlights
    The Subcommittee's investigatory record as a permanent 
Senate body began under the Chairmanship of Republican Senator 
Homer Ferguson and his Chief Counsel (and future Attorney 
General and Secretary of State) William P. Rogers, as the 
Subcommittee inherited the Truman Committee's role in 
investigating fraud and waste in U.S. Government operations. 
This investigative work became particularly colorful under the 
chairmanship of Senator Clyde Hoey, a North Carolina Democrat 
who took the chair from Senator Ferguson after the 1948 
elections. The last U.S. Senator to wear a long frock coat and 
wing-tipped collar, Mr. Hoey was a distinguished southern 
gentleman of the old school. Under his leadership, the 
Subcommittee won national attention for its investigation of 
the so-called ``five percenters,'' notorious Washington 
lobbyists who charged their clients five percent of the profits 
from any Federal contracts they obtained on the client's 
behalf. Given the Subcommittee's jurisdictional inheritance 
from the Truman Committee, it is perhaps ironic that the ``five 
percenters'' investigation raised allegations of bribery and 
influence-peddling that reached right into the White House and 
implicated members of President Truman's staff. In any event, 
the fledgling Subcommittee was off to a rapid start.
    What began as colorful soon became contentious. When 
Republicans returned to the Majority in the Senate in 1953, 
Wisconsin's junior Senator, Joseph R. McCarthy, became the 
Subcommittee's Chairman. Two years earlier, as Ranking Minority 
Member, Senator McCarthy had arranged for another Republican 
Senator, Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, to be removed from the 
Subcommittee. Senator Smith's offense, in Senator McCarthy's 
eyes, was her issuance of a ``Declaration of Conscience'' 
repudiating those who made unfounded charges and used character 
assassination against their political opponents. Although 
Senator Smith had carefully declined to name any specific 
offender, her remarks were universally recognized as criticism 
of Senator McCarthy's accusations that communists had 
infiltrated the State Department and other government agencies. 
Senator McCarthy retaliated by engineering Senator Smith's 
removal, replacing her with the newly-elected Senator from 
California, Richard Nixon.
    Upon becoming Subcommittee Chairman, Senator McCarthy 
staged a series of highly publicized anti-communist 
investigations, culminating in an inquiry into communism within 
the U.S. Army, which became known as the Army-McCarthy 
hearings. During the latter portion of those hearings, in which 
the parent Committee examined the Wisconsin Senator's attacks 
on the Army, Senator McCarthy recused himself, leaving South 
Dakota Senator Karl Mundt to serve as Acting Chairman of the 
Subcommittee. Gavel-to-gavel television coverage of the 
hearings helped turn the tide against Senator McCarthy by 
raising public concern about his treatment of witnesses and 
cavalier use of evidence. In December 1954, the Senate censured 
Senator McCarthy for unbecoming conduct. In the following year, 
the Subcommittee adopted new rules of procedure that better 
protected the rights of witnesses. The Subcommittee also 
strengthened the rules ensuring the right of both parties on 
the Subcommittee to appoint staff, initiate and approve 
investigations, and review all information in the 
Subcommittee's possession.
    In 1955, Senator John McClellan of Arkansas began 18 years 
of service as Chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on 
Investigations. Senator McClellan appointed a young Robert F. 
Kennedy as the Subcommittee's Chief Counsel. That same year, 
Members of the Subcommittee were joined by Members of the 
Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee on a special 
committee to investigate labor racketeering. Chaired by Senator 
McClellan and staffed by Robert Kennedy and other Subcommittee 
staff members, this special committee directed much of its 
attention to criminal influence over the Teamsters Union, most 
famously calling Teamsters' leaders Dave Beck and Jimmy Hoffa 
to testify. The televised hearings of the special committee 
also introduced Senators Barry Goldwater and John F. Kennedy to 
the nation, as well as leading to passage of the Landrum-
Griffin Labor Act.
    After the special committee completed its work, the 
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations continued to 
investigate organized crime. In 1962, the Subcommittee held 
hearings during which Joseph Valachi outlined the activities of 
La Cosa Nostra, or the Mafia. Former Subcommittee staffer 
Robert Kennedy--who had by then become Attorney General in his 
brother's Administration--used this information to prosecute 
prominent mob leaders and their accomplices. The Subcommittee's 
investigations also led to passage of major legislation against 
organized crime, most notably the Racketeer Influenced and 
Corrupt Organizations (RICO) provisions of the Crime Control 
Act of 1970. Under Chairman McClellan, the Subcommittee also 
investigated fraud in the purchase of military uniforms, 
corruption in the Department of Agriculture's grain storage 
program, securities fraud, and civil disorders and acts of 
terrorism. In addition, from 1962 to 1970, the Subcommittee 
conducted an extensive probe of political interference in the 
awarding of government contracts for the Pentagon's ill-fated 
TFX (``tactical fighter, experimental'') aircraft. In 1968, the 
Subcommittee also examined charges of corruption in U.S. 
servicemen's clubs in Vietnam and elsewhere around the world.
    In 1973, Senator Henry ``Scoop'' Jackson, a Democrat from 
Washington, replaced Senator McClellan as the Subcommittee's 
Chairman. During his tenure, recalled Chief Clerk Ruth Young 
Watt--who served in this position from the Subcommittee's 
founding until her retirement in 1979--Ranking Minority Member 
Charles Percy, an Illinois Republican, became more active on 
the Subcommittee than Chairman Jackson, who was often 
distracted by his Chairmanship of the Interior Committee and 
his active role on the Armed Services Committee.\3\ Senator 
Percy also worked closely with Georgia Democrat Sam Nunn, a 
Subcommittee member who subsequently succeeded Senator Jackson 
as Subcommittee Chairman in 1979. As Chairman, Senator Nunn 
continued the Subcommittee's investigations into the role of 
organized crime in labor-management relations and also 
investigated pension fraud.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\It had not been uncommon in the Subcommittee's history for the 
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member to work together closely despite 
partisan differences, but Senator Percy was unusually active while in 
the Minority--a role that included his chairing an investigation of the 
hearing aid industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regular reversals of political fortunes in the Senate 
during the 1980s and 1990s saw Senator Nunn trade the 
chairmanship three times with Delaware Republican William Roth. 
Senator Nunn served from 1979 to 1980 and again from 1987 to 
1995, while Senator Roth served from 1981 to 1986, and again 
from 1995 to 1996. These 15 years saw a strengthening of the 
Subcommittee's bipartisan tradition in which investigations 
were initiated by either the Majority or Minority and fully 
supported by the entire Subcommittee. For his part, Senator 
Roth led a wide range of investigations into commodity 
investment fraud, offshore banking schemes, money laundering, 
and child pornography. Senator Nunn led inquiries into Federal 
drug policy, the global spread of chemical and biological 
weapons, abuses in Federal student aid programs, computer 
security, airline safety, and health care fraud. Senator Nunn 
also appointed the Subcommittee's first female counsel, 
Eleanore Hill, who served as Chief Counsel to the Minority from 
1982 to 1986 and then as Chief Counsel from 1987 to 1995.
    Strong bipartisan traditions continued in the 105th 
Congress when, in January 1997, Republican Senator Susan 
Collins of Maine became the first woman to chair the Permanent 
Subcommittee on Investigations. Senator John Glenn of Ohio 
became the Ranking Minority Member, while also serving as 
Ranking Minority Member of the full Committee. Two years later, 
in the 106th Congress, after Senator Glenn's retirement, 
Michigan Democrat Carl Levin succeeded him as the 
Subcommittee's Ranking Minority Member. During Senator Collins' 
chairmanship, the Subcommittee conducted investigations into 
issues affecting Americans in their day-to-day lives, including 
mortgage fraud, deceptive mailings and sweepstakes promotions, 
phony credentials obtained through the Internet, day trading of 
securities, and securities fraud on the Internet. Senator Levin 
initiated an investigation into money laundering. At his 
request, in 1999, the Subcommittee held hearings on money 
laundering issues affecting private banking services provided 
to wealthy individuals, and, in 2001, on how major U.S. banks 
providing correspondent accounts to offshore banks were being 
used to advance money laundering and other criminal schemes.
    During the 107th Congress, both Senator Collins and Senator 
Levin chaired the Subcommittee. Senator Collins was chairman 
until June 2001, when the Senate Majority party changed hands; 
at that point, Senator Levin assumed the chairmanship and 
Senator Collins, in turn, became the Ranking Minority Member. 
In her first six months chairing the Subcommittee at the start 
of the 107th Congress, Senator Collins held hearings examining 
issues related to cross border fraud, the improper operation of 
tissue banks, and Federal programs designed to fight diabetes. 
When Senator Levin assumed the chairmanship, as his first major 
effort, the Subcommittee initiated an 18-month bipartisan 
investigation into the Enron Corporation, which had collapsed 
into bankruptcy. As part of that investigation, the 
Subcommittee reviewed over 2 million pages of documents, 
conducted more than 100 interviews, held four hearings, and 
issued three bipartisan reports focusing on the role played by 
Enron's Board of Directors, Enron's use of tax shelters and 
structured financial instruments, and how major U.S. financial 
institutions contributed to Enron's accounting deceptions, 
corporate abuses, and ultimate collapse. The Subcommittee's 
investigative work contributed to passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley 
Act which enacted accounting and corporate reforms in July 
2002. In addition, Senator Levin continued the money laundering 
investigation initiated while he was the Ranking Minority 
Member, and the Subcommittee's work contributed to enactment of 
major reforms strengthening U.S. anti-money laundering laws in 
the 2001 Patriot Act. Also during the 107th Congress, the 
Subcommittee opened new investigations into offshore tax 
abuses, border security, and abusive practices related to the 
pricing of gasoline and other fuels.
    In January 2003, at the start of the 108th Congress, after 
the Senate Majority party again changed hands, Senator Collins 
was elevated to Chairman of the full Committee on Governmental 
Affairs, and Republican Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota 
became Chairman of the Subcommittee. Over the next two years, 
Senator Coleman held hearings on topics of national and global 
concern including illegal file sharing on peer-to-peer 
networks, abusive practices in the credit counseling industry, 
the dangers of purchasing pharmaceuticals over the Internet, 
SARS preparedness, border security, and how Saddam Hussein 
abused the United Nations Oil for Food Program. At the request 
of Senator Levin, then Ranking Minority Member, the 
Subcommittee also examined how some U.S. accounting firms, 
banks, investment firms, and tax lawyers were designing, 
promoting, and implementing abusive tax shelters across the 
country; and how some U.S. financial institutions were failing 
to comply with anti-money laundering controls mandated by the 
Patriot Act, using as a case history Riggs Bank accounts 
involving Augusto Pinochet, the former President of Chile, and 
Equatorial Guinea, an oil-rich country in Africa.
    During the 109th Congress, Senator Coleman held additional 
hearings on abuses associated with the United Nation's Oil for 
Food Program, and initiated a series of hearings on Federal 
contractors who were paid with taxpayer dollars but failed to 
meet their own tax obligations, resulting in billions of 
dollars in unpaid taxes. He also held hearings on border 
security issues, securing the global supply chain, Federal 
travel abuses, abusive tax refund loans, and unfair energy 
pricing. At Senator Levin's request, the Subcommittee held 
hearings on offshore tax abuses responsible for $100 billion in 
unpaid taxes each year, and on U.S. vulnerabilities caused by 
states forming 2 million companies each year with hidden 
owners.

