U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

56–143 PDF 2011

S. Hrg. 111–852 

NOMINATIONS OF ERROLL G. SOUTHERS AND 

DANIEL I. GORDON 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

OF THE

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOMINATIONS OF ERROLL G. SOUTHERS TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, AND DANIEL I. GORDON 

TO BE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 

NOVEMBER 10, 2009 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/ 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

ROLAND W. BURRIS, Illinois 

PAUL G. KIRK, JR., Massachusetts 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

TROY H. CRIBB, Counsel 

KRISTINE V. LAM, Professional Staff Member 

JASON M. YANUSSI, Professional Staff Member 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

ROBERT L. STRAYER, Minority Director for Homeland Security Affairs 

JENNIFER L. TARR, Minority Counsel 

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 

PATRICIA R. HOGAN, Publications Clerk and GPO Detailee 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Hearing Clerk 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Lieberman ........................................................................................... 1, 16 

Senator Collins ................................................................................................. 2, 17 

Senator Bennett ................................................................................................ 10 

Senator Voinovich ............................................................................................. 13 

Senator Kirk ..................................................................................................... 14 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Lieberman ........................................................................................... 29 

Senator Collins ...................................................................................................... 31 

Senator Kirk ..................................................................................................... 35 

WITNESSES 

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2009 

Erroll G. Southers to be Assistant Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security ................................................................................................................. 3 

Daniel I. Gordon to be Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, Office 

of Management and Budget ................................................................................ 18 

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Gordon, Daniel I.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 141 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 143 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 152 

Responses to pre-hearing questions ................................................................ 153 

Responses to post-hearing questions .............................................................. 186 

Southers, Erroll G.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 37 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 39 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 66 

Responses to pre-hearing questions ................................................................ 67 

Responses to post-hearing questions .............................................................. 99 

Letters of support ............................................................................................. 108 

(1) 

NOMINATIONS OF ERROLL G. SOUTHERS AND 

DANIEL I. GORDON 

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2009 

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Lieberman, Kirk, Collins, Voinovich, and Bennett. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good morning and welcome. The Committee today takes up the nominations of Erroll G. Southers to be 

the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of the 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Daniel Gordon 

to be Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy 

(OFPP) at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). And we 

are going to begin with the nomination of Mr. Southers. 

Sir, you have been nominated to administer an agency which in 

very few years has grown to a large size and to be of great importance to the American people. It is probably one of the Federal 

agencies that has direct personal contact with more citizens of our 

country than any other—50,000 employees, a budget of $7 billion 

with a very important mission to protect the safety of passengers 

and cargo traveling by air, road, or rail. 

To this job, you bring nearly three decades of experience in public safety, homeland security, and intelligence carried out at all levels of government and, indeed, in academia. In your current position as the Assistant Chief of Homeland Security and Intelligence 

at Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA), you have had responsibility 

for the security of Los Angeles’ four area airports. 

Previously, Mr. Southers taught homeland security and public 

policy at the University of Southern California and served as deputy director of the California Governor’s Office of Homeland Security. He also worked as a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 

special agent and as a police officer in Santa Monica, California. 

If Mr. Southers is confirmed to be the TSA Administrator, he will 

be taking charge of an agency that I think has made enormous 

strides in the last 8 years to strengthen the security of the commercial aviation sector but that clearly must make more progress inVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:51 Feb 14, 2011 Jkt 056143 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\56143.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
2 

creasing the security not only of air travel but of other forms of 

transportation, particularly mass transit including railways. 

So I have several questions that I want to ask you in that regard, 

but for now, it is a pleasure to welcome you here. I appreciate that 

you are willing to take on this job. 

Now I would call on Senator Collins for an opening statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COLLINS 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I join you in welcoming our nominee today for the important position of being the 

Assistant Secretary for the Transportation Security Administration. 

From the first day of its operation, the TSA was given a critical 

assignment under extraordinary circumstances. It was created to 

close the serious aviation security gaps that allowed terrorists to 

board airplanes, overpower the crews in flight, and carry out the 

deadly attacks against America on September 11, 2001. Eight years 

later, what was once seen as a new and fledgling agency has become an established security presence at our Nation’s airports. 

Every year, the TSA screens more than 600 million airline passengers. The agency, through its screening and security efforts, has 

helped to restore America’s confidence in air travel. 

While progress has been made, some security vulnerabilities persist. For example, there have been troubling reports of undercover 

inspectors being able to smuggle bomb components and weapons 

undetected through TSA’s security checkpoints. To respond to these 

troubling findings, TSA must be aggressive in improving its screener training. It must also develop new and innovative technologies 

to aid in the detection of these threats. 

