[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
NATIONAL ARCHIVES: ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION POLICY,
CENSUS, AND NATIONAL ARCHIVES
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 20, 2009
__________
Serial No. 111-28
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
http://www.oversight.house.gov
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
54-382 PDF WASHINGTON : 2010
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York, Chairman
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania DARRELL E. ISSA, California
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOHN L. MICA, Florida
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
DIANE E. WATSON, California LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
JIM COOPER, Tennessee BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
GERRY E. CONNOLLY, Virginia JIM JORDAN, Ohio
MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah
Columbia AARON SCHOCK, Illinois
PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois ANH ``JOSEPH'' CAO, Louisiana
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire
CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
PETER WELCH, Vermont
BILL FOSTER, Illinois
JACKIE SPEIER, California
STEVE DRIEHAUS, Ohio
JUDY CHU, California
Ron Stroman, Staff Director
Michael McCarthy, Deputy Staff Director
Carla Hultberg, Chief Clerk
Larry Brady, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri, Chairman
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of JOHN L. MICA, Florida
Columbia JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
STEVE DRIEHAUS, Ohio
DIANE E. WATSON, California
Darryl Piggee, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on October 20, 2009................................. 1
Statement of:
Fawcett, Sharon, Assistant Archivist for Presidential
Libraries, National Archives and Records Administration;
Martha Morphy, Chief Information Officer, National Archives
and Records Administration; Robert Flaak, Director,
Committee Management Secretariat, General Services
Administration; and Christopher Greer, Assistant Director
for Information Technology Research and Development, White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy.............. 18
Fawcett, Sharon.......................................... 18
Flaak, Robert............................................ 51
Greer, Christopher....................................... 47
Morphy, Martha........................................... 40
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Clay, Hon. Wm. Lacy, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Missouri, prepared statement of................... 4
Fawcett, Sharon, Assistant Archivist for Presidential
Libraries, National Archives and Records Administration,
prepared statement of...................................... 21
Flaak, Robert, Director, Committee Management Secretariat,
General Services Administration, prepared statement of..... 54
Greer, Christopher, Assistant Director for Information
Technology Research and Development, White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy, prepared statement of....... 49
McHenry, Hon. Patrick T., a Representative in Congress from
the State of North Carolina, prepared statement of......... 14
Morphy, Martha, Chief Information Officer, National Archives
and Records Administration, prepared statement of.......... 42
NATIONAL ARCHIVES: ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS
----------
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2009
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and
National Archives,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m. in room
2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Clay and McHenry.
Staff present: Darryl Piggee, staff director/counsel; Jean
Gosa, clerk; Frank Davis, professional staff; Yvette Cravins,
counsel; Charisma Williams, staff assistant; Anthony Clark,
professional staff member; Leneal Scott, information systems
manager (full committee); Adam Hodge, deputy press secretary
(full committee); Gerri Willis, special assistant (full
committee); Adam Fromm, minority chief clerk and Member
liaison; Howard Denis, minority senior counsel; and Chapin Fay
and Jonathan Skladany, minority counsels.
Mr. Clay. Good afternoon. The Information Policy, Census,
and National Archives Subcommittee of the Oversight and
Government Reform Committee will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair and ranking minority member
will have 5 minutes to make opening statements, followed by
opening statements not to exceed 3 minutes by any other Member
who seeks recognition.
Without objection, Members and witnesses may have 5
legislative days to submit a written statement or extraneous
materials for the record.
Welcome to today's oversight hearing entitled, ``National
Archives: Advisory Committees and their Effectiveness.'' The
purpose of today's hearing is to examine the National Archives'
use of Federal advisory committees. We will consider several
important topics, including the statutory requirements of
Federal advisory committees, the impact of the advisory
committees on NARA decisionmaking, relevant developments in
Presidential libraries, and compare NARA's use of two very
different committees.
The National Archives' stated mission is to serve American
democracy by safeguarding and preserving the records of our
Government. As we will hear from our witnesses today, in order
to help them fulfill their mission successfully, NARA employs
advisory committees made up of outside experts and subject to
the Federal Advisory Committee Act. We will examine two of
those committees this afternoon, one for the Electronic Records
Archives and one on Presidential libraries.
Before we go to our witnesses, I would like to address the
role of advisory committees under FACA at the National
Archives.
Presidents and executive agencies have utilized outside
expertise since George Washington's Presidency, and Congress
has exerted legislative control over advisory bodies since
1842. Responding to increasing concerns that Federal advisory
committees were inefficient, inaccessible, and imbalanced, in
1972 Congress enacted FACA, which requires that committee
membership must be fairly balanced in terms of the points of
view represented and the functions to be performed, and the
committee should not be inappropriately influenced by the
appointing authority or by any special interest. Additionally,
FACA requires nearly all committee meetings to be open to the
public.
This subcommittee is concerned about NARA's Advisory
Committee on Presidential Libraries, both as regards its
effectiveness at this critical time for Presidential records
and libraries, and in terms of NARA's compliance with FACA.
As we will hear from our witnesses, the Committee on
Presidential Libraries is very different in important ways from
most Federal advisory committees, including another important
NARA Committee on Electronic Records Archives.
NARA claims that the membership of the Advisory Committee
on Presidential Libraries must be limited to representatives of
the private foundation that build and support the libraries
because they have been deeply involved in the development of
the various libraries and can speak with authority on issues
that arise in connection with establishing new libraries or
administering existing ones.
Obviously, the expertise of the foundation is quite
valuable, given the rare world that they live and work in.
After all, there are currently only 12 open Presidential
libraries in the Federal system, and understanding how to
prepare for, build, maintain, and support one requires a very
specific set of skills and experience. However, that the
membership is so narrowly limited concerns this subcommittee in
light of FACA's clear requirement that committees be fairly
balanced in terms of the points of view represented.
The advisory committee does not include any other relevant
stakeholders, historians, archivists, preservationists,
curators, and other museum performances, educators,
researchers, whose experience, perspectives, and skills could
greatly assist NARA.
Also troubling is the fact that the committee appears no
longer to meet. There are many serious issues surrounding the
Presidential libraries, not the least of which are the current
plans for the next library for former President George W. Bush,
and yet the Advisory Committee on Presidential Libraries last
met in January 2006, almost 4 years ago. As far as this
subcommittee knows, there are no plans for the committee to
meet again, even though NARA continues to reauthorize the
committee and appoint or reappoint members from the private
foundations.
The challenges faced by new and existing Presidential
libraries are not limited to fund-raising and construction.
There are serious questions of prompt and proper access to
Presidential records; the records management policies and
practices of Presidential administrations and executive
agencies; the care, preservation, and exhibition of priceless
artifacts and other national treasures; the security of
Presidential collections at the libraries and at other NARA
facilities; the role of the libraries in the education of our
young people; the historical balance, or often lack of balance,
within permanent and temporary museum exhibits; just to name a
few.
It is this subcommittee's hope that through our hearing
today we will gain a better understanding of NARA's reasons for
treating this advisory committee so differently and will
provide the National Archives with some valuable information
they can use in order to make their advisory committees more
efficient and effective.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Now on to today's topic. I will now yield to the
distinguished ranking minority member, Mr. McHenry of North
Carolina.
Mr. McHenry, you are recognized.
Mr. McHenry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your
leadership.