(2) More Recent Investigations
    During the 110th Congress, in January 2007, after the 
Senate majority shifted, Senator Levin once again became 
Subcommittee Chairman, while Senator Coleman became the Ranking 
Minority Member. Senator Levin chaired the Subcommittee for the 
next seven years. He focused the Subcommittee on investigations 
into complex financial and tax matters, including unfair credit 
card practices, executive stock option abuses, excessive 
speculation in the natural gas and crude oil markets, and 
offshore tax abuses involving tax haven banks and non-U.S. 
persons dodging payment of U.S. taxes on U.S. stock dividends. 
The Subcommittee's work contributed to enactment of two 
landmark bills, the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility 
and Disclosure Act (Credit CARD Act) which reformed credit card 
practices, and the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) 
which tackled the problem of hidden offshore bank accounts used 
by U.S. persons to dodge U.S. taxes. At the request of Senator 
Coleman, the Subcommittee also conducted bipartisan 
investigations into Medicare and Medicaid health care providers 
who cheat on their taxes, fraudulent Medicare claims involving 
deceased doctors or inappropriate diagnosis codes, U.S. dirty 
bomb vulnerabilities, Federal payroll tax abuses, abusive 
practices involving transit benefits, and problems involving 
the United Nations Development Program.
    During the 111th Congress, Senator Levin continued as 
Subcommittee Chairman, while Senator Tom Coburn joined the 
Subcommittee as its Ranking Minority Member. During the 111th 
Congress, the Subcommittee dedicated much of its resources to a 
bipartisan investigation into key causes of the 2008 financial 
crisis, looking in particular at the role of high risk home 
loans, regulatory failures, inflated credit ratings, and high-
risk, conflicts-ridden financial products designed and sold by 
investment banks. The Subcommittee held four hearings and 
released thousands of documents. The Subcommittee's work 
contributed to passage of another landmark financial reform 
bill, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection 
Act of 2010. In addition, the Subcommittee held hearings on 
excessive speculation in the wheat market, tax haven banks that 
helped U.S. clients evade U.S. taxes, how to keep foreign 
corruption out of the United States, and social security 
disability fraud.
    During the 112th Congress, Senator Levin and Senator Coburn 
continued in their respective roles as Chairman and Ranking 
Minority Member of the Subcommittee. In a series of bipartisan 
investigations, the Subcommittee examined how a global banking 
giant, HSBC, exposed the U.S. financial system to an array of 
money laundering, drug trafficking, and terrorist financing 
risks due to poor anti-money laundering controls; how two U.S. 
multinational corporations engaged in offshore tax abuses, 
including how Microsoft shifted profits offshore to dodge U.S. 
taxes, and Hewlett Packard secretly brought offshore funds back 
home without paying taxes by utilizing abusive short term loan 
schemes; and how excessive commodity speculation by mutual 
funds and others were taking place without Dodd-Frank 
safeguards such as position limits being put into effect. At 
the request of Senator Coburn, the Subcommittee also conducted 
bipartisan investigations into problems with Social Security 
disability determinations that, due to poor procedures, 
perfunctory hearings, and poor quality decisions, resulted in 
over 1 in 5 disability cases containing errors or inadequate 
justifications; how DHS state and local intelligence fusion 
centers failed to yield significant, useful information to 
support Federal counterterrorism efforts; and how certain 
Federal contractors that received taxpayer dollars through 
stimulus funding nevertheless failed to pay their Federal 
taxes.
    During the 113th Congress, Senator Levin continued as 
Chairman, while Senator John McCain joined the Subcommittee as 
its Ranking Minority Member. They continued to strengthen the 
Subcommittee's strong bipartisan traditions, conducting all 
investigations in a bipartisan manner. During the 113th 
Congress, the Subcommittee held eight hearings and released ten 
reports on a variety of investigations. The investigations 
examined high risk credit derivatives trades at JPMorgan; 
hidden offshore accounts opened for U.S. clients by Credit 
Suisse in Switzerland; corporate tax avoidance in case studies 
involving Apple, Caterpillar, and a structured financial 
product known as basket options; online advertising abuses; 
conflicts of interest affecting the stock market and high speed 
trading; IRS processing of 501(c)(4) applications; defense 
acquisition reforms; and bank involvement with physical 
commodities. At the end of the 113th Congress, Senator Levin 
retired from the Senate.

          II. Subcommittee Hearings During the 113th Congress


A. JPMorgan Chase Whale Trades: A Case History of Derivatives Risks & 
        Abuse (March 13, 2013)

    The Subcommittee's first hearing in the 113th Congress 
focused on high risk credit derivative trades which were 
undertaken by JPMorgan Chase out of its London office and which 
were responsible for losses totaling more than $6.2 billion. 
The trades used funds supplied by JPMorgan's Chief Investment 
Office (CIO), including federally insured deposits from the 
bank. The trades were conducted by a JPMorgan London trader 
whose transactions were so large that they triggered 
speculation over who was behind the ``whale'' trades and whose 
identity was unmasked by the media.
    The Subcommittee investigation determined that, over the 
course of the first quarter of 2012, the CIO used a ``Synthetic 
Credit Portfolio'' to knowingly engage in high stakes 
derivatives trading involving a mix of complex credit 
derivatives. The investigation found that JPMorgan mismarked 
its trading book to hide increasing portfolio losses; 
disregarded multiple indicators of increasing risk; breached 
five different risk limits; manipulated risk models to 
eliminate or prevent those breaches; dodged regulatory 
oversight; and misinformed investors, regulators, and the 
public about what happened. The investigation exposed not only 
high risk activities and abuses at JPMorgan Chase, but also 
broader, systemic problems related to the valuation, risk 
analysis, disclosure, and oversight of synthetic credit 
derivatives. The evidence also disproved the assertion that 
credit derivatives inherently lower financial risk.
    In March 2013, the Subcommittee released a bipartisan 
report and held a hearing detailing the JPMorgan Chase whale 
trades. The first panel of witnesses consisted of three senior 
JPMorgan Chase Bank officers, Ina Drew, former head of the CIO; 
Ashley Bacon, acting Chief Risk Officer; and Peter Weiland, 
former head of Market Risk for the CIO. They discussed the 
nature of the whale trades, risk management practices, and how 
the bank handled the increasing losses. The second panel of 
witnesses presented testimony from Michael J. Cavanagh, who 
headed a JPMorgan task force reviewing the CIO losses and also 
served as co-head of JPMorgan Chase's corporate and investment 
bank; and Douglas Braunstein, former JPMorgan Chief Financial 
Officer and then Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors. They 
discussed bank oversight of the whale trades, JPMorgan's 
interaction with regulators, and information provided by the 
bank to the public and investors. The third panel included 
Thomas Curry, Comptroller of the Currency and primary regulator 
of JPMorgan Chase Bank; Scott Waterhouse, Federal Examiner-in-
Charge at JPMorgan Chase Bank; and Michael Sullivan, Deputy 
Comptroller for Risk Analysis at the Office of the Comptroller 
of the Currency (OCC). They discussed JPMorgan's failure to 
disclose the existence of the Synthetic Credit Portfolio, the 
bank's lack of cooperation with regulators, and the regulators' 
failure to detect the high risk portfolio as well as systemic 
problems with derivative valuation and risk management.
    JPMorgan later paid civil fines totaling $1 billion for 
misstating its financial results, engaging in unsafe and 
unsound banking practices, and manipulating the credit market. 
Two of its traders were indicted for hiding losses, but have 
resisted standing trial. The London whale trading abuses 
resulted in stronger implementing regulations for the Volcker 
Rule to prevent federally insured banks and their subsidiaries 
from engaging in proprietary trading disguised as risk-reducing 
hedges. Federal regulators also clarified that banks may not 
change their derivative valuation methodologies to hide losses, 
and that U.S. derivatives requirements apply to a U.S. bank's 
foreign branches as well as its domestic branches. U.S. and 
international regulatory bodies also reviewed issues related to 
the manipulation of bank risk models for derivatives 
activities.

B. Offshore Profit Shifting and the U.S. Tax Code--Part 2 (Apple, Inc.) 
        (May 21, 2013)

    The Subcommittee's second hearing was the latest in a 
Subcommittee series on corporate offshore profit shifting, and 
focused on a case study involving a leading U.S. multinational 
corporation, Apple Inc. For the last decade, the Subcommittee 
has examined how multinational corporations and wealthy 
individuals use offshore tax schemes to dodge U.S. taxes, 
leaving other taxpayers to make up the difference. According to 
the Congressional Research Service, the share of corporate 
income taxes in the United States has fallen from a high of 32 
percent of Federal tax revenue in 1952, to less than 10 percent 
in 2012. Meanwhile, payroll taxes--which almost every working 
American must pay--have increased from 10 percent of Federal 
revenue to 35 percent.
    In May 2013, the Subcommittee investigation released a 
bipartisan memorandum and held a hearing showing how Apple Inc. 
established three Irish subsidiaries with no tax residency 
anywhere, ran those subsidiaries from the United States, and 
shifted more than $74 billion in profits over four years to 
Ireland while dodging payment of U.S. taxes. The Irish 
subsidiaries, Apple Operations International, Apple Sales 
International, and Apple Operations Europe, were controlled by 
the U.S. parent company, Apple Inc. Since Ireland bases tax 
jurisdiction over companies that are managed and controlled in 
Ireland, and the United States bases tax residency on where a 
company is incorporated, Apple exploited the gap between the 
two, and its subsidiaries failed to file an income tax return 
in either country, or any other country, for at least five 
years. One did pay taxes in Ireland on a tiny fraction of its 
income, resulting, for example, in an effective 2011 Irish tax 
rate of only five hundreds of one percent. The hearing also 
showed that, in addition to creating non-tax resident foreign 
affiliates, Apple Inc. utilized U.S. tax loopholes to avoid 
U.S. taxes on $44 billion in otherwise taxable offshore income 
over four years.
    The hearing heard from three panels of witnesses. The first 
panel consisted of two international corporate tax experts, 
Stephen E. Shay, former head of international tax policy at the 
U.S. Department of the Treasury and professor at Harvard Law 
School; and J. Richard Harvey, professor of law at Villanova 
University School of Law. Both criticized actions taken by 
Apple to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. The second panel presented 
testimony from three senior Apple executives, Timothy D. Cook, 
the CEO; Peter Oppenheimer, the Chief Financial Officer; and 
Phillip A. Bullock, the head of Tax Operations. All three 
defended Apple's actions, but admitted the company had formed 
three Irish subsidiaries with no tax residency anywhere. The 
third panel consisted of Mark J. Mazur, Treasury Assistant 
Secretary for Tax Policy, and Samuel M. Maruca, Director of 
Transfer Pricing Operations in the Large Business & 
International Division at the Internal Revenue Service. While 
neither would comment on the Apple case in particular, both 
expressed concerns about corporate tax loopholes that enabled 
U.S. companies to avoid payment of U.S. taxes.
    The bipartisan memorandum released by the Subcommittee 
offered recommendations to strengthen U.S. transfer pricing 
rules and reform the so-called ``check-the-box'' and ``look-
through'' loopholes that enable multinationals to shield 
offshore income from U.S. taxes. As a result of this and other 
examples of multinational corporate tax abuse, in 2013, G8 
world leaders called for an end to offshore corporate profit 
shifting and initiated international efforts to stop 
multinational corporate tax avoidance. G8 leaders also reached 
consensus on the need for an international template for 
multinational corporations to disclose their tax payments on a 
country-by-country basis. In addition, Ireland changed its law 
to prevent multinational corporations from establishing Irish 
subsidiaries with no tax residency in any country.

C. Offshore Tax Evasion: The Effort to Collect Unpaid Taxes on Billions 
        In Hidden Offshore Accounts (February 26, 2014)

    The Subcommittee's next hearing built upon two earlier 
hearings, held by the Subcommittee in 2008 and 2009, showing 
how well-known international banks, located in secrecy 
jurisdictions and tax havens, were deliberately helping U.S. 
clients cheat on their taxes by opening offshore accounts never 
reported to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), despite U.S. 
laws requiring their disclosure. The earlier hearings focused, 
in part, on UBS, Switzerland's largest bank, which made a 
dramatic admission at the 2008 hearing that it had facilitated 
tax evasion by opening undisclosed Swiss accounts for U.S. 
clients. After the hearing, in 2009, UBS signed a deferred 
prosecution agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) 
on charges of conspiring to defraud the United States by 
impeding U.S. tax collection, paid a $780 million fine, 
disclosed the names of some U.S. clients with hidden Swiss 
accounts, and agreed to no longer provide U.S. clients with 
undeclared Swiss accounts.
    In February 2014, the Subcommittee released a bipartisan 
report and held a hearing on how Credit Suisse, Switzerland's 
second largest bank, engaged in similar conduct and delayed 
closing Swiss accounts for some U.S. clients for up to five 
years. The Subcommittee investigation disclosed that, at its 
peak, Credit Suisse had over 22,000 U.S. customers with Swiss 
accounts containing more than 12 billion Swiss francs, which 
translated into $10 to $12 billion U.S. dollars. Nearly 1,500 
of those accounts were opened in the names of offshore shell 
companies to hide U.S. ownership. Another nearly 2,000 were 
opened at Clariden Leu, Credit Suisse's own private bank. 
Almost 10,000 were serviced by a special Credit Suisse branch 
at the Zurich airport which enabled clients to fly in to do 
their banking without leaving airport grounds. One client 
disclosed that, at Credit Suisse headquarters in Zurich, he was 
ushered into a remotely controlled elevator with no floor 
buttons, and escorted into a bare room with white walls to 
conduct his banking transactions, all dramatizing the bank's 
focus on secrecy.
    In addition to disclosing Credit Suisse's actions, the 
investigation criticized DOJ for failing to use U.S. legal 
tools, such as grand jury subpoenas and John Doe summonses, to 
obtain the names of U.S. tax evaders with hidden Credit Suisse 
accounts, choosing instead to file Swiss treaty requests with 
little success. The investigation noted that, over a five-year 
period, due to Swiss secrecy laws, DOJ had obtained 
information, including U.S. client names, for only 238 
undeclared Swiss accounts out of the tens of thousands that 
Credit Suisse opened. The hearing criticized DOJ for its slow 
enforcement efforts to collect unpaid taxes on funds held 
offshore, and hold accountable the tax evaders, banks, and 
bankers involved.
    The hearing heard from two panels of witnesses. The first 
consisted of senior officers from Credit Suisse, including 
Brady Dougan, the CEO; Romeo Cerutti, the General Counsel; and 
Hans-Ulrich Meiser and Robert Shafir, co-heads of the Private 
Banking and Wealth Management division. While the officers 
admitted that the bank had moved too slowly to close the hidden 
Swiss accounts, they also asserted that the misconduct was the 
result of rogue bankers rather than bank policy. The second 
panel of witnesses consisted of James M. Cole, Deputy Attorney 
General at DOJ, and Kathryn M. Keneally, Assistant Attorney 
General for the Tax Division. Both defended DOJ's use of Swiss 
treaty requests instead of U.S. discovery tools to obtain 
accountholder names, DOJ's failure to request the extradition 
of any of the seven Credit Suisse bankers indicted in 2011 for 
facilitating tax evasion, and DOJ's failure to obtain the names 
of thousands of U.S. tax evaders with hidden Credit Suisse 
accounts.
    After the hearing, Credit Suisse entered a guilty plea to 
DOJ charges of aiding and abetting U.S. tax evasion, and paid a 
$2.6 billion penalty, including $1.8 billion to DOJ, $100 
million to the Federal Reserve, and $715 million to the New 
York State Department of Financial Services. Credit Suisse also 
paid a $196 million fine to the U.S. Securities and Exchange 
Commission for providing broker-dealer and investment advisory 
services to U.S. clients without first registering with the 
agency. In addition, in July 2014, the Foreign Account Tax 
Compliance Act (FATCA), inspired in part by Subcommittee 
hearings on secret offshore accounts, took effect and made it 
more difficult to conceal offshore accounts opened for U.S. 
clients in the future.