The Secure Flight program is a vital component in TSA’s efforts 

to keep known and suspected terrorists from boarding commercial 

aircraft. When fully implemented next spring, this program will 

allow TSA to screen passenger names against the government’s NoFly list. 

As TSA manages the Secure Flight program, it must provide a 

better mechanism for passengers who believe they have been 

misidentified or put on the list in error. Our security measures 

must be designed not to unduly hamper legitimate travel while 

preventing access to aircraft by our enemies. 

Aviation is not the only sector of transportation that merits 

TSA’s vigilant security efforts. The agency’s mission extends to 

other modes of transportation as well, including mass transit, and 

that is for good reason. As the Chairman has noted in the past, we 

cannot focus all of our resources on terrorist threats to aviation 

alone as the threat does not stop there. We know that the terrorists 

will continue to devise new strategies to penetrate our defenses, 

and TSA cannot be caught flat-footed by focusing only on the techniques that terrorists employed in their last attack. 

I want to just close my remarks by mentioning two final points. 

One is, I am very impressed with the Visible Intermodal Protection 

and Response (VIPR) teams. These teams bring together Federal 

air marshals, TSA officers, and canine units to conduct security 

sweeps at airports, seaports, and transit stations. Two years ago, 

3 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Southers appears in the Appendix on page 37. 

I saw them in action in demonstrations at Maine’s airports, and I 

was very impressed how the resources are brought together. 

Finally, we cannot forget the importance of the role that the 

traveling public plays when it comes to identifying threats to mass 

transit. The See Something, Say Something public awareness campaign, which is underway I know in Los Angeles and New York, 

as well as the legal liability protections that the Chairman and I 

included in the 2007 homeland security law helps to prompt individuals to come forward and report suspicious activities. 

I look forward to exploring these issues with our witness today. 

The important mission of TSA will require a focused, talented, and 

determined leader. The security of our Nation’s transportation system depends upon it. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks very much, Senator Collins. 

Mr. Southers has filed responses to a biographical and financial 

questionnaire, answered pre-hearing questions submitted by the 

Committee, and had his financial statements reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics. Without objection, this information will 

be made part of the hearing record with the exception of the financial data, which are on file and available for public inspection in 

the Committee’s offices. 

Mr. Southers, I think you know our Committee rules require that 

all witnesses at nomination hearings give their testimony under 

oath, so I would ask you at this time to please stand and raise your 

right hand. 

Do you swear that the testimony that you are about to give to 

this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 

the truth, so help you, God? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. I do. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much. Please be seated. 

Mr. Southers, we would now welcome an opening statement, if 

you have one, and the introduction of any family or friends who are 

with you today. 

TESTIMONY OF ERROLL G. SOUTHERS1 TO BE ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Good morning, Chairman Lieberman, Ranking 

Member Collins, and distinguished Members of the Committee. Before I begin, I would like to extend my most heartfelt sympathy 

and support for the victims of the shooting at Fort Hood and their 

families. 

I am honored to appear before you today as President Obama’s 

nominee to lead the Transportation Security Administration as Assistant Secretary. It is a privilege to be selected by the President 

and to receive the support of Secretary Napolitano. I look forward 

to the great challenge of continuing the exceptional work that the 

men and women of TSA do in protecting our homeland. 

With the Committee’s indulgence, I would like to thank my parents, James and Thelma; my wife, Caryn; and our children, James 

and Maia for their love and support. I am so very pleased that 

Caryn and Maia are able to join me here today. 

4 

I also must thank and acknowledge the outstanding officers and 

employees of the Los Angeles World Airports Police Department 

and my esteemed colleagues at the University of Southern California. 

I share Secretary Napolitano’s vision that keeping our homeland 

safe from terrorism is a collective responsibility in which all Americans have a role to play. Protecting our transportation network requires the work of many hands: TSA; the unified resources of the 

Department of Homeland Security; other Federal agencies; private 

industry; State, local and tribal governments; our international 

partners; and most importantly, the traveling public. By engaging 

these partners, and with the oversight and guidance from Congress, we will more effectively ensure the free movement of the 

American people and the flow of commerce. 

If confirmed, I know the honor of leading TSA will come with 

great challenges and responsibilities. When Congress created TSA 

following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, it gave TSA 

the mission to provide for the security of all modes of transportation. While TSA has made great strides to fulfilling this responsibility, I fully understand that the work will never be complete. We 

are challenged by a dynamic threat and adaptive enemies who seek 

to harm Americans and our way of life. 

I believe that I am up to the challenge of leading TSA. TSA and 

its most valuable resource, its people, need leadership. I understand what type of leadership and support the front-line workforce 

needs to execute a security mission. 