Thank you all for being here today. I know it is not easy
to make the trek up to the Hill, but we certainly appreciate
your time and your testimony, as well as the written testimony
you have already submitted for the record.
We will also be exploring pretty important subject matter
today that goes often unnoticed, and that is Federal advisory
committees. As we will hear testimony today, in 2008, 49
Executive departments and agencies utilized advisory committees
consisting of over 63,000 committee members serving on more
than 900 committees and providing advice to Government
officials and employees.
These Government advisory committees are governed by the
Federal Advisory Committee Act [FACA], as the chairman
mentioned, which was passed in 1972 as part of a good
Government initiative. As the chairman said, advisory
committees go significantly further back, obviously, than 1972,
and Congress' role in oversight of those advisory committees is
certainly important.
FACA requires that committee members be ``fairly balanced
in terms of the point of view represented and the functions to
be performed,'' and the committee ``not be inappropriately
influenced by the appointing authority or by any special
interest.''
FACA is designed to ensure both the even-handedness and
transparency of Federal advisory committees. Moreover, FACA
provides for multiple tiers of oversight by the President,
Congress, and the GSA, which we will certainly hear from today,
and the agencies, themselves, which additionally we will hear
from today.
It is in this oversight vein that we are here today to
explore the operations and efficiencies and efficacy,
furthermore, of the advisory committees, giving advice to the
National Archives and Records Administration [NARA]. To that
end, we will be hearing from NARA officials responsible for the
agency's committees, the General Services Administration, and
the committees, themselves.
It is up to us as Members of Congress to ensure that NARA's
advisory committees, which are often made up of members outside
of Government, are living up to the good Government standards
set forth under FACA.
The National Archives, much like advisory committees, in
general, is an agency that conducts invaluable work, that is
certainly true, but not always with the highest level of public
scrutiny, as often important agencies are lost to public
scrutiny. Perhaps because of this lack of transparency and
sunlight, the agency has suffered multiple egregious security
lapses as of late.
Mr. Chairman, while I believe that the recent National
Archives security breaches represent a much more urgent call
for appropriate oversight hearings by this committee, as we
have previously had--and I appreciate your leadership on that--
I look forward to today's testimony so that we can ensure our
advisory committees are acting in a balanced and transparent
manner.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I thank you for your
testimony.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Patrick T. McHenry
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. McHenry, for your participation in
this hearing and in previous hearings, and your cooperation on
these issues. It is one thing that I think you say about this
subcommittee is that we do work together and that we do
understand the importance of these issues. So thank you for
your service.
I would now like to introduce our panel.
Our first witness will be Sharon K. Fawcett. Ms. Fawcett is
the assistant archivist for Presidential Libraries. In that
position she provides policy, direction, and oversight of the
13 Presidential libraries administered by the National Archives
and Records Administration. Ms. Fawcett began working at the
National Archives in 1969 as an archivist on the staff of the
Lyndon B. Johnson Library. Ms. Fawcett is the committee
decisionmaker under FACA for the Advisory Committee on
Presidential Libraries.
Welcome today at this hearing, Ms. Fawcett.
Our next witness is Martha Morphy. Ms. Morphy is currently
the chief information officer of NARA. She is responsible for
all NARA information technology projects, including the
acquisition of NARA's ERA system, a system that preserves and
provides long-term access to uniquely valuable electronic
records of the U.S. Government and transitions Government-wide
management of the life cycle of all records into the realm of
e-Government. Ms. Morphy is the committee decisionmaker under
FACA for the Advisory Committee on Electronic Records Archive.
After Ms. Morphy we will hear from Dr. Christopher Greer.
Dr. Greer is currently assistant director for information
technology research and development at the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy and was previously Program
Director for the Office of Cyber Infrastructure at the National
Science Foundation. Dr. Greer is a member of the Advisory
Committee on Electronic Records Archives.
Our final witness will be Robert Flaak. Mr. Flaak is
currently the director of the Committee Management Secretariat,
an organization that monitors and reports executive branch
compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and is also
Deputy Executive Director of the Office of Policy Initiatives
at the General Services Administration. He previously served as
the Deputy Executive Director of the Office of Administrative
Policy and Office of Government-Wide Policy of the General
Services Administration and as the head of the committee
operations staff, and later Deputy Director of the Science
Advisory Committee at the EPA.
I thank all of our witnesses for appearing today and look
forward to your testimony.
It is the policy of the Oversight and Government Reform
Committee to swear in all witnesses before they testify. Would
you all please stand and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
answered in the affirmative.
I ask that each witness now give a brief summary of their
testimony. Please limit your summary to 5 minutes. Your
complete written statement will be included in the hearing
record.
I have just been informed that Ms. Fawcett and Ms. Morphy
have been replaced as committee decisionmakers of their
respective committees as of yesterday morning. We will let the
record reflect that.
Ms. Fawcett, you may begin, please.
STATEMENTS OF SHARON FAWCETT, ASSISTANT ARCHIVIST FOR
PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES, NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS
ADMINISTRATION; MARTHA MORPHY, CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER,
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION; ROBERT FLAAK,
DIRECTOR, COMMITTEE MANAGEMENT SECRETARIAT, GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION; AND CHRISTOPHER GREER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, WHITE HOUSE
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
STATEMENT OF SHARON FAWCETT
Ms. Fawcett. Chairman Clay, Ranking Member McHenry, I want
to thank you for this opportunity to testify before you today
on NARA's use of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The
Advisory Committee on Presidential Libraries was established by
the former Archivist of the United States Don Wilson in 1988.
The committee last met on January 26, 2006.
Former Archivist Don Wilson tasked the committee to provide
advice to the Archivist on matters relating to the Archival
Museum and public programs of the Presidential libraries. The
original membership was composed of representatives of each of
the foundations or families that had developed an existing
Presidential library. It was intended that the membership
expand when new Presidential libraries were created, and so it
did. The meetings served as a forum for the discussion of
issues relevant to NARA and the Presidential foundations.
Over the 21-year history of the committee, it provided the
Archivist advice and recommendation in a number of areas,
including the need for additional Government resources to
support core programs; comments on a 1995 report on the
relationship between the Presidential libraries and their
support foundations; the responsibility for funding
renovations, exhibits, and programs in Presidential libraries;
ideas on marketing strategies for Presidential libraries;
whether the National Archives Trust Fund Board should re-
examine its trust fund investment strategy in order to increase
returns on investments; and whether NARA should consider the
possibility of allowing dual compensation for library directors
who also served as executive directors of library foundations.
After the 2006 meeting, Archivist Allen Weinstein did not
convene subsequent committee meetings. Representatives of the
foundations, not the advisory committee, have chosen recently
to meet among themselves to discuss issues of common interest
and concern. Foundation and/or family representatives convened
together at a Washington, DC, hotel in April 2008. Archivist
Allen Weinstein and I were invited to provide an update on NARA
and library activities following an evening reception, and we
did so. We did not attend any of the discussions the next day,
though it is my understanding that these discussions focused on
budgetary issues, including funding for core archival
processes, digitization, and information technology.
I was asked to address whether NARA has received all the
information from this advisory committee needed to properly
evaluate the proposal for the planned George Bush Presidential
Library. Neither Archivist Carlin nor Archivist Weinstein used
the committee to evaluate new library proposals. NARA developed
architectural design standards in 1999 which govern the design,
building, and acceptance of a Presidential archival depository.