D. Caterpillar's Offshore Tax Strategy (April 1, 2014)

    The Subcommittee's next hearing was another in its series 
of hearings on corporate offshore profit shifting, this time 
focused on a case study involving Caterpillar Inc., an American 
manufacturer of heavy equipment. As explained earlier, for the 
last decade, the Subcommittee has examined how multinational 
corporations and wealthy individuals have been using offshore 
tax schemes to dodge U.S. taxes, leaving other taxpayers to 
make up the difference.
    In April 2014, the Subcommittee held a hearing and issued a 
majority staff report examining how Caterpillar Inc. shifted $8 
billion in profits from its foreign parts business--a business 
run primarily from the United States--to a Swiss affiliate to 
avoid paying $2.4 billion in U.S. taxes to date. The case 
history showed that, in 1999, Caterpillar paid its accountant, 
PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC), over $55 million to develop and 
implement the offshore tax strategy. The strategy called for 
Caterpillar Inc. to issue a license to one of its Swiss 
affiliates, Caterpillar SARL, to sell Caterpillar parts 
worldwide. The parts license changed almost nothing in the 
actual functioning of Caterpillar's parts business. Its Swiss 
affiliate lacked the personnel, infrastructure, and expertise 
to actually run the worldwide parts operation and instead 
simply paid Caterpillar Inc. to continue running the business. 
The Swiss affiliate also paid Caterpillar Inc. a ``royalty 
payment'' equal to about 15 percent of the parts profits, while 
attributing the remaining profits to Switzerland. The result 
was that Caterpillar switched from reporting 85 percent or more 
of its foreign parts profits on its U.S. tax return to 
reporting 85 percent of more of those same profits on its Swiss 
tax return, subject to at a negotiated effective Swiss tax rate 
of 4 percent to 6 percent. PWC, in its role as independent 
accountant for the company, approved Caterpillar's use of the 
offshore tax strategy, essentially auditing the very tax 
strategy it had developed and sold to the company.
    Although Caterpillar had spent 90 years working to build up 
its international parts business, Caterpillar gave its Swiss 
affiliate the license to sell its parts worldwide without 
requiring any compensation for developing the business. In an 
arm's length transaction, no company would turn over a 
profitable business that took decades to develop without 
receiving compensation. Nor would a business relinquish 85 
percent of the ongoing profits from that business in exchange 
for 15 percent of the profits. But that was the arrangement 
Caterpillar entered into with its affiliate. The result was 
that, from 2000 to 2012, the Swiss tax strategy shifted $8 
billion in profits from Caterpillar Inc. to its Swiss 
affiliate, cutting Caterpillar's U.S. tax bill by $2.4 billion. 
Caterpillar's actions provided additional evidence of the need 
to close unjustified U.S. corporate tax loopholes that enable 
profitable corporations to avoid paying U.S. taxes.
    The hearing heard from three panels of witnesses. The first 
panel consisted of two international corporate tax experts, 
Reuven S. Avi-Yonah, the Irwin I. Cohn Professor Law at the 
University of Michigan School of Law, and Bret Wells, Assistant 
Professor of Law at the University of Houston Law Center. Both 
criticized Caterpillar's offshore tax strategy as an improper 
attempt to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. The second panel of 
witnesses presented testimony from three PWC accountants who 
helped develop and implement Caterpillar's Swiss tax strategy, 
Thomas F. Quinn, TWC tax partner; Steven R. Williams, PWC 
managing director; and James G. Bowers, PWC tax partner. All 
three defended the company's use of the PWC-developed tax 
strategy and denied that PWC had a conflict of interest in 
developing, selling, auditing, and approving use of that tax 
strategy. The third panel consisted of three senior Caterpillar 
officers, Robin D. Beran, Chief Tax Officer; Rodney Perkins, 
former Senior International Tax Manager; and Julie A. Lagacy, 
Vice President from the Finance Services Division. All three 
defended Caterpillar's use of its offshore tax strategy and 
shifting its parts profits from the United States to 
Switzerland.
    Caterpillar's actions, as well as other examples of 
multinational corporate tax abuse, contributed to G8 world 
leaders, in 2013, calling for an end to offshore profit 
shifting and initiating international efforts to stop 
multinational corporate tax avoidance. G8 leaders also reached 
consensus on the need for an international template for 
multinational corporations to disclose their tax payments on a 
country-by-country basis. In addition, the Public Company 
Accounting Oversight Board initiated a review of the propriety 
of an independent accounting firm auditing an offshore tax 
strategy that the firm sold to its client.

E. Online Advertising and Hidden Hazards to Consumer Security and Data 
        Privacy (May 15, 2014)

    The Subcommittee's next hearing addressed a new 
investigative topic initiated by Ranking Member John McCain 
related to data privacy. In May 2014, the Subcommittee held a 
hearing and released a bipartisan report examining how current 
online advertising practices expose online consumers to hidden 
hazards, including data breaches, malware attacks, and other 
cybercrimes.
    In 2013, U.S. online advertising revenues for the first 
time surpassed that of broadcast television advertising as 
companies spent $42.8 billion to reach consumers. The hearing 
examined the enormous complexity of the online advertising 
ecosystem, including the many parties involved in delivering a 
single ad. The investigation showed that a simple display of an 
online advertisement can trigger consumer interactions with a 
chain of other companies, many of which are unknown to the 
consumer and each of which could compromise the consumer's 
privacy or become a source of vulnerability for cybercriminals. 
In one instance, for example, the investigation found that 
visiting a popular tabloid news website triggered a user 
interaction with some 352 other web servers as well. On radio 
or television, the content of an advertisement is generally 
transmitted by the same party that hosts the rest of the 
content on the station. In contrast, host websites commonly 
sell ad space on their sites through an intermediary company, 
most often associated with a well-known tech company. The 
intermediary--often referred to as an ad network or exchange--
typically directs an internet user's browser to display an 
advertisement from a server controlled by neither the ad 
network nor the original host website. The investigation 
disclosed that host websites often do not select and cannot 
predict which intermediary advertising networks will deliver 
advertisements to consumers visiting their sites, exposing 
consumers to unmanaged risks. Today, most ad networks also have 
limited control over the content of the advertisements whose 
placements they facilitate.
    The growth of online advertising has also brought with it a 
rise in cybercriminals attempting to use mainstream websites to 
infect consumers' computers with advertisement-based malware or 
``malvertising.'' Some estimates indicate that malvertising 
increased over 200 percent in 2013, to over 209,000 incidents 
generating over 12.4 billion malicious ad impressions. A recent 
study found that more than half of internet website publishers 
have suffered a malware attack through a malicious 
advertisement. The report detailed examples in which consumers 
were subjected to malicious software delivered through the 
online advertising network. The complexity and many 
vulnerabilities of the online advertising ecosystem also made 
it difficult for individual industry participants to adopt 
effective long-term security countermeasures. The investigation 
disclosed that host websites often operate under voluntary 
compliance regimes or contractual arrangements that are 
ineffective, unreliable, or poorly enforced. In addition, as 
the online advertising industry grows more complex, it is also 
becoming more difficult to ascertain responsibility when 
consumers are hurt by malicious advertising or data collection. 
Moreover, there is currently no standard reporting requirement 
that informs the public when an ad network is compromised by 
malware or cybercriminals. The lack of accountability and 
disclosure requirements in online advertising may lead to lax 
security regimes, creating serious vulnerabilities for Internet 
users. The investigation determined that the Federal Trade 
Commission also needs tools to protect consumers from online 
advertising abuses.
    The hearing heard from two panels of witnesses. The first 
panel consisted of three individuals with industry experience 
in online advertising problems and data privacy threats. They 
included Alex Stamos, Chief Information Security Officer for 
Yahoo! Inc.; George F. Salem, Senior Product Manager for Google 
Inc., and Craig Spiezle, Executive Director, founder and 
President of Online Trust Alliance. All three discussed 
instances of malicious online advertising and what is being 
done and can be done by the private sector to protect online 
consumers. The second panel heard from Maneesha Mithal, Federal 
Trade Commission Associate Director for the Division of Privacy 
and Identity Protection; and Lou Mastria, Managing Director of 
the Digital Advertising Alliance. Both discussed the 
development of standards and procedures to protect online 
consumers from malicious online advertising and the need for 
stronger FTC tools to combat online advertising abuses.

F. Conflicts of Interest, Investor Loss of Confidence, and High Speed 
        Trading in U.S. Stock Markets (June 17, 2014)

    The Subcommittee's next hearing focused on conflicts of 
interest affecting how stock brokers place trading orders in 
U.S. stock markets, including for high speed traders. The 
conflicts arise from millions of dollars in opaque payments 
made to brokers in order to attract client orders, including 
``payments for order flow'' made by wholesale brokers to retail 
brokers, and so-called ``maker-taker'' rebates and fees paid by 
trading venues to broker dealers, both of which created 
incentives for brokers to put their financial interests before 
those of their clients, fueling public distrust of U.S. stock 
markets.
    The June 2014 hearing examined both conflicts of interest 
affecting broker placement of trading orders. The first 
conflict, involving payment for order flow, arose when a retail 
broker chose a wholesale broker to execute client trades and 
accepted payment from that wholesale broker for placing those 
orders. One reason wholesale brokers pay for order flow is to 
enable the wholesale broker to fill the orders out of its own 
inventory and profit from the trades. The Subcommittee 
investigation determined that payments from wholesale to retail 
brokers can add up to millions of dollars, yet were rarely 
disclosed or passed on to retail customers. The second conflict 
of interest, involving maker-taker rebates and fees, arose when 
a broker decided to place client orders on a trading venue 
rather than with a wholesale broker, and chose the venue based 
upon the broker's financial interest, rather than on best 
execution for its clients. Under the maker-taker system, when a 
broker makes an offer on a venue to buy or sell a stock at a 
certain price, the broker is generally classified as a 
``maker,'' and most trading venues will pay the broker a rebate 
when that offer is accepted. A broker who accepts a maker's 
offer to buy or sell is called a ``taker,'' and will generally 
pay a fee to the trading venue. The investigation found that, 
by routing customer orders in a manner that maximizes maker 
rebates and avoids taker fees, a broker dealer can add millions 
of dollars to its bottom line, creating a powerful incentive 
for the broker dealer to send client orders to the trading 
venues that are in the broker's best interest even if they are 
not in the clients' best interest. The investigation also found 
that the extent of those payments were largely undisclosed by 
broker dealers. In addition, the investigation found that the 
market complexity and fragmentation caused by the maker-taker 
system could be exploited by high frequency traders.
    The hearing heard from two panels of witnesses. The first 
panel included Bradley Katsuyama, President and CEO of IEX 
exchange, who discussed the conflicts of interest affecting 
U.S. stock markets and advocated action to address them. In 
addition, Robert H. Battalio, Professor of Finance at the 
Mendoza College of Business at the University of Notre Dame, 
discussed research he had conducted indicating that when given 
a choice, four leading retail brokers sent their orders to the 
trading venues offering the biggest maker rebates, even when 
those venues did not offer the best execution for clients. The 
second panel heard from four senior industry officials with 
differing views on the nature of the conflicts of interest and 
what should be done about them. They included Thomas W. Farley, 
President of the New York Stock Exchange, which described the 
conflicts as having a ``corrosive impact'' on stock markets; 
Joseph P. Ratterman, CEO of BATS Global Markets, which did not 
view the conflicts as creating substantial problems; Joseph P. 
Brennan, Global Equity Index head at the Vanguard Group, a 
major mutual fund company that has expressed concerns about the 
broker conflicts of interest; and Steven Quirk, Senior Vice 
President of the Trader Group at TD Ameritrade, a retail broker 
that derived significant revenues from payments for order flow 
and maker rebates.
    After the hearing, the Financial Industry Regulatory 
Authority launched a probe into how retail brokers route 
customer orders. The inquiry seeks to determine, among other 
things, how brokers determine where to route orders so that 
customers receive the best price possible under prevailing 
market conditions. The Securities and Exchange Commission also 
told the Subcommittee that it would consider issuing a rule to 
enhance order routing disclosures.

