[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.]