The Archivist invited representatives from the George W.
Bush Library Committee to meet with the advisory committee in
January 2006. At an informal lunch following the meeting, the
library directors and members of the committee provided
suggestions on best practices and mistakes to avoid. My office
compiled a summary of the advice for the Bush Library
Committee, which I have provided to you.
The Archivist encouraged the Bush committee to visit some
of the Presidential Libraries and meet with library and
foundation staff, which I believe they did.
As NARA laid out in our report, Alternative Models for
Presidential Libraries, our relationship with library
foundations is complex. The Government's role is to run the
library, which involves preserving the collections, processing
the records for public access, and working to ensure that the
historical content of exhibits and education programs reflects
an objective perspective of the Presidency, even as the private
foundations have carried the major financial responsibility for
funding our exhibits and programs. Exhibits today, which
incorporate cutting edge technology and dramatic design
elements, are costly, as much as $10 million to design and
install a new permanent exhibit. Five library foundations have
recently funded or are currently raising money for new
permanent exhibits.
While there are many positive benefits to the unique
relationship NARA has with the foundations, the foundations and
NARA's view of our stewardship responsibilities are not always
aligned. Presidential libraries serve a broad constituency of
users who hold divergent views on the priorities and mission of
Presidential libraries.
I have long thought that the advisory committee
representing these multiple stakeholder groups could provide
the Archivist with advice on a broader range of issues;
however, it is also important for the Archivist to have a forum
in which to discuss important issues of concern to the National
Archives with the foundations who provide substantial support
to the libraries.
In late 2004 I discussed the issue of membership with
Archivist John Carlin. Archivist Weinstein held two meetings of
the committee. He and I discussed whether to make changes to
the membership of the committee. In December 2008 the Archivist
designed before making any decision about the future of the
committee.
Earlier this year, Acting Archivist Adrienne Thomas
considered not renewing the charter; however, as Carlin did
previously, she decided to leave the decision to the next
Archivist of the United States, and therefore elected to renew
its charter for another 2 years.
Family members, former associates of the Presidents, and
foundation members from the committees where we have libraries
have served on the committee. It is my understanding that FACA
does not bar an agency from establishing a limited purpose
advisory committee with a more focused membership such as this
one. The library foundations are an important partner, and the
Archivist needs to be able to meet with them individually and
as a group.
The FACA-established committee provides an open and
transparent way in which to conduct these meetings. The next
Archivist will need to consider the important question of
whether to keep this advisory committee as it is currently
constituted and/or establish a new committee with a broader
membership to provide more divergent feedback and advice to
NARA on its Presidential libraries.
Thank you. This concludes my oral statement. I will be
pleased to answer any of your questions about the advisory
committee.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Fawcett follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Ms. Fawcett, for your statement.
Ms. Morphy, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF MARTHA MORPHY
Ms. Morphy. Chairman Clay, Ranking Member McHenry, I am
here as the designated Federal official for the Archivist
Advisory Committee on Electronic Records Archives. I appreciate
the opportunity to testify before you today on the National
Archives and Records Administration use of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, and specifically the Advisory Committee on
Electronic Records Archives [ACERA].
ACERA was established by then Archivist of the United
States Allen Weinstein in 2005. This committee meets twice a
year in April and November, and information about the meeting
and the meeting minutes are available at the National Archives
Web site. The last meeting was held on April 29, and 30, 2009.
The costs for that meeting were approximately $9,300, which
included travel, per diem, and supplies.
Since its creation, this committee has scheduled nine
meetings and met eight times. The ninth meeting will be held on
November 4th and 5th of this year.
Archivist Weinstein established the committee to serve as a
deliberative body to advise the Archivist of the United States
on technical, mission, and service issues related to the
Electronic Records Archives [ERA]. This includes but is not
limited to advising and making recommendations to the Archivist
on issues related to the development, implementation, and use
of the ERA system. ERA is an information technology system
being built to support the preservation of and access to
electronic records that are complex in nature, diverse in
format, and exponentially increasing in volume. The challenge
that NARA faces in the area of electronic records is one that
is shared throughout the Government and the private sector.
The original ACERA membership consisted of 18 members
considered to have particular expertise, knowledge, and
interest in electronic records. Today's membership consists of
17 recognized experts and leaders with active interest in
records management, electronic records, information technology,
and research in Federal and State governments, academia, and
the public and private sectors.
The meetings serve as a forum for the discussion of issues
relevant to NARA and the Electronic Records Archives, and are
therefore not strictly structured to only provide formal
recommendations or findings. The meetings are also an
opportunity for NARA to communicate to and to seek feedback
from the committee on NARA's strategic plans, the state of the
Electronic Records Archives, the newest releases and
developments of the ERA system, and any electronic records
challenges encountered since the previous meeting. Committee
members often add value to the meetings by discussing their own
projects and activities that are relevant to electronic records
and information technology.
Over the 4-year history of the committee, it provided
informal recommendations and advice on the architecture and
design of the ERA system and approach to processing Freedom of
Information Act requests for the Presidential electronic
records, a review of the Hitachi Content Archive Platform to be
used for processing records, a review of the Global Digital
Format Registry initiative, discussions of the pros and cons of
a Federated Electronic Management Model, and a review of the
requirements for public access within the ERA system.
The November 2009 meeting agenda includes an overview of
NARA's Center for Advanced Systems and Technology, a
presentation on the use of ERA in Presidential libraries,
strategies for communicating ERA progress, and a discussion of
NARA's conceptual framework for digital preservation.
In my letter of invitation to this hearing, you also asked
for my views on this advisory committee and if there was
anything that should be done to improve its service to NARA. It
is my opinion that this advisory committee is useful and
necessary to the Archivist of the United States at a time when
preserving and providing access to the growing volume of
Government electronic records is made even more challenging by
the rapid changes in technologies that create those records.
Government does not have all the answers to these
challenges, but thankfully with ACERA we have a diverse group
of experts who are willing to give their time to help us stay
focused on feasible, cost-effective, and, most importantly,
far-sighted solutions.
I am personally thankful we have ACERA, and I do not see
any need for changes to its charter. It is my hope that the new
Archivist will find this a useful forum, as well.
Thank you. This concludes my statement, and I will be
pleased to answer any questions that you might have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Morphy follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Morphy, for your
statement.
Dr. Greer, you are next up for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER GREER
Dr. Greer. Good afternoon. My name is Chris Greer, and I am
a member of the National Archives and Records Administration's
Advisory Committee for the Electronic Records Archive. I thank
the chairman and the ranking member for the opportunity to meet
with you today.
I am here today representing myself as an individual member
of the ACERA. I have been an advisory committee member since
2007. I am a scientist by training and was a faculty member at
the University of California Irvine for more than 18 years
before joining the Federal Government. I have been an employee
of the National Science Foundation since 2003, where I recently
served as senior advisor for digital data in the Office of
Cyber Infrastructure. I am currently on assignment from NSF to
the Office of Science and Technology Policy, where I serve as
Assistant Director for Information Technology, Research, and
Development. I also co-chair the Inter-Agency Working Group on
Digital Data of the National Science and Technology Council's
Committee on Science.
Your committee has asked witnesses to describe their
advisory group's purposes, uses, and effectiveness, so let me
describe each of these in turn.