G. Abuse of Structured Financial Products: Misusing Basket Options to 
        Avoid Taxes and Leverage Limits (July 22, 2014)

    The Subcommittee's next hearing addressed a capital gains 
tax scheme involving hedge funds avoiding the payment of 
billions of dollars in Federal taxes. It exposed how, from 1999 
through 2013, two global banks used a structured financial 
product known as a basket option to help more than a dozen 
hedge funds dodge limits on trading with borrowed money, earn 
huge trading profits, and then claim that those profits 
qualified for the lower long-term capital gains tax rate, even 
for trades that lasted seconds. One hedge fund, Renaissance 
Technology Corp. (RenTec), used this scheme to avoid paying 
taxes estimated at more than $6 billion.
    In July 2014, the Subcommittee held a hearing and issued a 
bipartisan report detailing the misuse of basket options to 
avoid U.S. taxes. The two banks, Deutsche Bank and Barclays 
Bank, sold 199 basket options to hedge funds that used them to 
make over $100 billion in trades, including 79 involving 
RenTec, the largest participant. To produce the tax savings, 
each bank opened a designated account in its own name, 
appointed the hedge fund as the ``investment advisor'' for the 
account, authorized the investment advisor to buy and sell 
securities for the account, and then gave the hedge fund an 
``option'' on the account with a payoff equal to any profits 
generated by the ``basket'' of securities in the account. The 
hedge fund put up 10 percent of the cash needed to buy the 
securities, while the bank lent the other 90 percent. The hedge 
fund made all the trading decisions and reaped all the trading 
profits, while in effect holding an ``option'' on its own 
trading efforts. RenTec estimated that it used the basket 
option accounts to make 100,000--150,000 trades per day or 
approximately 30 million trades per year per bank.
    The key to the tax savings was the claim that basket 
options exercised after one year produced trading profits that 
qualified for the reduced long-term capital gains tax rate, 
even if the underlying trades had lasted seconds or were 
executed the day before the option was exercised. The lower 
long-term capital gains tax rate is intended to provide an 
incentive for investors to risk capital on long-term 
investments that grow the economy and create jobs; the high-
volume trading that, for example, RenTec conducted through its 
basket options did not meet that test.
    In addition, the banks used the basket options to enable 
the hedge funds to trade stocks using borrowed money, in excess 
of regulatory limits. The 1929 stock market crash harmed the 
U.S. economy, not just by the collapse of thousands of stock 
speculators, but also by the failure of thousands of banks that 
had lent them money and couldn't collect on the loans. In 
response, Congress enacted limits on the use of borrowed money 
to trade securities. Had the hedge funds used normal brokerage 
accounts, they would have been subject to the 2-to-1 Federal 
leverage limit; instead the banks used basket options to 
provide the hedge funds with leverage of up to 20-to-1, by 
treating the funds deposited into the option accounts as 
deposits of their own money rather than as loans, despite 
charging the hedge funds financing fees for use of the funds. 
The end result was that the hedge funds, facilitated by the 
banks, claimed billions of dollars in unjustified tax savings 
while avoiding leverage limits that protect the U.S. financial 
system from systemic risks caused by stock speculation fueled 
by borrowed funds.
    As part of its investigation, the Subcommittee commissioned 
and released, along with other Senators, a Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) report disclosing that the Internal 
Revenue Service (IRS) audits less than 1 percent of large 
partnerships per year, including partnerships that function as 
hedge funds. GAO found that, in 2012, just 0.8 percent of large 
partnerships, defined as having $100 million or more in assets 
and 100 or more direct and indirect partners, underwent an IRS 
audit versus 27 percent of traditional C corporations. That low 
audit rate made it difficult for the IRS to detect abusive tax 
practices and underpayment of U.S. taxes by hedge funds, 
including in connection with basket options.
    The hearing heard from three panels of witnesses. The first 
panel consisted of Steven Rosenthal, a Senior Fellow at the 
Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, who criticized the basket 
option tax scheme; and James R. White, Director of Tax Issues 
at GAO, who discussed the GAO report on IRS audits of large 
partnerships. The second panel heard testimony from four senior 
officials at the banks and RenTec, all of whom defended their 
basket option activities. They included Martin Malloy, Managing 
Director at Barclays Bank; Satish Ramakrishna, Managing 
Director at Deutsche Bank Securities; Mark Silber, RenTec's 
Chief Financial Officer, Chief Compliance Officer, Chief Legal 
Officer, and Vice President; and Jonathan Mayers, RenTec's 
Counsel. The third panel consisted of high level officials from 
the banks and RenTec, including Gerard LaRocca, Chief 
Administrative Officer for the Americas at Barclays; M. Barry 
Bausano, President and Managing Director of Deutsche Bank 
Securities; and Peter Brown, Co-CEO and Co-President of RenTec. 
They also defended their use of basket options.
    The Subcommittee investigation called for the IRS to review 
the hedge funds' basket option activities; for the U.S. 
Securities and Exchange Commission to review the hedge funds' 
and banks' circumvention of Federal leverage limits; and for 
Federal bank regulators to review the banks' facilitation of 
the basket option tax schemes.

H. Wall Street Bank Involvement With Physical Commodities (November 20 
        and 21, 2014)

    The Subcommittee's final hearing during the 113th Congress, 
and Chairman Levin's final hearing as Subcommittee Chairman, 
examined Wall Street bank involvement with physical 
commodities.
    In November 2014, the Subcommittee held a hearing and 
released a bipartisan report detailing case studies of Goldman 
Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and JPMorgan Chase, and their extensive 
physical commodity activities, including warehousing aluminum, 
copper, and other metals, trading uranium, mining coal, 
operating oil and gas storage and pipeline facilities, 
supplying jet fuel to airlines, and controlling power plants. 
The Subcommittee investigation also described a three-year 
review of those physical commodity activities by Federal 
Reserve examiners who identified a host of risks and 
recommended steps to reduce those risks. The investigation 
examined not only the catastrophic event and environmental 
risks incurred by the banks, but also their involvement with 
commodity price manipulation and use of non-public information 
to gain unfair trading advantages in financial commodity 
markets.
    The hearing took place over two days and heard from five 
panels of witnesses. On the first day, three panels presented 
evidence. The first panel consisted of two witnesses involved 
with Goldman's aluminum warehousing activities, Christopher 
Wibbelman, President and CEO of Metro International warehouse, 
and Jacques Gabillon, head of Goldman's Global Commodities 
Principal Investing Group and Chairman of the Board of the 
warehouse company. Both admitted that the wait to remove 
aluminum from the warehouse had grown dramatically during 
Goldman's ownership of the company, and that the warehouse had 
engaged in so-called merry-go-round transactions to keep 
aluminum from leaving the warehouse system, but denied that 
those actions manipulated aluminum supplies or prices, or that 
Goldman took advantage of non-public warehouse information when 
trading aluminum-related financial products. The second panel 
consisted of two aluminum experts, Jorge Vazquez, Founder and 
Managing Director of Harbor Aluminum Intelligence, and a 
leading aluminum analyst; and Nick Madden, Senior Vice 
President and Chief Supply Chain Officer for Novelis Inc., the 
largest purchaser of aluminum in the world. Both testified that 
Goldman's activities had disrupted normal aluminum pricing, and 
that confidential warehouse information could be used to gain 
trading advantages. The third panel for the day consisted of 
senior officials from the three banks, Gregory A. Agran, Co-
Head of Goldman's Global Commodities Group; Simon Greenshields, 
Co-Head of Morgan Stanley's Global Commodities group; and John 
Anderson, Co-Head of JPMorgan's Global Commodities group. All 
three answered questions about their physical commodity 
activities.
    On the second day, two additional panels of witnesses 
provided testimony at the hearing. The first panel consisted of 
Saule Omarova, Professor of Law at Cornell University and an 
expert on banking law; and Chiara Trabucchi, a principal at 
Industrial Economics Inc. and an expert on financial and 
environmental risk management. Professor Omarova testified that 
current bank involvement with physical commodities was 
unprecedented and contrary to longstanding U.S. principles 
against mixing banking with commerce. Ms. Trabucchi testified 
that banks appeared ill prepared to address the catastrophic 
event risks associated with their physical commodity 
activities. The second panel consisted of two Federal 
regulators, Daniel K. Tarullo, a Federal Reserve Governor 
involved with bank holding company oversight, and Larry D. 
Gasteiger, Acting Director of the Office of Enforcement at the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Mr. Gasteiger 
discussed FERC's legal actions against banks for manipulating 
electricity prices and payments, while Mr. Tarullo discussed 
the Federal Reserve's concerns with bank holding company 
involvement with physical commodities and its plans to propose 
a rulemaking in the first quarter of 2015 to reduce related 
risks.
    After the hearing, bipartisan legislation was introduced by 
the Subcommittee Chairman and Ranking Member to prevent banking 
entities from engaging in financial commodity trading if they 
own or have an interest in businesses or facilities involved 
with the same physical commodities.

         III. Legislative Activities During the 113th Congress

    The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations does not have 
legislative authority, but because its investigations play an 
important role in bringing issues to the attention of Congress 
and the public, the Subcommittee's work frequently contributes 
to the development of legislative initiatives. The 
Subcommittee's activity during the 113th Congress was no 
exception, with Subcommittee hearings and Members playing 
prominent roles in several legislative initiatives.

A. Cut Unjustified Tax (CUT) Loopholes Act (S. 268)

    On February 11, 2013, Senators Levin and Whitehouse re-
introduced S. 268, the Cut Unjustified Tax Loopholes or CUT 
Loopholes Act, to close a series of tax loopholes, not only to 
increase the fairness of the tax code, but also to produce 
significant revenues for deficit reduction and avoid the 
across-the-board budget cuts known as sequestration. The 
proposed changes to the tax code were the product of a series 
of Subcommittee hearings on corporate tax avoidance. The bill 
included provisions to close a host of corporate offshore tax 
loopholes, including loopholes allowing corporations to deduct 
expenses for moving operations offshore, lower their taxes by 
manipulating foreign tax credits or moving intellectual 
property moved offshore, and avoid paying taxes by shifting 
corporate profits to tax havens. The bill also targeted 
domestic corporate tax loopholes, including those allowing 
corporations to take stock option tax deductions that were 
billions of dollars greater than the stock option expenses 
shown on their books; use a so-called ``derivatives blended 
rate'' enabling hedge funds and others to treat earnings from 
short-term investments in certain derivatives as long-term 
capital gains; exclude tar sands oil from excise taxes 
supporting the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund; and enable 
investment managers, such as hedge fund managers, to use the 
so-called carried interest loophole to pay less than ordinary 
income tax rates on income earned from providing investment 
management services.
    Closing those loopholes was estimated to produce, over ten 
years, at least $260 billion in deficit reduction. The bill was 
referred to the Finance Committee which took no further action.

B. Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act (S. 1533)

    On September 19, 2013, Senators Levin, Whitehouse, Shaheen, 
and Begich--later joined by Senators Markey and Mikulski--
reintroduced the Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act, S. 1533, to close 
offshore tax loopholes and strengthen offshore tax enforcement. 
This legislation was based upon more than ten years of 
Subcommittee investigations into offshore tax havens, abusive 
tax shelters, and the professionals who design, market, and 
implement tax dodges. While some provisions from earlier 
versions of this bill were enacted into law, offshore tax 
abuses have continued and additional reforms are needed. The 
Subcommittee has estimated that offshore tax abuses cost the 
Treasury at least $150 billion per year.
    Among other measures, the bill would authorize Treasury to 
take special measures against foreign jurisdictions and 
financial institutions that impede U.S. tax enforcement; and 
establish rebuttable presumptions in tax enforcement cases that 
offshore companies and trusts are controlled by the U.S. 
persons who send or receive assets from them. The bill would 
also prevent companies that are managed and controlled from the 
United States from claiming foreign status for tax purposes; 
and close a loophole allowing swap payments to be treated as 
non-U.S. source income when sent from the United States to 
persons offshore. Other provisions would require multinational 
corporations to report the taxes they pay on a country-by-
country basis in public SEC filings; and require U.S. hedge 
funds and company formation agents to establish anti-money 
laundering programs. Still other provisions would stop 
corporations from deducting expenses for moving operations 
offshore, manipulating foreign tax credit abuses, and using 
short-term loan abuses to dodge taxes. The bill would also 
repeal the so-called check-the-box and CFC look-through rules 
that create tax incentives for U.S. multinationals to shift 
profits offshore and manipulate their offshore affiliates to 
avoid paying U.S. taxes on passive income.
    This bill is very similar to Title I of the CUT Loopholes 
Act, described above. The Senate bill was referred to the 
Finance Committee which took no further action.

C. Incorporation Transparency and Law Enforcement Assistance Act (S. 
        1465)

    On August 1, 2013, Senators Levin, Grassley, Feinstein and 
Harkin, later joined by Senator Whitehouse, re-introduced S. 
1465, the Incorporation Transparency and Law Enforcement 
Assistance Act, to protect the United States from U.S. 
corporations with hidden owners being misused to commit crimes, 
including terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering, tax 
evasion, financial fraud, and corruption. The bill is based 
upon a series of Subcommittee investigations which found that 
the 50 states establish nearly two million U.S. companies each 
year without knowing who is behind them, that the lack of 
ownership information invites wrongdoers to incorporate in the 
United States, and that the same lack of ownership information 
impedes U.S. law enforcement efforts when U.S. corporations are 
misused to commit crimes.
    Among other provisions, the bill would require the states 
to obtain beneficial ownership information for the corporations 
or limited liability companies formed within their borders; 
require states to provide that information to law enforcement 
in response to a subpoena or summons; and impose civil and 
criminal penalties for persons who knowingly submit false 
ownership information. The bill would exempt all publicly 
traded and regulated corporations, as well as certain other 
corporations whose ownership information was already available.
    In 2013, after G8 world leaders called for disclosing 
corporate owners, the White House issued an action plan 
championing legislation like the Levin-Grassley bill, which has 
been endorsed by multiple law enforcement groups. The bill was 
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary which took no 
further action.

D. Ending Insider Trading in Commodities Act (S. 3013)

    On December 12, 2014, Senators Levin and McCain introduced 
S.3013, the Ending Insider Trading in Commodities Act. This 
bill is the product of the Subcommittee's investigation into 
Wall Street bank involvement with physical commodities, 
described above, and is intended to prevent price manipulation 
and unfair trading. It would prevent a large financial 
institution from trading in physical commodities and commodity-
related financial instruments while at the same time in 
possession of material, non-public information related to the 
storage, shipment, or use of a commodity arising from its 
ownership or interest in a business or facility used to store, 
ship, or use the commodity.
    The bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 
which, due to the ending of the Congress, took no further 
action.

E. Partnership Auditing Fairness Act (S. 3018)

    On December 16, 2014, Senators Levin introduced S. 3018, 
the Partnership Auditing Fairness Act to improve and streamline 
audit procedures for large partnerships, such as hedge funds, 
private equity funds, and publicly traded partnerships. 
According to a report by the Government Accountability Office, 
in 2012, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audited less than 1 
percent of large partnerships compared to 27 percent of large 
corporations. The bill is intended to ensure that large for-
profit partnerships, like other large profitable businesses, 
are subject to routine audits by the IRS and eliminate audit 
red tape that currently impedes IRS oversight. The bill is the 
product of the Subcommittee's investigation during this 
Congress into hedge fund use of a structured financial product 
known as basket options, which was used to avoid billions of 
dollars in U.S. taxes and demonstrated the need for routine IRS 
audits of hedge funds and other large partnerships. The bill 
mirrors a provision in the Tax Reform Act of 2014, introduced 
in the House of Representatives earlier this year by 
Congressman David Camp.
    The bill was referred to the Committee on Finance which, 
due to the ending of the Congress, took no further action.

                    IV. Reports, Prints, and Studies

    In connection with its investigations, the Subcommittee 
often issues lengthy and detailed reports. During the 113th 
Congress, the Subcommittee released ten such reports, listed 
below, some of which have already been partly described in 
connection with Subcommittee hearings.

A. JPMorgan Chase Whale Trades: A Case History of Derivatives Risks & 
        Abuses, March 15, 2013 (Report Prepared by the Majority and 
        Minority Staffs of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 
        and released in conjunction with the Subcommittee's hearing on 
        March 15, 2013)

    In March 2013, following a nine-month probe, the 
Subcommittee released its first report of the 113th Congress. 
This 300-page bipartisan staff report examined the so-called 
``whale trades'' that, in 2012, caused JPMorgan Chase & Co., 
America's biggest bank and largest derivatives dealer, to lose 
at least $6.2 billion. As explained earlier, this report was 
released in connection with a Subcommittee hearing examining 
that trading activity.
    The report detailed how the whale trades were conducted, 
presenting information on actions taken by the traders in the 
London office of the Chief Investment Office (CIO) of JPMorgan 
Chase Bank, their supervisors, and associated risk management 
and financial personnel. The report described the nature and 
extent of the high risk synthetic credit derivative trades 
executed over the first quarter of 2012, and how JPMorgan Chase 
personnel handled the mounting losses. It described how the 
traders mismarked the trading book to hide the losses; managers 
disregarded multiple indicators of increasing risk and allowed 
ongoing breaches of five different risk limits; quantitative 
experts manipulated the risk models; and the bank dodged 
regulatory oversight and misinformed investors, regulators, and 
the public about its risky derivatives trades. The report 
exposed not only high risk activities and abuses at JPMorgan 
Chase, but also broader, systemic problems related to the 
valuation, risk analysis, disclosure, and oversight of 
synthetic credit derivatives. As indicated earlier, the report 
presented detailed evidence disproving the assertion that 
credit derivatives inherently lower financial risk.
    The report offered a number of bipartisan recommendations 
to detect, prevent, and stop high risk derivatives trading 
involving synthetic credit derivatives at federally insured 
banks. They included requiring Federal bank regulators to 
identify and obtain performance data for all derivatives 
investment portfolios at the banks they oversee; require 
contemporaneous documentation of all hedges, including how each 
so-called hedge lowered risks associated with specified assets; 
and strengthen credit derivative valuation procedures to ensure 
derivatives are accurately priced and valued. The report also 
recommended that Federal regulators identify and investigate 
all large or sustained breaches of risk limits and all risk or 
capital evaluation models which, when activated, materially 
lower the purported risk or capital requirements associated 
with derivative trading activities. In addition, the report 
recommended that regulators promptly issue a final regulation 
implementing the Volcker Rule to stop high risk proprietary 
trading at federally insured banks, and to impose additional 
capital charges for those trading activities to ensure banks 
can cover potential losses.

B. Social Security Disability Benefits: Did a Group of Judges, Doctors, 
        and Lawyers Abuse Programs for the Country's Most Vulnerable?, 
        October 7, 2013 (Report Prepared by the Majority and Minority 
        Staffs of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
        Affairs and of its Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, 
        and released by the full Committee in conjunction with a full 
        Committee hearing on October 7, 2013)

    In October 2013, the full Committee, under the leadership 
of Senator Coburn, released a 160-page joint bipartisan staff 
report from the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the full 
Committee and the Subcommittee, presenting a case study of how 
one lawyer living in Kentucky, Eric Conn, engaged in a raft of 
improper practices to obtain disability benefits for thousands 
of claimants. This report followed an earlier report, issued by 
the Subcommittee's Minority staff in September 2012, finding 
deficiencies in how Social Security administrative law judges 
(ALJs) decided Social Security disability cases, detailing 
decisions which ``failed to properly address insufficient, 
contradictory, or incomplete evidence.'' The 2013 report built 
upon that earlier work as well as investigative efforts 
conducted, in part, by the Subcommittee when Senator Coburn was 
the Subcommittee's Ranking Member during the 112th Congress.
    The joint bipartisan report detailed improper Social 
Security disability practices by Mr. Conn and his law firm, 
which included the manufacture of boilerplate medical forms, 
the misuse of waivers to submit disability claims that should 
have gone elsewhere, the employment of suspect doctors willing 
to conduct cursory medical exams, and apparent collusion with 
Social Security ALJs on practices that improperly favored the 
Conn clients. One ALJ's practices included improperly assigning 
the Conn cases to himself, secretly informing Mr. Conn of what 
cases he would decide and what documentation should be 
submitted, accepting boilerplate medical forms, relying on 
conclusory medical opinions to reverse prior benefit denials, 
skipping hearings, and churning out short, poor quality 
decisions. The report also presented evidence of repeated 
unexplained cash payments to the ALJ's bank account. In 
addition, the report faulted lax oversight by Social Security 
officials that allowed the abuses to continue for years and 
exposed U.S. taxpayers to millions of dollars in attorney and 
physician fees paid to the professionals who engaged in abusive 
practices.
    The report offered a number of bipartisan recommendations 
to detect, prevent, and stop abusive practices like those 
exposed in the Conn case study. The recommendations included 
strengthening Social Security quality reviews of ALJ decisions, 
reforming outdated medical-vocational guidelines, and 
prohibiting claimants from submitting medical opinions from 
doctors with revoked or suspended licenses. The report also 
recommended that Social Security provide improved training on 
how ALJs should handle medical opinions that directly conflict 
with other evidence in a claimant's medical files; and on how 
AMJs should articulate and support their decisions on claims. 
In addition, the report recommended that the Social Security 
Administration Inspector General conduct an annual review of 
the practices of the law firms earning the most attorney fees 
from processing disability cases to detect any abusive conduct.

C. Offshore Tax Evasion: The Effort to Collect Unpaid Taxes on Billions 
        in Hidden Offshore Accounts, February 26, 2014 (Report Prepared 
        by the Majority and Minority Staffs of the Permanent 
        Subcommittee on Investigations and released in conjunction with 
        the Subcommittee's hearing on February 26, 2014)

    In February 2014, following a two-year Subcommittee 
investigation, the Subcommittee released a 175-page bipartisan 
staff report detailing how Swiss banks aided and abetted tax 
evasion by their U.S. customers, using Credit Suisse, 
Switzerland's second largest bank, as a case study. The report 
described how Credit Suisse opened Swiss accounts for over 
22,000 U.S. customers with assets that, at their peak, totaled 
roughly $10 billion to $12 billion, the vast majority of which 
were hidden from U.S. authorities. The report also described 
how U.S. law enforcement officials were slow to collect the 
unpaid taxes and hold accountable both the tax evaders and the 
bank.
    The report provided context for the Credit Suisse case 
study by describing how, in 2008 and 2009, the Subcommittee 
held a series of hearings into how Swiss banks, including UBS, 
Switzerland's largest, had colluded with U.S. tax evaders, 
aided by Switzerland's bank secrecy laws. It described how, in 
a 2008 Subcommittee hearing, UBS had acknowledged its 
wrongdoing and, in the year after the hearing, paid a $780 
million fine, entered into a deferred prosecution agreement 
with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and identified 
thousands of previously undisclosed U.S. accounts to the IRS, 
including providing U.S. client names. The report explained 
that Credit Suisse had engaged in similar conduct from at least 
2001 to 2008, had been slow to close the hidden Swiss accounts 
held by U.S. accountholders, and had disclosed almost none of 
the names of those U.S. accountholders to U.S. tax authorities.
    The report described the misconduct engaged in by Credit 
Suisse, which included sending Swiss bankers into the United 
States to recruit U.S. customers, opening Swiss accounts, 
including accounts opened in the name of offshore shell 
corporations, that were not disclosed to U.S. authorities, and 
servicing Swiss accounts here in the United States without 
leaving a paper trail. The report also described how, after the 
UBS scandal broke, Credit Suisse began a series of Exit 
Projects that took five years to close Swiss accounts held by 
18,900 U.S. clients. In addition, the report detailed how 
Credit Suisse had conducted an internal investigation into its 
activities, but produced no report and identified no leadership 
failures that allowed the bank to become involved with U.S. tax 
evasion. The report noted that, despite a 2011 indictment of 
seven of its bankers and a DOJ letter stating that the bank 
itself was an investigation target, Credit Suisse had yet to be 
held legally accountable by DOJ, and none of its bankers had 
yet stood trial.
    The report also examined DOJ conduct. It found that, 
despite 2008 and 2009 DOJ testimony pledging to use U.S. legal 
tools such as grand jury subpoenas and John Doe summonses to 
obtain the names of U.S. tax evaders with hidden offshore 
accounts, DOJ had failed to use those tools, choosing instead 
to file Swiss treaty requests with little success. The report 
noted that, over the prior five years, DOJ had not sought to 
enforce a single grand jury subpoena against a Swiss bank, had 
not assisted in the filing of a single John Doe summons to 
obtain client names or account information in Switzerland, and 
had not requested the extradition of a single indicted Swiss 
banker. It also noted that DOJ had prosecuted only one Swiss 
bank, Wegelin & Co., despite more than a dozen under 
investigation for facilitating U.S. tax evasion. The report 
found that, in five years, DOJ had obtained U.S. client names 
for only 238 undeclared Swiss accounts out of the tens of 
thousands opened offshore. Finally, the report examined the 
conduct of the Swiss government in response to allegations that 
Swiss banks had facilitated U.S. tax evasion. The report 
described Swiss efforts to preserve bank secrecy, its 
unwillingness to provide U.S. client names, and its stance 
against extraditing indicted bankers to stand trial in the 
United States.
    The report made a number of bipartisan recommendations to 
revitalize U.S. efforts to stop tax haven banks from 
facilitating U.S. tax evasion. They included urging DOJ to step 
up its prosecution of tax haven banks and offshore U.S. 
accountholders, using U.S. legal tools rather than treaty 
requests to obtain U.S. client names; and to strengthen 
transparency requirements for tax haven banks with deferred 
prosecution agreements. The report also recommended that 
Congress amend U.S. tax laws to streamline the use of John Doe 
summons procedures to uncover offshore accounts; that the U.S. 
Senate ratify a 2009 protocol strengthening disclosures under 
the U.S.-Swiss tax treaty; and that the U.S. Treasury and IRS 
close legal loopholes enabling offshore accounts held by U.S. 
persons to remain hidden.