First purposes: the ACERA is charged with serving as a
deliberative body to provide advice to the Archivist on
technical, mission, and service issues relevant to the
development, implementation, and use of the Electronic Records
Archive. The operative word in this charge is deliberative. The
committee's central function is to analyze ERA issues, weigh
options, and evaluate solutions. The committee's deliberations
are typically intense and engaging.
Next uses: the committee is used to air ideas and opinions
on strategic, technical, and implementation issues. My
experience is that NARA uses the committee to probe the full
spectrum of ERA issues. Recent topics have ranged from design
concepts for the reference architecture through standards
adoption and supported formats to details of the project time
line and work status.
The committee typically uses an action items mechanism
rather than formal recommendations, reflecting a spirit of
partnership and an emphasis on real progress. Each meeting
generates 5 to 10 action items, and the resolution of these
items is tracked in the minutes.
Finally effectiveness: in my opinion, five factors have
allowed ACERA to be effective. First, NARA places a high
priority on the committee. The Archivist or acting Archivist
and ERA project leadership attend nearly the entire 2-day
meeting and actively participate in debate and discussion.
Second, the committee is consulted at each major project
phase. The committee meets twice each year, a frequency that is
about right for this multi-year project.
Third, ACERA is given the opportunity for full
deliberation. Each meeting is conducted over 2 days, providing
the time needed to tackle complex issues in a thoughtful
manner.
Fourth, the committee is given the information it needs to
provide informed advice. Briefing materials are complete and
candid, and we get an honest look at all sides.
Fifth, ACERA is used to address questions of substance.
Briefings focus on challenges, options, and implications rather
than on defending a preferred choice. NARA leadership and
staffers, alike, engage in honest debate and demonstrate a
willingness to change course in response to a compelling case.
Because of these factors, I have found ACERA membership to
be valuable and rewarding.
I hope these comments are helpful, and I am glad to answer
any questions you may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Greer follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Dr. Greer.
Now we will hear from Mr. Flaak.
Mr. Flaak, 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT FLAAK
Mr. Flaak. Chairman Clay, Mr. Ranking Member McHenry, my
name is Robert Flaak. I direct the Committee Management
Secretariat at GSA. Thank you for the opportunity to be here
today to discuss the important role played by Federal advisory
committees in the work and missions assigned to the executive
branch and, in particular, for NARA's advisory committees and
the two in particular that have been mentioned already.
During previous testimony before this subcommittee, Mr.
Chairman, I have had the opportunity on occasion to discuss how
GSA and executive branch agencies and departments manage their
responsibilities under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. I
have also included that material in my prepared testimony,
which I have submitted to you, so therefore I am not going to
repeat those in my oral statements, but I want to cover the
questions that you had asked me in your letter.
At NARA, just as any other executive department and agency,
the agency committee management officer has responsibility for
the implementation of FACA on behalf of the agency's head.
Within NARA, individual designated Federal officers work with
the CMO to implement the act's requirements at the committee
level, and together the two of them are responsible for
ensuring that NARA's compliance with FACA, GSA's regulations
and guidelines, NARA's internal operating procedures, and any
other applicable statutes and regulations are adhered to.
As both you and the ranking member both mentioned, FACA is
quite detailed in specific procedures, and it does mention the
requirement for balance in advisory committees. You both quoted
section five of FACA in that membership of advisory committees
is to be fairly balanced in the points of view represented and
the functions to be performed by committees.
Now, FACA doesn't say much more about it than that. That is
about as much as the statement exists. We have incorporated
additional language in our regulations in 41 C.F.R. 102-3 on
balance, and we specifically state that in the selection of
members for the advisory committee, the agency will consider a
cross-section of those directly affected, interested, and
qualified, as appropriate, to the nature and functions of the
committee. We also apply additional guidance in our regulatory
package that lets agencies evaluate other ways of selecting and
balancing their committees.
Mr. Chairman, in your letter to me you asked specifically
about these two NARA advisory committees, the Advisory
Committee on Electronic Record Archives and the one on
Presidential Libraries. Both of these were established as
agency authority committees, and as such they are discretionary
and they report to NARA. The Advisory Committee on Electronic
Record Archives was established in 2005. Its most recent
charter was renewed in August of this year in 2009. It has 16
members, all of whom are special Government employees.
According to data submitted by NARA in our shared
management system, which is our online FACA data base, from
fiscal years 2006 through 2009 the committee met twice each
year and expended an average of about $38,000 each year. Cost
figures for 2009 are still tentative pending reconciliation of
that data through our annual comprehensive review.
According to its charter, the committee serves as a
deliberative body on technical, mission, and service issues
related to electronic record archives, as Dr. Greer mentioned.
I might point out that as a deliberative body I have
noticed this committee does not typically use a formal
recommendations mechanism. That is to say we don't see formal
recommendations listed in our data base. We do see, though, in
the minutes that are online for this committee a number of
action items that are identified in the minutes, as Dr. Greer
mentioned.
The Advisory Committee on Presidential Libraries was
established by NARA in 1988. Its most recent charter was
renewed in July 2008, with 12 members who are representative
members. That charter is still active. It is a 2-year charter.
It will expire next summer.
According to data submitted to us by NARA, the committee
has not met during fiscal year 2007, 2008, or 2009, and, as
mentioned earlier, they did meet in 2006.
NARA does report one recommendation issued by the committee
during its lifetime in our system, and, again, that is the
information that has been received by my office.
According to its charter, the committee is to advise the
Archivist of the United States on matters relating to the
archival, museum, and public programs of the Presidential
libraries operated by the NARA and advises the Archivist on
policies, procedures, programs, objectives, and other matters
relating to the effectiveness of the Presidential library
system.
Mr. Chairman, you had also asked me to address the degree
to which NARA's advisory committees process gives NARA relevant
information that it needs to conduct its business. I have to
say that is a little difficult for us to determine at our
distance. You did hear some of that from Ms. Fawcett earlier
regarding her committee. GSA does rely on Executive departments
and agencies like NARA to provide real-time data throughout the
year and to wrap it up at the end of the year and verify it on
their committees, and so we can verify that information by the
close of the fiscal year.
In looking at advisory committees, though, from our
perspective, we can estimate a committee's value to an agency
in a couple of ways. One, if the committee is meeting
frequently. Is the committee used a lot by the agency? Does it
get a lot of opportunities to participate with the agency and
the public? The number of recommendations issued by the
committee and whether or not, most importantly, those
recommendations are adopted by the Federal agency. Finally, if
we get feedback from the agency through our desk officer
program in my office. Last, since these committees in both
cases have been renewed on a regular basis, from our
perspective it would appear that NARA finds them both to be
beneficial and will continue to renew these.
I am not sure whether the Presidential Library Committee
will change as a result of the change in the Archivist. That is
a matter up to the agency to decide. I defer certainly to NARA
on that.
Mr. Chairman, that ends my oral statements. I would be
happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Flaak follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Mr. Flaak. I appreciate your
insight and testimony.
Let me start with Ms. Fawcett. In light of the broad and
serious challenges facing Presidential libraries and the fact
that they aim to serve many different kinds of groups and
individuals, can you continue to justify limiting the
membership of the committees solely to representatives of the
private foundations?