D. Caterpillar's Offshore Tax Strategy, April 1, 2014 (Report Prepared 
        by the Majority Staff of the Permanent Subcommittee on 
        Investigations and released in conjunction with the 
        Subcommittee's hearing on April 1, 2014)

    In April 2014, following a year-long investigation, the 
Subcommittee released a 95-page majority staff report detailing 
how Caterpillar Inc., an American manufacturer of heavy 
equipment, used a wholly owned Swiss affiliate to shift $8 
billion in profits from the United States to Switzerland to 
take advantage of a 4-6 percent corporate tax rate it had 
negotiated with the Swiss government and defer or avoid paying 
$2.4 billion in U.S. taxes to date. This report was the latest 
in a series of Subcommittee investigations into tax avoidance 
by U.S. multinational corporations, including Apple, Microsoft, 
and Hewlett-Packard.
    The report described how Caterpillar paid 
PricewaterhouseCoopers, acting as both its tax consultant and 
auditor, over $55 million to develop and implement its Swiss 
tax strategy. The report explained that, under that tax 
strategy, in exchange for a small royalty, Caterpillar gave a 
license to its wholly controlled Swiss affiliate called CSARL 
to make all non-U.S. sales of Caterpillar's third party 
manufactured parts to Caterpillar's non-U.S. dealers. The 
report noted that Caterpillar redirected those profits from the 
United States to Switzerland essentially by replacing its name 
with CSARL on the parts invoices, and without moving any 
personnel or parts activities to Switzerland. The report 
presented detailed evidence showing that Caterpillar's global 
parts business continued to be run from the United States, and 
that virtually none of the manufacturing, warehousing, 
distribution, or parts management activities took place in 
Switzerland. Because CSARL lacked the personnel, 
infrastructure, and expertise to run the global parts business, 
CSARL paid Caterpillar to keep doing the work, reimbursing it 
for its costs plus a small service fee. The report showed that, 
prior to implementing the Swiss tax strategy, Caterpillar had 
booked 85 percent or more of its non-U.S. parts profits in the 
United States, where 70 percent of those parts were made and 
warehoused and where its global parts operation was managed, 
while afterward it booked 85 percent or more of the parts 
profits in Switzerland.
    The report offered a number of recommendations to detect, 
prevent, and stop corporate tax avoidance using suspect 
offshore tax strategies like that exposed in the Caterpillar 
case study. The recommendations included urging the Internal 
Revenue Service (IRS) to analyze the economic substance of all 
intercompany transactions in which licenses are issued to 
offshore affiliates to sell U.S. produced products, require 
U.S. parent corporations to identify and value the functions 
performed by those offshore affiliates, and require U.S. 
parents to justify the profit allocation between themselves and 
their offshore affiliates. The report also recommended that the 
United States participate in ongoing international efforts to 
develop better principles for taxing multinational 
corporations, including by requiring those multinationals to 
disclose their business operations and tax payments on a 
country-by-country basis. In addition, the report recommended 
that public accounting firms be prohibited from simultaneously 
providing auditing and tax consulting services to the same 
corporation, to prevent the conflicts of interest that arise 
when an accounting firm's auditors are asked to audit the tax 
strategies designed and sold by the firm's tax consultants.

E. Online Advertising and Hidden Hazards to Consumer Security and Data 
        Privacy, May 15, 2014 (Report Prepared by the Majority and 
        Minority Staffs of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 
        and released in conjunction with the Subcommittee's hearing on 
        May 15, 2014)

    In May 2014, after nearly a year-long investigation under 
the leadership of Senator McCain, the Subcommittee released a 
40-page bipartisan staff report detailing how online 
advertising, which has surpassed broadcast television as the 
largest advertising medium in the United States with $42.8 
billion in 2013 revenues, exposed online consumers to hidden 
hazards, including data breaches, malware attacks, and other 
cybercrimes.
    The report described the complex system used for online 
advertising, which involves the participation of many parties 
in delivering a single ad. The report showed how the display of 
a single online advertisement can trigger online consumer 
interactions with a chain of other companies, many of which are 
unknown to the consumer and each of which could compromise the 
consumer's privacy or become a source of vulnerability for 
cybercriminals. The report described one instance, for example, 
in which a consumer visit to a popular tabloid news website 
triggered the consumer's interaction with over 350 other web 
servers, even without the consumer's clicking on the 
advertisement display. The report explained that, on radio or 
television, the content of an advertisement is generally 
transmitted by the same party that hosts the rest of the 
content on the station while, in contrast, host websites 
commonly sell ad space on their sites through intermediary 
companies and typically have no control or even notice of the 
advertisements that will be displayed. The report noted that 
host websites often do not select and cannot predict which 
intermediary advertising networks will deliver advertisements 
to consumers visiting their sites, and typically have limited 
control over the content of the advertisements whose placements 
they facilitate. The report also described how cyber criminals 
use malicious advertising to target consumers, including by 
using online ads to place malware on consumer devices.
    The report offered a number of bipartisan recommendations 
to detect, prevent, and stop abusive practices in online 
advertising. The recommendations included urging the online 
advertising industry to establish better practices and clearer 
rules to prevent abuses, strengthening cyber threat-related and 
other security information exchanges within the online 
advertising industry to detect and prevent abuses, and 
clarifying specific prohibited practices. The report also 
recommended that self-regulatory bodies develop comprehensive 
security guidelines for preventing online advertising malware 
attacks; that additional ``circuit breakers'' be developed to 
introduce check-points to catch malicious advertisements at an 
earlier stage before transmission to consumers; and that online 
companies thoroughly vet new advertisers and perform rigorous 
and ongoing checks to ensure legitimate advertisements do not 
morph into malware. In addition, the report recommended that 
the Federal Trade Commission consider issuing comprehensive 
regulations to prohibit deceptive and unfair online advertising 
practices that facilitate or fail to take reasonable steps to 
prevent malware, invasive cookies, and inappropriate data 
collection delivered to Internet consumers through online 
advertisements.

F. The Air Force's Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS): A 
        Cautionary Tale on the Need for Business Process Reengineering 
        and Complying with Acquisition Best Practices, July 7, 2014) 
        (Report Prepared by the Majority and Minority Staffs of the 
        Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations)

    In July 2014, under Senator McCain's leadership, the 
Subcommittee released a 40-page bipartisan staff report on the 
Air Force's Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS) program, 
a $1 billion failed effort to form a unified logistics and 
supply-chain management system to track all Air Force physical 
assets from airplanes to fuel to spare parts. Following the 
program's cancellation in 2012, the report analyzed the factors 
that led to the failure, including a lack of leadership and 
cultural resistance to adopting ``best practices'' in Air Force 
procurements.
    The report described the development of the ECSS system. It 
found, among other problems, that the Air Force admitted it did 
not understand what it needed to do to implement the ECSS. The 
report noted that, in the eight years ECSS was active, the Air 
Force transitioned six program managers and five program 
executive officers, resulting in constant leadership turnover 
and leaving no one accountable for ECSS's failure. The report 
also determined that the Department of Defense (DOD) and Air 
Force had a strong cultural resistance to change and adoption 
of ``best practices'' to improve their procurement systems. The 
report found that their resistance hindered effective 
implementation of business process reengineering (BPR) efforts 
intended to ensure that enterprise resource planning (ERP) 
systems were effectively integrated into the relevant business 
units. The report concluded that the Air Force squandered over 
$1 billion in taxpayer funds over eight years without producing 
a workable ECSS capability.
    The report offered a number of bipartisan recommendations 
to prevent future acquisition failures. The recommendations 
included improving ERP systems outcomes by initiating BPR 
assessments earlier in the acquisition process, improving 
oversight to ensure DOD has a sufficient understanding of the 
existing business processes to be changed, and ensuring sound 
budget decision making by integrating the Investment Review 
Boards (IRB) at the beginning of the budget process. The report 
also recommended reducing duplicative reporting requirements by 
utilizing a single governance structure for the acquisition of 
ERP systems, improving accountability by aligning the tenure of 
program executives with key acquisition decision points, and 
strengthening resource verifications of self-reporting BPR 
certification from program offices.
    To help alleviate the problems disclosed by the ECSS 
failure, at Senator McCain's request, the Senate Armed Services 
Committee included in the Fiscal Year 2015 defense 
authorization bill provisions that required DOD to gain an 
understanding of the existing legacy systems before procuring 
any large new business system and to complete a report on 
enhancing the role of DOD civilian and military program 
managers in developing and carrying out defense acquisition 
programs.

G. Abuse of Structured Financial Products: Misusing Basket Options to 
        Avoid Taxes and Leverage Limits, July 22, 2014 (Report Prepared 
        by the Majority and Minority Staffs of the Permanent 
        Subcommittee on Investigations and released in conjunction with 
        the Subcommittee's hearing on July 22, 2014)

    In July 2014, the Subcommittee released at 95-page 
bipartisan staff report describing how two global banks, 
Deutsche Bank AG and Barclays Bank PLC, and more than a dozen 
hedge funds misused a complex financial structure known as a 
basket option to claim billions of dollars in unjustified tax 
savings and avoid leverage limits that protect the financial 
system from risky debt. This report was the latest in a line of 
Subcommittee reports documenting bank participation in 
transactions designed to help clients avoid or evade U.S. 
taxes.
    The report outlined how, over the course of more than a 
decade, from 1998 to 2013, the banks sold 199 basket options to 
13 hedge funds which used them to conduct more than $100 
billion in trades. The report provided detailed information on 
options involving two of the largest basket option users, 
Renaissance Technologies Corporation LLC (``RenTec'') and 
George Weiss Associates. The report explained how the banks and 
hedge funds used the option structure to open proprietary 
trading accounts in the names of the banks and create the 
fiction that the banks owned the account assets, when in fact 
the hedge funds exercised total control over the assets, 
executed all the trades, and reaped all the trading profits. 
The report also explained that when the hedge funds exercised 
the options shortly after the one-year mark, they claimed that 
the trading profits were eligible for the lower income tax rate 
that applies to long-term capital gains on assets held for at 
least a year, even for short-term trades. The report noted, for 
example, that RenTec claimed it could treat the trading profits 
as long term gains, even though it executed an average of 26 to 
39 million trades per year and held many assets for mere 
seconds. The report also noted that, in 2010, the Internal 
Revenue Service (IRS) had issued an opinion prohibiting the use 
of basket options to claim long-term capital gains. The report 
estimated that the hedge funds used the basket option 
structures to avoid taxes in excess of $6 billion.
    The report also explained that, in addition to avoiding 
taxes, the basket option structure was used by the banks and 
hedge funds to evade Federal leverage limits on trading 
securities with borrowed money. Leverage limits were enacted 
into law after the stock market crash of 1929, when stock 
losses led to the collapse of not only the stock speculators, 
but also the banks that lent them money and were unable to 
collect on the loans. Had the hedge funds made their trades in 
a normal brokerage account, they would have been subject to a 
2-to-1 leverage limit--that is, for every $2 in total holdings 
in the account, $1 could be borrowed from the broker. But 
because the option accounts were in the name of the bank, the 
option structure created the fiction that the bank was 
transferring its own money into its own proprietary trading 
accounts instead of lending to its hedge-fund clients, in some 
cases leading to a leverage ratio of 20-to-1. The banks 
pretended that the money placed into the accounts were not 
loans to its customers, even though the hedge funds paid 
financing fees for use of the money. While the two banks have 
stopped selling basket options as a way for clients to claim 
long-term capital gains, they continue to use the structures to 
avoid Federal leverage limits.
    The report offered a number of bipartisan recommendations 
to detect, prevent, and stop basket option abuses. The 
recommendations included urging the IRS to audit each of the 
hedge funds that used basket option products to collect any 
unpaid taxes; and urging Federal financial regulators, as well 
as Treasury and the IRS, to intensify warnings against, 
scrutiny of, and legal actions to penalize bank participation 
in tax-motivated transactions. The report also recommended that 
Treasury and the IRS revamp the Tax Equity and Fiscal 
Responsibility Act (TEFRA) regulations to reduce impediments to 
audits of large partnerships, and that Congress amend TEFRA to 
facilitate those audits. In addition, the report recommended 
that the Financial Stability Oversight Council, working with 
other agencies, establish new reporting and data collection 
mechanisms to enable financial regulators to analyze the use of 
derivative and structured financial products to circumvent 
Federal leverage limits on purchasing securities with borrowed 
funds, gauge the systemic risks, and develop preventative 
measures.