Ms. Fawcett. Well, I don't think in the end that is my
decision. It would be the decision of the next Archivist. As I
said in my testimony, we are interested in what other
stakeholder groups have, and NARA reaches out on a consistent
basis to talk with those divergent stakeholders. We held
meetings of public interest groups with regard to the
alternative models report, and our thoughts and
recommendations, changes we might propose to the Presidential
Records Act. As a result of that meeting, we chose not to
propose certain changes to the act.
We meet regularly with educators, and we meet with
historians and other special interest groups. Each of the
individual libraries reaches out to many of the groups in their
communities. They work with local school boards and local
school districts in developing curriculum packages for visits
by school children to the various libraries. So there is much
that is done by NARA to continue to reach out to all of these
groups.
On the other hand, you know, having a way and a forum in
which to meet with the foundations is a strength and provides a
useful forum for the Archivist when he chooses to do that.
Archivist Carlin, for example, used the meetings that occurred
during his tenure to focus on the issue of funding programs in
Presidential libraries and to get the foundations to understand
the necessity of their stepping up to the plate to provide for
the exhibits and education programs and public programs that
make a library a viable and vibrant entity. I think that very
use was very helpful.
On the other hand, the foundations gave feedback to the
Archivist, and I think members of the committee might be
surprised to know how interested the foundations are in
ensuring that NARA has the resources for core processes.
Processing declassification was a very important issue to these
foundations. They wanted to see the Presidential records open.
They wanted to see records declassified. I think, as a result
of their urging, the urging of many other stakeholder groups
who talked to NARA, Congress did see fit to provide us with
additional resources for processing Presidential records. We
added 15 new archivists in the Presidential Records Act
libraries, and we have the largest staff of archivists ever at
the George W. Bush Library.
So I found the committee has been useful.
Mr. Clay. So you do think we need to have historians,
archivists, preservationists, researchers, curators, educators,
and others?
Ms. Fawcett. I think it is very important to hear from all
of those groups, and NARA reaches out to them.
Mr. Clay. Do you think they should be on the boards?
Ms. Fawcett. I think that is fair. I think that is a
perfectly reasonable thought to have them on board on this
committee, and that is why Archivist Weinstein and Archivist
Carlin and I both discussed the membership. But for various
reasons it didn't occur. I became Acting Archivist for
Presidential Libraries just before John Carlin left the agency
and just before Weinstein was sworn in.
Archivist Weinstein held two meetings of the committee, but
I think that his particular style, he preferred a more
individual one-on-one relationship with the foundations, and so
he sought to interact with the foundations more on a one-on-one
basis. I think that may have been one of the reasons why he had
so few meetings of the committee.
Mr. Clay. OK. Do you think they should meet regularly?
Ms. Fawcett. I think it is useful for them to meet
regularly. Yes.
Mr. Clay. OK. When you reach out to other stakeholders, as
you mentioned, are the contacts subject to FACA?
Ms. Fawcett. Well, it depends. You can have a single-
purpose meeting with other stakeholders and not be in violation
of the FACA. We work very closely with our general counsel's
office when we set up any of these kind of meetings to ensure
that we are in compliance with the FACA.
Mr. Clay. You take recommendations from the different
stakeholders, right?
Ms. Fawcett. We listen. Yes.
Mr. Clay. OK.
Ms. Fawcett. Yes.
Mr. Clay. OK. And that all comes into the decisionmaking
process under FACA?
Ms. Fawcett. It becomes part of our decisionmaking process
as we listen to people one-on-one or in small groups. We are
not meeting with them on a regular basis on any one subject.
Mr. Clay. Ms. Fawcett, has any of the following items
occurred since the last meeting of the advisory committee? I've
got a list here, so I want to ask you to respond.
Ms. Fawcett. OK.
Mr. Clay. Has NARA accepted any Presidential libraries into
the system since you last met?
Ms. Fawcett. When was Clinton?
Mr. Clay. Would it be the----
Ms. Fawcett. Clinton was already in the system since we
last met. No. Yes, we have--the Nixon.
Mr. Clay. Nixon.
Ms. Fawcett. The Nixon Presidential Library was accepted
into the system in July 2007. Excuse my memory blank here.
Mr. Clay. OK. So that is pretty major. That is pretty
major, correct, to get a new library into the system?
Ms. Fawcett. Yes, it is.
Mr. Clay. OK. Has any Presidential library undergone or
announced plans for major renovations to their physical plant
such as expansions or other kind of capital improvement
projects?
Ms. Fawcett. Yes, we are working on capital improvement
projects in several Presidential libraries. Currently,
Roosevelt and Kennedy. On dock are Johnson----
Mr. Clay. And that is pretty significant, too, I mean, to
go through a major renovation is pretty significant?
Ms. Fawcett. Yes, but we don't depend on the advisory
committee for advice on those renovations. NARA has
architectural and design standards that govern the renovations
of these buildings. We work closely with our preservation
staff, our facilities staff, with the library where the
renovations are being considered.
Mr. Clay. OK. All right. Let me go to Dr. Greer or Mr.
Flaak.
There seems to be many areas where NARA's reporting is
either incomplete or incorrect in the FACA data base. Is the
agency responsible for providing accurate, up-to-date
information for the public?
Mr. Flaak. Yes, Mr. Chairman, that is correct. The agency
enters the data into the system, which is a public facing
system. The data is entered in in different ways by different
agencies. Some agencies, the DFOs, the designated Federal
officers for the individual committees, enter the data. In
other cases, the community management officer, themselves,
reserves that right to themselves. In any event, the agencies
do it. They verify the data toward the end of the year during
our annual comprehensive review process, which is ongoing right
now through the end of next month. And then we work with them
to verify that data at the end of that process.
Mr. Clay. Why should we be concerned about compliance with
information reporting requirements of FACA?
Mr. Flaak. Pardon me, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Clay. Why should we be concerned about compliance with
the information reporting requirements of FACA in this
instance?
Mr. Flaak. If the agency is reporting incorrect
information, then either the Congress, ourselves, or other
interested parties don't have an accurate understanding of what
that committee might be doing, how much money they are
spending, or how they are operating their committees.
For the current fiscal year that just ended, 2009, the data
is still I would call it in raw form because it doesn't get
verified until the end of the year. But if you look at previous
years, 2008 and prior, that information has been verified by
the agency and is complete, and therefore should be accurate.
Mr. Clay. OK. Thank you for that response.
In talking about accuracy, I received a response from
Archives yesterday pointing out six discrepancies in
information that they supplied to this committee. One of them
was on how to classify members of the advisory committee, as
special Government employees or as representatives. Then they
say we've changed the designation for these members in our 2008
report, and now they are all correctly listed as
representatives instead of special Government employees. They
talk about appointment type. Have you seen this letter?
Mr. Flaak. I saw it this morning, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. And it is six different areas that they had to
correct. What do you think of this? This is pretty going by the
seat of their pants pretty quickly here, aren't they?
Mr. Flaak. Well, it is always good to get the data correct,
but it is nice to have it right in the first place.
Mr. Clay. Eventually you get it correct.
Mr. Flaak. We'd like to think so, but there is a lot of
agencies and a lot of advisory committees out there, and
checking each of these over individually takes time.
Mr. Clay. Thank you.
Mr. Flaak. I might point out, Mr. Chairman, on the
representative issue that you mentioned a moment ago, back in
2004 the Government Accounting Office, now the Government
Accountability Office, did a review of the membership balance
issues. I believe you are aware of that----
Mr. Clay. Yes.
Mr. Flaak [continuing]. And directed that both GSA and
Office of Government Ethics step up their process on ensuring
that members were correctly designated on Federal advisory
committees, whether they be representative members of special
Government employees. We have worked on that process with
agencies back from about that time in the mid-2004-2005
timeframe.
For this Committee on Presidential Libraries it would
appear to be appropriate that the members be representative
members. Why they characterized them originally as special
government employees, I don't know. But the change as it took
place over the last couple of years was correct, and it was the
correct direction for it to go.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for your response.
Ms. Morphy, how important is the Advisory Committee on
Electronic Records Archives to you, to the ERA, and to NARA?
Ms. Morphy. As I stated in my testimony, very important.
Whenever you are doing a large information technology project,
you are very, very focused on doing that project and trying to
meet deadlines, and it is always good to have an external
opinion to make sure that our focus continues to be correct,
and ACERA certainly has provided great guidance to us, and,
based on the action items that we have received, we have made
some changes in terms of the direction that we have gone with
the system.
Mr. Clay. Do you meet so often and for so long because of
the complexity of the issues or because of the diversity of the
membership views or both?
Ms. Morphy. I think first the complexity of the issue.
Actually, both. The membership, because they are from both the
private and the public sector, from universities, people who
have an interest in electronic records as well as information
technology, when you have people with those skills all in a
room together, the discussion really, really does get to a
level to really help us make determinations on the direction
the system should go.
Mr. Clay. Can you give me a specific example or two of how
the committee's advice or assistance has improved the
Electronic Records Archive?
Ms. Morphy. I think from my own experience in the area of
public access, this is an area that I am very interested in. At
our last meeting in April we provided a presentation on the
direction that we were going toward public access, something
that we are building right now, and the advisory committee
offered several suggestions that we accepted and that have been
added to our requirements, and also offered some possibilities
in how we might share the development of the prototype with
them as we go forward.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that. Do you think the committee
could have provided NARA with such assistance if it were
comprised only of individuals directly involved with NARA and
only representing one general area of the ERA?
Ms. Morphy. No, not at all. Having the blend of people who
have different experiences and come from different
organizations has really--and some of the things that they have
experienced in terms of doing projects just have enhanced our
ability to build ERA.
Mr. Clay. Very good to know. Thank you for that.
Dr. Greer, in your experience as a member of the Advisory
Committee on Electronic Records Archives, does the committee as
a whole or individual members of the committee provide
assistance, guidance, or advice in any other forum or by any
other means than the committee's meetings?
Dr. Greer. Mr. Chairman, the question is: are there other
mechanisms that are used to provide advice to NARA on ERA?
Mr. Clay. Yes, I guess it would be e-mail communications,
letters.
Dr. Greer. There are, of course, materials that go out in
advance of each meeting to provide background for the members
and scheduling issues, things like that. Otherwise, there is
not a lot of formal back-and-forth.
Now, we are all of us involved in areas of digital
preservation and access, and so we certainly run across one
another individually and talk about general technology issues
in the course of events.
Mr. Clay. Here's the point: do you think the committee
could be effective without meeting as a group or if it did not
meet for several years at a time?
Dr. Greer. In the case of the Electronic Records Archive,
which is a very broad scope project which is moving forward in
a landscape of changing technologies, I think the only way to
keep up in this particular instance is through regular meetings
where people get together and have an active debate over things
that don't have a single solution.
Mr. Clay. OK. You said in your statement that the committee
membership is diverse, providing a breadth of perspectives;
however, one could argue that because the committee's work
covers a very specific area, NARA's Electronic Records Archive,
that the membership should be limited only to those with direct
experience in such a unique field, and only from the experience
with the National Archives. Do you think the committee could be
as effective if its members were limited in this way?
Dr. Greer. The Electronic Records Archive, again, is a
complex project that has the issues of ingest from the various
Federal agencies, permanent preservation and access, in its
archives function, and access to a wide variety of communities
in order to make that information have value to the public.
Because of that breadth of issues, I don't think any one person
or group, interest group, could cover all of that.
So I think in a case of ERA, which is quite a unique
project in NARA's history, the breadth of the project demands a
group that has considerable breadth.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that testimony.
Ms. Fawcett, the membership of the Advisory Committee on
Presidential Libraries consists solely of individuals who
represent the private foundations that build and support the
library; is that correct?
Ms. Fawcett. Private foundations or family members.
Mr. Clay. Or family members. OK. Are these foundations
completely separate from the Presidential libraries and the
National Archives?
Ms. Fawcett. They are completely independent institutions,
501(c)(3)'s.
Mr. Clay. OK. For instance, do any foundations receive
anything of value from any Presidential library and/or NARA? Do
we fund them? Do we give them any resources?
Ms. Fawcett. Prior to the passage of the amendments of the
Presidential Libraries Act in 1988, when foundations provided a
library to the Government the Government then, in return,
allowed them to use some space within the library, so a very
few of our libraries actually house foundations within their
space. After the amendments to the Presidential Libraries Act,
that space is separate and apart from the National Archives. So
yes, that would be, I suppose, a benefit to the foundations.
Mr. Clay. So NARA covers the space, the utilities, computer
equipment, Government phone lines?
Ms. Fawcett. Not the computer equipment, not the staff.
They cover the space and the utilities, but not the computer
equipment or the staff.
Mr. Clay. OK. Whose telephones are they? Are they
Government or----
Ms. Fawcett. It varies. I think in most cases it is their
own system, but in some cases they do use our telephones.
Mr. Clay. How about furniture?
Ms. Fawcett. They gave the furniture in the first place, so
they get to use it.
Mr. Clay. How about office supplies?
Ms. Fawcett. They buy their own office supplies.
Mr. Clay. OK. Government e-mail addresses? No?
Ms. Fawcett. There are a couple that use the NARA-net
system, which is our internal system. Most have left NARA-net
because they don't like the security requirements so they have
their own systems. But I don't do think at--I think the Ford
Library Foundation uses a NARA mail account.
Mr. Clay. Does NARA have memorandums of understanding with
these foundations for the goods and services the Government
provides?
Ms. Fawcett. We have joint operating agreements with the
foundations. When they turn over to the Government a library,
we have a joint operating agreement that outlines the tenets of
our relationship.
Mr. Clay. And then does NARA calculate the value of these
goods and services, and is NARA compensated in all cases?
Ms. Fawcett. Well, NARA is compensated through the funding
of programs, etc. For example, the Johnson Library Foundation
occupies a couple of offices and a little reception space in
the library, but that foundation provides over $1.5 million a
year in support for processing staff, exhibits, public
programs, etc. So yes, NARA does receive something in return
for the foundations being able to use that space. They raise
money on behalf of the library.
Mr. Clay. OK. Other than vendors who are paid for their
products and services----
Ms. Fawcett. I am sorry? Other than who?
Mr. Clay. Than vendors.
Ms. Fawcett. Vendors.
Mr. Clay. Vendors, who are paid for their products and
services and groups that rent the facilities for a fee, are
there any other organizations that receive anything of value
from any Presidential library and/or NARA? Any other groups
that receive anything of value that they don't pay for?
Ms. Fawcett. Well, for example, we put on education
programs for classrooms around the country, and so classes of
students come to the library, experience our theater of
decisionmaking, and there is no charge for that service.