H. IRS and TIGTA Management Failures Related to 501(c)(4) Applicants 
        Engaged in Campaign Activity, September 5, 2014 (Report 
        Prepared by the Majority Staff of the Permanent Subcommittee on 
        Investigations with Minority Staff Dissenting Views)

    In September 2014, after more than a year-long 
investigation, the Subcommittee released a 225-page report 
summarizing the Subcommittee's bipartisan investigation into 
problems with how the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) processed 
applications for tax exempt status under Section 501(c)(4) of 
the tax code. The report was prepared by the majority staff and 
included dissenting views by the minority staff, which did not 
join the majority staff report. The report was accompanied by 
the release of over 1,700 pages of documents from the IRS and 
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), 
including emails, correspondence, memoranda, charts, 
handwritten notes, reports, and analyses.
    The majority staff report reached many of the same 
conclusions as an audit report that was released earlier by 
TIGTA about the 501(c)(4) application process. The majority 
staff report found that the IRS used inappropriate screening 
criteria when it flagged for increased scrutiny applications 
based upon the applicants' names or political views rather than 
direct evidence of their involvement with campaign activities. 
The report also presented evidence of significant program 
mismanagement, including years-long delays in processing 
501(c)(4) applications; inappropriate, intrusive, and 
burdensome questioning of groups; and poor communication and 
coordination between IRS officials in Washington and 
Cincinnati. At the same time, like TIGTA, the report found no 
evidence of IRS political bias in selecting 501(c)(4) 
applications for heightened review, as distinguished from using 
poor judgment in crafting the selection criteria. Based on 
investigative work that went beyond what TIGTA examined, the 
majority staff report also determined that the same problems 
affected IRS review of 501(c)(4) applications filed by liberal 
groups, detailing several examples.
    The majority staff report also criticized the TIGTA audit. 
It found that, by focusing exclusively on how the IRS handled 
501(c)(4) applications filed by conservative groups and 
excluding any comparative data on applications filed by liberal 
groups, the TIGTA audit produced distorted audit results that 
continue to be misinterpreted. The report explained that the 
TIGTA audit engagement letter stated that the audit's ``overall 
objective'' was to examine the ``consistency'' of IRS actions 
in identifying and reviewing 501(c)(4) applications, including 
whether ``conservative groups'' experienced ``inconsistent 
treatment.'' The report found that, instead, the TIGTA audit 
focused solely on IRS treatment of conservative groups, and 
omitted any mention of other groups. For example, while the 
TIGTA audit report criticized the IRS for using ``Tea Party,'' 
``9/12,'' and ``Patriot'' to identify applications filed by 
conservative groups, it left out that the IRS also used 
``Progressive,'' ``ACORN,'' ``Emerge,'' and ``Occupy'' to 
identify applications filed by liberal groups. The majority 
staff report noted that, while the TIGTA audit report 
criticized the IRS for subjecting conservative groups to 
delays, burdensome questions, and mismanagement, it failed to 
disclose that the IRS subjected liberal groups to the same 
treatment. The majority staff report explained that the result 
was that when the TIGTA audit report presented data showing 
conservative groups were treated inappropriately, it was 
interpreted to mean conservative groups were handled 
differently and less favorably than liberal groups, when in 
fact, both groups experienced the same mistreatment. The 
majority staff report also criticized TIGTA for failing to 
include in its audit report its conclusion that the TIGTA audit 
had `found no evidence of political bias' by the IRS in 
processing 501(c)(4) applications, an omission which led to the 
TIGTA audit report being misconstrued to inaccurately and 
unfairly damage public confidence in the impartiality of the 
IRS.
    The majority staff report offered a number of 
recommendations to reform IRS processing of 501(c)(4) 
applications filed by groups planning to engage in both social 
welfare and campaign activities. The recommendations included 
urging the IRS to stop using a ``facts and circumstances'' test 
to evaluate the applications and groups, since it produced a 
time-consuming, case-by-case, non-transparent, subjective, and 
unpredictable method of evaluation that not only confused and 
delayed IRS decisionmaking, but also invited public suspicion 
that the IRS may have been influenced by politics. Instead, the 
majority staff report recommended developing objective 
standards and bright line rules to produce more consistent, 
timely, transparent, and predictable treatment of 501(c)(4) 
applications filed by groups that engage in campaign 
activities. The report also recommended that the IRS revise its 
rules to comply with the statutory requirement that 501(c)(4) 
groups engage `exclusively' in social welfare activities, 
including by applying an `insubstantial' test to limit other 
activities, similar to the one already applied to 501(c)(3) 
charities, and by applying a percentage test to ensure campaign 
activities comprise no more than an insubstantial portion of a 
tax-exempt social welfare organization's activities. In 
addition, the report recommended that the IRS require 501(c)(4) 
groups to provide the IRS with a copy of any filing submitted 
to the Federal Election Commission, so that the IRS can use 
those filings to identify 501(c)(4) groups warranting 
heightened review for campaign activity.
    The dissenting views filed by the minority staff disagreed 
that the IRS mistreated both conservative and liberal groups. 
The dissenting views found that, while some liberal groups were 
examined by the IRS from May 2010 to May 2012, there were far 
fewer such groups, they were systematically separate from the 
review of conservative groups, their questioning was far less 
intrusive, and, in some cases, the liberal groups were 
affiliates of specific organizations that had behaved illegally 
in the past and could reasonably have expected additional 
scrutiny. The dissenting views found that the inclusion of a 
few liberal groups by the IRS did not bear comparison to the 
targeting of conservative groups, that conservative groups 
received the bulk of unfair and burdensome treatment, and that 
the IRS screening resulted in a clearly disparate impact on 
conservative group applications. The dissenting views also 
noted that, while the majority and minority staffs were unable 
to come to agreement in their analysis, the Subcommittee 
conducted its investigation through joint interviews and 
document requests, and continued its tradition of in-depth fact 
finding and frequent consultations that are the hallmark of the 
Subcommittee's oversight work and led to a deepened 
understanding of key issues.

I. Defense Acquisition Reform: Where Do We Go from Here? A Compendium 
        of Views by Leading Experts, October 2, 2014 (Report Prepared 
        by the Majority and Minority Staffs of the Permanent 
        Subcommittee on Investigations)

    In October 2014, under the leadership of Senator McCain, 
the Subcommittee released a bipartisan staff report containing 
a collection of 31 essays from a variety of defense acquisition 
experts offering views on defense acquisition reform. While the 
Subcommittee made no recommendations of its own, the report's 
experts provided a comprehensive review of current shortcomings 
in the acquisition process and provided a wide range of options 
to improve the defense acquisition system.  This compendium 
provides a starting point for defense acquisition reforms in 
the next Congress.

J. Wall Street Bank Involvement With Physical Commodities, November 20 
        and 21, 2014 (Report Prepared by the Majority and Minority 
        Staffs of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations and 
        released in conjunction with the Subcommittee's hearing on 
        November 20 and 21, 2014)

    In November 2014, after a two-year investigation, the 
Subcommittee released a 400-page bipartisan staff report 
detailing the nature and extent of the involvement of large 
Wall Street banks with physical commodities. The report 
explained how physical commodity activities were eroding the 
longstanding separation of banking and commerce; increasing 
risks to the banks, their holding companies, and the financial 
system; and raising questions about price manipulation and 
unfair trading in commodity markets.
    The report presented three case studies involving Goldman, 
Morgan Stanley, and JPMorgan Chase. In each case study, the 
report provided detailed evidence on several examples of 
physical commodity activities, including warehousing aluminum 
and other metals, trading uranium, mining coal, operating oil 
and gas storage and pipeline facilities, supplying jet fuel to 
airlines, constructing a compressed natural gas facility, and 
controlling power plants. The report provided detailed 
information about Goldman's ownership of Metro Trade Services 
International, a U.S. warehouse company which was certified to 
store aluminum warranted by the London Metal Exchange for use 
in settling trades and which operated a number of Detroit-area 
warehouses. The report noted that, after Goldman bought Metro 
in 2010, Metro warehouses accumulated 85 percent of the LME 
aluminum storage market in the United States, began to engage 
in so-called ``merry-go-round'' deals that shuttled metal from 
building to building without actually shipping aluminum out of 
Metro's system; and increased the wait to withdraw LME-
warranted metal from storage from about 40 days to more than 
600, reducing aluminum availability and tripling the U.S. 
premium for storage and delivery costs. The report noted that, 
during the same period, Goldman engaged in massive aluminum 
trades in both the physical and financial markets, further 
increasing the length of the warehouse queue and raising 
concerns about whether Goldman was manipulating aluminum prices 
or making trades using non-public warehouse information.
    The report also detailed how JPMorgan amassed physical 
commodity holdings equal to nearly 12 percent of its Tier 1 
capital, while telling regulators its holdings were far 
smaller; owned or controlled 30 electrical power plants across 
the country; and incurred a $410 million penalty for 
manipulative bidding strategies that produced excessive 
electricity payments that hurt consumers in California and the 
Midwest. The report also described JPMorgan's involvement with 
stockpiling and trading copper and designing an exchange traded 
fund based on copper prices. In addition, the report described 
how, at one time, Morgan Stanley controlled 55 million barrels 
of oil storage capacity as well as 6,000 miles of pipeline, 
while also working to build its own compressed natural gas 
facility and supplying major airlines with jet fuel. The report 
also described how the Federal Reserve conducted an intensive 
review of the physical commodity activities being engaged in by 
financial holding companies, determined they carried novel and 
troubling risks to both the holding companies and the financial 
system, and was considering new rules to rein in physical 
commodity risks.
    The report offered a long list of bipartisan 
recommendations to reduce physical commodity activities at 
banks and their holding companies. The recommendations included 
urging the Federal Reserve to reaffirm the separation of 
banking from commerce, and reconsider all of the rules and 
practices related to physical commodity activities in light of 
that principle; to issue a clear and comprehensive limit on the 
size of a financial holding company's physical commodity 
activities; and strengthen public disclosures of those 
activities to support effective oversight. The report also 
recommended narrowing the scope of the legal authorities 
permitting physical commodity activities, and establishing 
capital and insurance minimums to protect against potential 
losses from catastrophic events. In addition, the report 
recommended barring large traders, including financial holding 
companies, from using material non-public information gained 
from physical commodities activities to benefit their trading 
activities in the financial markets. The report also urged the 
Federal Reserve to use its upcoming rulemaking to address these 
concerns and reduce the risks associated with financial company 
involvement in physical commodity activities.

                   V. Requested and Sponsored Reports

    In connection with its investigations, the Subcommittee 
makes extensive use of the resources and expertise of the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Offices of 
Inspectors General (OIGs) at various Federal agencies, and 
other entities. During the 113th Congress, the Subcommittee 
requested a number of reports and studies on issues of 
importance. Several of these reports have already been 
described in connection with Subcommittee hearings. Several 
additional reports that were of particular interest, and that 
were not covered by Subcommittee hearings, are the following.