Mr. Clay. That wasn't what I was looking for.
Ms. Fawcett. I don't know what you are----
Mr. Clay. That is educational. I don't know how you put
value on that.
Ms. Fawcett. I can't think of any group that is receiving
free services from NARA.
Mr. Clay. OK. The private library foundations are the only
ones who receive anything of value from the National Archives
then?
Ms. Fawcett. And only a very limited number of them have
offices in our space.
Mr. Clay. OK. All right.
Mr. Flaak, these private foundations have financial
relationships with the National Archives. Does the fact that
the leadership or other representatives of these foundations
serve on the advisory committee present any conflict or the
possibility of a conflict of interest?
Mr. Flaak. Mr. Chairman, I can't speak to the relationship
between the foundations and NARA, but with regard to the
membership on the advisory committees, whoever that
representative is from each foundation to the committee, under
the guidelines put out by the Office of Government Ethics,
representative members are not subject to conflict of interest
rules. So, while there may be an appearance issue here, from a
legal standpoint, Office of Government Ethics would not apply
conflict of interest rules to those individuals.
Mr. Clay. All right. Thank you for that.
Ms. Fawcett, has any representative from the George W. Bush
Library Foundation been invited to join the committee formally
or informally? If so, who are they and when did they join the
committee?
Ms. Fawcett. We invited the Library Committee to attend the
2006 meeting, but because we haven't had a meeting since then
no formal invitation has been extended to the George W. Bush
Library Foundation to have a member of the committee, so the
answer is no, we have not.
Mr. Clay. So you are waiting on the new Archivist to invite
them?
Ms. Fawcett. Well, at such time as the new Archivist or at
such time as we would have a meeting, then we would look to
have a representative name from that foundation.
Mr. Clay. OK. Do you know who that person would be, who the
contact person would be with the Bush Library?
Ms. Fawcett. I know who I would contact at the Bush Library
Foundation to make a suggestion. Whether that person would be
the member or not, I don't know.
Mr. Clay. Would you like to give a name?
Ms. Fawcett. Mark Langdale. He is the CEO of the
foundation.
Mr. Clay. All right. Thank you for that.
Allen Weinstein was the most recent Archivist of the United
States, but the advisory committee was established long before
his tenure. How many meetings were held after Professional
Weinstein began his tenure as Archivist?
Ms. Fawcett. Two.
Mr. Clay. Two. Do you know if Professor Weinstein supported
and made use of the advisory committee?
Ms. Fawcett. Well, at the two meetings held with Professor
Weinstein, there was much discussion of marketing Presidential
libraries and funding for education programs and IT
initiatives. There was concern expressed by the foundation
members that the libraries didn't have sort of the IT
infrastructure that they needed to do far-reaching projects,
digitization, etc. So there was that discussion, and then there
was the discussion of creating a marketing plan for
Presidential libraries, which my office later worked on and
completed a marketing study.
Mr. Clay. And do you think the next Archivist of the United
States should support and make use of the committee?
Ms. Fawcett. I haven't talked to Mr. Ferriero, so I don't
know. I would certainly recommend that he think about how best
to use the committee for whatever, however he is going to
approach the issues in Presidential libraries. I think there
are ways that the committee can be helpful, or there are ways
that, depending on what his goals are, that other types of
committees could be helpful.
Mr. Clay. How often do you think the committee should meet?
Ms. Fawcett. I think once a year, as a practical matter, is
useful.
Mr. Clay. Should membership be open to individuals outside
of the private library foundations?
Ms. Fawcett. I think that is something for the Archivist to
consider. It is his committee. But I wouldn't object.
Mr. Clay. OK. Thank you.
Mr. Flaak, in your testimony you said that the FACA
regulations state that in selecting members of a committee the
agency will consider a cross-section of those directly
affected, interested, and qualified. Does the Advisory
Committee on Presidential Libraries' membership, limited only
to those appointed by the private foundations, meet that
criteria?
Mr. Flaak. For a committee like this one--and this is a
discretionary committee, Mr. Chairman--it is up to the agency
that is supporting this committee to make a decision on who
should be on that committee. However, it would appear that this
committee might be better served by broadening its membership.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that opinion.
Mr. Flaak. There are certainly complex relationships
between this committee and the agency.
Mr. Clay. And that could possibly require some legislative
direction for an agency in this case?
Mr. Flaak. The agency could either make that decision on
their own, or they could be directed to do so, certainly.
Mr. Clay. I see. Under FACA, should the members of the
Advisory Committee on Presidential Libraries be classified as
representatives or special Government employees?
Mr. Flaak. The current membership who are representing the
foundations should be classified as representatives, which they
currently are.
Mr. Clay. OK.
Mr. Flaak. If there were additional members who are experts
in various fields, I would suggest those probably would be
classified as special Government employees.
Mr. Clay. And that was changed yesterday.
Ms. Fawcett. Excuse me. Our charter----
Mr. Clay. I am asking him. All right.
If a member of the committee is classified as a
representative, does FACA require a conflict of interest check
or any other kind of ethics-related screening?
Mr. Flaak. Mr. Chairman, FACA is pretty silent with regard
to ethics requirements, but I know Office of Government Ethics
would not require an ethics check on a representative member.
Mr. Clay. OK. Ms. Fawcett, for many years members of the
Presidential Libraries Committee were designated as SGEs. In
1999 they were all changed to representatives, even though NARA
continued to report them as SGEs for almost 10 years. When
these members were designated as special Government employees,
did they complete the proper requirements for reporting
conflicts of interest?
Ms. Fawcett. In 1999 our counsel, Chris Runkle, determined
that, after I think it was an OGE audit, that these should be
classified as representatives, and it is so reflected in our
charter. The fact that our committee management staff failed to
correctly note on the FACA data base that they were
representational, I think that is problematic for us, but the
fact of the matter is the charter, itself, declares that for
the purposes of representation they are representational
members. It was a mistake in the FACA data base. The charter is
clear. The OGE audits are clear. The decisions have been clear
since 1999. Prior to that I couldn't tell you.
Mr. Clay. Wow, that is 10 years. That is almost 10 years of
an oversight, as you call it.
Ms. Fawcett. I am sorry.
Mr. Clay. No real explanation for that?
Ms. Fawcett. I have no explanation of why the committee
management staff, which is not a part of my office, reported it
this way.
Mr. Clay. OK. Mr. Flaak, 11 of the 12 members of the
Presidential Libraries Committee have no fixed terms of
appointment, and 5 of the 12 have served for around 20 years.
Is either common for Federal advisory committees?
Mr. Flaak. In general, Mr. Chairman, no, that is not common
behavior. Most advisory committees rotate membership terms of
maybe 2 or 3 years and for the most part, keep members no more
than perhaps 6. But there are exceptions, and this may be one
of them.
Mr. Clay. OK. For Dr. Greer or Mr. Flaak, the President has
recently encouraged agencies not to reappoint lobbyists to
Federal advisory committees citing the need to introduce fresh
points of view. Do you think that service on an advisory
committee for 10 or 20 or more years should also be discouraged
in order to add new perspectives?
Mr. Flaak. I think there are a couple of factors that go
into advisory committee membership. One is continuity of
understanding of the issues, so sometimes it is good to have
somebody who serves on the committee for a fair amount of time.
But at the same time, it is good to give new opportunities to
other people to participate and get a broader perspective on
what the issues are. So I think there is room for both.
Dr. Greer. I would second that. There is an issue of
continuity, particularly on a multi-year project like the
Electronic Records Archive. Understanding some of the
architectural decisions that were made early on and the
intention there is very helpful. So I would say a mix is
appropriate.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that.
Ms. Fawcett, as NARA claims in its official justification,
the advisory committees' assistance has been particularly
useful in discussions of future financing of the libraries and
the relationship between the libraries and their support
organizations. If this is the case and these major events have
occurred and continue to occur, why have you not called a
meeting of the committee in almost 4 years?
Ms. Fawcett. That is not my responsibility to call a
meeting of the committee.
Mr. Clay. OK. Whose responsibility is it?
Ms. Fawcett. It is the Archivist of the United States.
Mr. Clay. Have you advised the Archivist to call a meeting
maybe?
Ms. Fawcett. We have discussed having a meeting and he
chose not to have one.
Mr. Clay. OK. He chose not to have one. OK. And in the last
4 years have you tried to schedule a meeting or recommended
that the committee meet?
Ms. Fawcett. In the last 4 years have we tried to schedule
a meeting? No, we have not scheduled a meeting in the last 4
years. As I said in my statement or in answer to an earlier
question, I think Archivist Weinstein was more comfortable
meeting one-on-one with the foundations and he chose that path
and met regularly across the Nation with individual
Presidential foundations to discuss issues, budget, governance
issues, etc.
Mr. Clay. Has any member of the committee requested that
you call a meeting within the last 4 years?
Ms. Fawcett. Not that I recall.
Mr. Clay. In your testimony you said that members of the
advisory committee communicate with and make recommendations to
NARA without formally meeting. You also say that these members
or other representatives of the library foundation have begun
to meet and to invite NARA officials to participate in at least
a part of those meetings. Do you have any concerns that this
seems to indicate that the representatives of the private
foundations are operating outside of the reporting and
transparency requirements of FACA?
Ms. Fawcett. Since our only role at that meeting was to
deliver a fairly perfunctory report on NARA activities, I think
that the foundations have every right to meet among themselves
to discuss issues of concern to them. There were, I think, 32
or 33 members who came to that meeting, of which--and I had an
attendance list, so I know who came--there were 5 or maybe 6
who had ever been to an advisory committee meeting, so most of
the people who attended that meeting were not advisory
committee members.
Mr. Clay. OK. But, I mean, look at the process here. They
are----
Ms. Fawcett. We didn't govern the process, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. They are calling the meetings and then NARA is
participating. Could it be----
Ms. Fawcett. NARA's participation was very, very brief.
Mr. Clay. OK. It is really blurring the lines here.
Ms. Fawcett. And we didn't participate in any discussions.
Mr. Clay. OK.
Ms. Fawcett. We participated in no discussions.
Mr. Clay. OK. We are blurring the lines here of what is
proper and transparent, I think. It really calls into question
what we are trying to achieve here.
Ms. Fawcett. Well, we didn't intend to blur any lines of
transparency.
Mr. Clay. Well, I am telling you what it is starting to
look like.
Late yesterday we received a letter from NARA explaining
errors and discrepancies in the reporting of information about
your committee. How did that series of errors over the course
of several years occur, and how were they identified?
Ms. Fawcett. In preparation for this hearing, I actually
became aware that there was this FACA data base. Over the years
my staff would be asked periodically--specifically the
designated Federal official on my staff, who was not me--would
be asked to supply certain information, and he would be asked
specific questions, and so we supplied that information.
But it turned out that we weren't asked all the information
that is in the FACA data base, so therefore certain errors
occurred. We had not reviewed the data base until recently, and
mae culpa for not knowing of its existence and reviewing it on
a regular basis to make sure the information was correct. But
we will take corrective action, and I am sure that in the
future that all the designations are appropriate and correct
and timely.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
Mr. Flaak, there seem to be many areas where NARA's
reporting is either incomplete or incorrect in the FACA data
base. Is the agency responsible for providing accurate, up-to-
date information for the public?
Mr. Flaak. Yes, it is, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. Mr. Flaak, why should we be concerned about
compliance with the information reporting requirements of FACA?
Mr. Flaak. Well, when inaccurate information is reported,
it is reviewed by many outside sources. It is the source of
newspaper articles, it is the source of mis-information. It
results in hearings like this one.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response. I just don't know.
Maybe it is me, but I just think, you know, this system of
Presidential libraries is very troubling. It is not well
connected and transparent. I think that NARA needs to do a
better job of being open and having a process that is open and
that is more public oriented and more open to the public and is
just--I am very uneasy about what we have discovered over the
last couple of months of inquiry.
Ms. Fawcett, I look forward to the new Archivist coming in
an explaining to us just how we will proceed as a Government
with our relationship with Presidential libraries. It is kind
of willy-nilly now, this whole process, and it is not clear.
And we ought to be able to clearly define it in this new era of
open Government and transparency, and I would like to see more
openness from NARA on how we administer Presidential libraries
or the relationship with those committees and the libraries.
Ms. Fawcett. We made numerous suggestions in the
alternative model report on how to have a better governance
relationship with the Presidential foundations. I would be
happy to refer you to that report or leave you with a copy of
it.
Mr. Clay. OK.
Ms. Fawcett. We identified five particular models for the
future for Presidential libraries that would cost less. Not all
of them cost less, as it turned out, but model one, which was
some variation of the present system, suggested that the
Presidential libraries scattered across the country bring value
to the country. The Presidency is the one office elected by
everyone, and to have libraries established across the country
where citizens have access to them mates the Presidency to
these communities where many citizens, students benefit.
But the libraries, as I said, the relationship between
library foundations and NARA is complex, and it could be more
open and it could be better and it could be better established
through a governance relationship that is stipulated either
through NARA regulations or in statute. I agree completely with
you that there are more things we can do. We have worked hard
to be as open and transparent as we can. We meet regularly with
people. We have not attempted to foster any secret meetings. We
do meet individually with foundations.
I travel to the libraries and visit the libraries and while
I am there visit the Presidential foundations, encourage them
to work with the library directors on programs and exhibits and
to gain, to have a more appropriate, a more nuanced historical
perspective in the exhibits, and I am really pleased to say
that we are seeing that happen as new exhibits are being
planned.
I appreciate the chairman's concern and I know I will take
that concern to the Archivist as we discuss the future of
Presidential libraries, so thank you for your concern.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response, Ms. Fawcett. You
know, public Presidential libraries do bring a value to the
public. Personally, I have visited several.
Ms. Fawcett. I am glad for that.
Mr. Clay. My children enjoy every one that they visit. We
house one in Missouri, the Truman Library, in Independence. I
think all of them bring value to the public.
This hearing has indicated to me that we need to have some
clearly defined rules and statutes for which these libraries
are to operate under, and the sooner the better.
Ms. Fawcett. Right. I refer you to the paper we wrote on
alternative models that has several suggestions.
Mr. Clay. Please share that with committee staff.
Ms. Fawcett. I think the committee staff may have a copy,
but I am happy to leave another one with them.
Mr. Clay. All right. That will be fine.
That will conclude this hearing. I want to thank all of you
for your participation in this today. Thank you and God bless
you.
Ms. Fawcett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]