A. Corporate Income Tax: Effective Tax Rates Can Differ Significantly 
        from the Statutory Rate (GAO-13-520), May 30, 2013

    Over the past ten years, the Subcommittee has conducted a 
series of investigations into corporate nonpayment of U.S. 
income taxes. In 2008, in part at the Subcommittee's request, 
GAO issued a report on corporate tax payments (GAO-08-957) 
which found that nearly 55 percent of all large U.S.-controlled 
corporations reported no Federal tax liability in at least one 
year between 1998 and 2005. In response to a bipartisan request 
from the Subcommittee to update that report five years later, 
GAO assessed the extent to which corporations pay U.S. 
corporate income tax, and compared the average effective tax 
rate for corporations to the U.S. statutory corporate tax rate 
of 35 percent.
    The GAO report determined that large, profitable U.S. 
corporations paid an average effective Federal tax rate of 12.6 
percent in 2010, or only about one-third of the U.S. statutory 
rate. The report's findings added to a growing body of evidence 
that large, profitable corporations bear a dwindling share of 
the U.S. tax burden, and that the Treasury collects far less 
revenue from large, profitable corporations than might be 
expected under the 35 percent statutory tax rate. GAO's year-
long study examined, in particular, how effective tax rates are 
typically calculated, and then developed a new, more accurate 
methodology using actual corporate tax return data. GAO 
compiled the tax return data from large corporations for tax 
years 2008 through 2010, using M-3 tax returns filed with the 
Internal Revenue Service by corporations with at least $10 
million in assets. Using actual tax return data enabled GAO to 
develop more accurate figures for the taxes paid by large U.S. 
corporations than studies using tax information provided in 
corporate financial statements. The GAO report noted that the 
amounts reported in the corporate tax returns were, on the 
whole, lower than the tax liabilities reported in the corporate 
financial statements filed with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission. The GAO report explained that average corporate 
effective tax rates are generally computed as the ratio of 
taxes paid or tax liabilities accrued in a given tax year over 
the net income declared by the corporation during that same 
year.
    GAO found that, on average, large, profitable U.S. 
corporations paid U.S. Federal income tax amounting to just 
12.6 percent of their worldwide income. In addition, GAO found 
that the relatively low effective tax rate paid by U.S. 
corporations did not substantially increase when other taxes 
paid by those corporations were taken into account. For 
example, GAO found that, in 2010, adding foreign, state, and 
local taxes to Federal income taxes increased the average 
effective tax rate of large, profitable U.S. corporations by 
about 4 percentage points to 16.9 percent of their worldwide 
income. That composite tax rate was still less than half the 
U.S. statutory rate.
    GAO noted that some studies calculating effective tax rates 
included unprofitable corporations in their analysis, but 
explained that ``[t]he inclusion of unprofitable firms, which 
pay little if any actual tax, can result in relatively high 
estimates because the losses of unprofitable corporations 
greatly reduce the denominator of the effective rate'' and ``do 
not accurately represent the tax rate on the profitable 
corporations that actually pay the tax.'' GAO calculated that 
when unprofitable corporations were included in its data, the 
average effective Federal tax rate rose from 12.6 percent to 
16.6 percent, because those corporations had lost $315 billion 
and thereby reduced the overall net income against which the 
corporate tax payments were compared. GAO concluded that the 
resulting tax rate overstated the effective tax rate actually 
paid by large, profitable U.S. corporations.
    GAO's finding that corporations pay far less than the U.S. 
statutory rate was consistent with other Subcommittee 
investigative work detailing the many tax loopholes and tax 
shelters used by some U.S. profitable corporations to avoid or 
evade paying U.S. taxes. It was also consistent with other 
studies demonstrating that large, profitable corporations are 
often able to minimize, if not entirely avoid, paying U.S. 
income taxes. GAO did not make any recommendations in its 
report.

B. Disability Insurance: Work Activity Indicates Certain Social 
        Security Disability Insurance Payments Were Potentially 
        Improper (GAO-13-635), August 15, 2013

    For a number of years, the Subcommittee has examined issues 
related to Social Security disability programs and benefits. In 
August 2013, in response to a bipartisan request from the 
Subcommittee, GAO examined the extent to which the Federal 
Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) program may be 
overpaying benefits. This program is the nation's largest cash 
assistance program for workers with disabilities. Although 
program rules allow beneficiaries to engage in a limited amount 
of certain types of work, other work activities indicate that 
the beneficiaries are not disabled and therefore not entitled 
to DI benefits. Consequently, the Social Security 
Administration (SSA) may overpay beneficiaries if the agency 
does not detect disqualifying work activity and suspend 
benefits appropriately.
    GAO estimated that, as of January 2013, SSA made $1.29 
billion in potential cash benefit overpayments to about 36,000 
individuals, representing an estimated 0.4 percent of all 
primary DI beneficiaries as of December 2010. GAO developed 
this estimate by analyzing SSA data on individuals who were DI 
beneficiaries as of December 2010, and earnings data from the 
National Directory of New Hires (NDNH). GAO noted that the 
exact number of individuals who received improper disability 
payments and the exact amount of improper payments cannot be 
determined without detailed case investigations. GAO also noted 
that SSA, using a different methodology, had estimated its DI 
overpayments in Fiscal Year 2011 at $1.62 billion, or 1.27 
percent of all DI benefits in that Fiscal Year.
    GAO explained that its estimate included consideration of 
work activity performed by two populations of individuals. The 
first population performed work activity during the DI 
program's mandatory 5-month waiting period--a statutory program 
requirement to help ensure that SSA does not pay benefits to 
individuals who do not have long-term disabilities. Prior to 
receiving benefits, individuals must complete a 5-month waiting 
period, in which the individual cannot exceed a certain level 
of earnings, known as substantial gainful activity, during any 
month in order to be eligible for DI benefits. Earnings that 
exceed program limits during the waiting period indicate that 
individuals might not have long-term disabilities. The second 
population performed work activity beyond the program's trial 
work period which allows certain types of work for up to 9 
months, to see if the beneficiary can do that work and no 
longer requires DI benefits. Beneficiaries whose earnings 
consistently exceed program limits after completing the trial 
work period are generally no longer entitled to DI benefits. 
GAO determined that SSA uses its enforcement operation to 
generate alerts for potentially disqualifying earnings, but 
those alerts are not issued for earnings that occur in all 
months of the waiting period and potentially disqualifying work 
activity may remain undetected. SSA officials indicated to GAO 
that modifying its enforcement operation could be costly, and 
that the agency had not performed a cost assessment for making 
that modification.
    GAO recommended that SSA assess the cost and feasibility of 
establishing a mechanism to detect potentially disqualifying 
earnings during all months of the waiting period. SSA 
concurred, despite raising concerns about GAO's estimates.

C. IRS's Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program: 2009 Participation by 
        State and Location of Foreign Bank Accounts (GAO-14-265R), 
        January 6, 2014

    For a number of years, the Subcommittee has examined issues 
related to offshore tax abuses, including actions taken by 
banks located in tax havens to open offshore accounts for U.S. 
clients without disclosing those accounts to the Internal 
Revenue Service (IRS). At a 2008 Subcommittee hearing, UBS, 
Switzerland's largest bank, admitted that it had facilitated 
U.S. tax evasion by opening undisclosed Swiss accounts for U.S. 
clients. In 2009, UBS signed a deferred prosecution agreement 
with the United States on charges of conspiring to defraud the 
United States by impeding U.S. tax collection, paid a $780 
million fine, and agreed to disclose the names of some U.S. 
clients with hidden Swiss accounts. Also in 2009, the IRS 
established an Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program to 
encourage U.S. taxpayers to disclose the existence of their 
offshore accounts and, using a system of reduced penalties, pay 
the back taxes, interest, and penalties they owed for evading 
U.S. taxes. As a condition to participating in the program, the 
IRS required taxpayers to provide information about the 
offshore banks, investment firms, law firms, and others that 
helped them hide their assets offshore.
    In March 2013, at the request of the Finance Committee and 
others, GAO issued a report (GAO-13-318) analyzing the Offshore 
Voluntary Disclosure Program. The report found that, as of 
December 2012, the IRS had received more than 39,000 
disclosures from taxpayers and revenues exceeding $5.5 billion. 
GAO also analyzed about 10,500 taxpayer filings from the 
program and determined that, during the 2009 initiative, the 
median offshore account amount was $570,000, while accounts 
with penalties greater than $1 million represented only about 6 
percent of the cases, but accounted for almost half the 
penalties. In addition, GAO determined that many other 
taxpayers had made so-called ``quiet disclosures'' of offshore 
assets or income, by either amending a past return or 
disclosing offshore income for the first time on a current 
return, without paying any back taxes, interest, or penalties 
on previously hidden income. GAO noted, for example, that from 
tax year 2007 through tax year 2010, IRS estimated that the 
number of taxpayers reporting foreign accounts had nearly 
doubled to 516,000. GAO described these quiet disclosures as 
resulting in lost revenues while also undermining the 
effectiveness of the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program, and 
recommended review by the IRS.
    In January 2014, in response to a request from the 
Subcommittee, GAO issued a report providing supplemental 
information about the taxpayers who participated in the 2009 
Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program. GAO found that the 
participants had together filed over 12,800 Foreign Bank and 
Financial Account Reports (FBARs), as part of their disclosure 
obligations. GAO reported that its review of a sample of those 
FBARs found that some participants disclosed dozens of offshore 
accounts with multiple banks in multiple countries, while other 
participants disclosed only one account. Of the 12,800 FBARs 
reviewed, GAO determined that about 5,400 or 42 percent 
reported at least one account in Switzerland, while the next 
highest country total was the United Kingdom with about 1,000 
accounts. GAO also determined that U.S. taxpayers across the 
country filed those FBARs, with the most filed by taxpayers in 
the five states with generally the largest populations, 
California, New York, Florida, New Jersey, and Texas. No 
comparable analysis has yet been performed for FBARs filed in 
later stages of the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program, nor 
has any analysis been made public regarding other types of 
information provided by program participants. GAO did not make 
any recommendations in this report.

D. Large Partnerships: Characteristics of Population and IRS Audits 
        (GAO-14-379R), March 19, 2014; and Large Partnerships: With 
        Growing Number of Partnerships, IRS Needs to Improve Audit 
        Efficiency (GAO-14-732), September 18, 2014

    Over the years, the Subcommittee has examined a number of 
tax issues involving partnerships, including hedge funds. In 
March and September 2014, in response to a bipartisan request 
from the Subcommittee, GAO examined the IRS audit rate for 
large partnerships, defined by GAO as those with at least 100 
direct and indirect partners and $100 million in assets. They 
include hedge funds, private equity funds, and publicly traded 
partnerships. The March report provided preliminary graphics 
and data, while the September report provided a more 
comprehensive examination of IRS audits of large partnerships.
    In its reports, GAO determined that, from 2002 to 2011, the 
number of large partnerships had tripled to over 10,000, while 
the number of C corporations being created, including the 
largest U.S. publicly traded corporations, fell by 22 percent. 
GAO found that large partnerships had also increased in both 
the average number of direct partners and average asset size. 
GAO also found that some of those partnerships had revenues 
totaling billions of dollars per year and estimated that they 
collectively held more than $7.5 trillion in assets. In 
addition, GAO found that the IRS was auditing only a tiny 
fraction of the partnerships. According to GAO, in 2012, the 
IRS audited less than 1 percent of large partnerships compared 
to 27 percent of C corporations, making C corporations 33 times 
more likely to face an audit than a partnership.
    The GAO report described the complexity of some large 
partnerships, which made them difficult for the IRS to audit 
effectively. GAO reported that some partnerships had 100,000 or 
more partners arranged in multiple tiers, and some of those 
partners were not individuals or corporate entities but pass-
through entities--essentially, partnerships within 
partnerships. In addition, at publicly traded partnerships, the 
partners can change on a daily basis. GAO reported that one IRS 
official calculated that there were more than 1,000 
partnerships with more than a million partners in 2012.
    The GAO report also discussed a number of statutory 
obstacles to IRS audits of large partnerships. The report 
explained that the key statute, the Tax Equity and Fiscal 
Responsibility Act (TEFRA), was three decades old, was enacted 
at a time when many partnerships had 30 to 50 partners, and was 
not designed to handle partnerships with a million partners or 
a partnership roster that changed on a daily basis. Among the 
TEFRA problems identified by the report was a requirement that 
the IRS identify a ``tax matters partner'' to represent the 
partnership on tax issues, even though many partnerships did 
not designate such a partner, and simply identifying one in a 
complex partnership could take months. Second, the report 
described notification requirements that essentially required 
the IRS to notify individual partners prior to commencing an 
audit of the partnership, even though such notices were time 
consuming, carried large costs, and produced few, if any, 
benefits. Third, the report noted that TEFRA required any tax 
adjustments called for by an audit to be passed through to the 
partnership's taxable partners, even though the IRS's process 
for identifying, assessing, and collecting from those partners 
was laborious, time consuming, costly, and subject to error. In 
addition, the report explained that, under TEFRA, any tax 
adjustments had to be applied to past tax years, using 
complicated and expensive filing and amendment requirements, 
instead of being applied to the year in which the audit was 
performed and the adjustment made.
    GAO offered several recommendations for Congress and the 
IRS in its September report. GAO recommended that Congress 
consider requiring large partnerships to identify a partner to 
represent them during audits and to pay taxes on audit 
adjustments at the partnership level. GAO recommended that the 
IRS take multiple actions, including defining large 
partnerships, tracking audit results using revised audit codes, 
and implementing project planning principles for the audit 
procedure projects.

                                  [all]