For the past 30 years, I have dedicated myself to the challenge 

of counter-terrorism and public safety at local, State, and Federal 

levels. This has given me the important perspective to understand 

how partnerships are critical to success. The crucial need to effectively share information, be it threat information, intelligence, coordinated response planning, or best practices, is something I have 

lived with, practiced, and experienced. If confirmed, I will bring 

this same dedication and commitment with me to TSA. 

Since 2007, I have served as the Assistant Chief for Homeland 

Security and Intelligence for the Los Angeles World Airports Police 

Department. I am proud to wear the uniform of the airport police 

with the responsibility, in partnership with TSA and other agencies, to protect the people and goods that pass through one of the 

world’s major airports, Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), as 

well as Van Nuys Airport, one of the busiest general aviation airports in the United States. 

LAX has the largest aviation law enforcement agency in the Nation with the largest complement of explosives detection canine 

teams of any U.S. airport. LAX is also an intermodal hub with an 

important nexus to surface transportation with its nearby light rail 

system and transit buses. 

LAX has served as an interdisciplinary laboratory in a real-world 

setting for advances in risk modeling and infrastructure protection. 

If confirmed, I will seek to further develop and deploy innovative 

security strategies and technologies to protect our transportation 

systems. 

Since 2006, I have served as Associate Director of the University 

of Southern California’s Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of 

5 

Terrorism Events (CREATE), a DHS Center of Excellence. My responsibilities include the development and enhancement of special 

programs to provide the intellectual underpinnings for the fight 

against terrorism. 

I also developed the executive program on counter-terrorism designed to challenge international counter-terrorism leaders and enhance their analysis, coordination, and response capabilities. My 

experience with the airport police and CREATE has afforded me 

the opportunity to collaborate with my international counterparts 

and other world experts in sharing best practices to combat terrorism. If confirmed, I will continue to draw on these relationships 

to benefit TSA’s mission. 

I also had the honor to serve Governor Schwarzenegger as the 

Deputy Director of the Office of Homeland Security for California. 

I was responsible for counter-terrorism policy, the protection of 

California’s critical infrastructure in a post-September 11, 2001, 

environment and participated in the development of DHS’s first 

National Infrastructure Protection Plan. 

If confirmed, I will serve as a key member of Secretary Napolitano’s leadership team as she continues to forge a unified agency. 

Having served at both the operational level and as a stakeholder 

of the Department, I hope that I will bring a fresh perspective to 

fully integrating TSA operations as part of one DHS. 

Every day at LAX, I witnessed firsthand the great work of the 

transportation security officers, and I understand the challenges 

they face. I would be honored to serve as their assistant secretary. 

I will provide them with an effective voice within TSA while fulfilling the agency’s critical security mission. A professional, effective workforce will further promote public confidence in TSA while 

enhancing our country’s resilience. 

If confirmed, I hope to forge a close relationship with this Committee and with Congress. This is a partnership, and the threat the 

United States faces requires a unified effort. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Collins, Members of the Committee, thank you again for the opportunity to meet with you and 

your staff and appear before you today. I look forward to answering 

your questions. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks very much for that opening statement, Mr. Southers. I want to start my questioning with the standard three questions we ask of all nominees. First, is there anything 

you are aware of in your background that might present a conflict 

of interest with the duties of the office to which you have been 

nominated? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. No, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Second, do you know of anything personal 

or otherwise that would in any way prevent you from fully and 

honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you 

have been nominated? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. No, Senator. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. And then finally, do you agree without 

reservation to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and 

testify before any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are 

confirmed? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. I do. 

6 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much. You are off to a 

good start. [Laughter.] 

Let me ask you a standard question for nominees, but it is, I 

think, a relevant one. In the general sense in the area of responsibility that you will take on, you have dealt with responsibilities 

like this. You have had interactions with TSA. 

As I have said, this agency has really come a long way in the 

8 years, but obviously, it has enormous responsibilities. So my 

question is, what are your priorities going in, beyond preserving 

the progress made? In other words, what do you see as threats that 

you are concerned about that you would like to see us better defended against? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. As I mentioned in my opening statement, the 

threat environment is quite dynamic, especially as it relates to explosives and things of that nature. One of the things that would be 

a challenge initially is tomorrow’s threat as it relates to some of 

the peroxide-based explosives. There is technology available, and I 

think going forward, I might look forward to an enhanced relationship with DHS’s Science and Technology Directorate to better identify the technology that would be able to identify those types of 

threats. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. So tell us a little about that, just from the 

layman’s perspective. What is the change that is occurring and 

what consequences does it have? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. The change that is occurring is that these explosives are able to be put in forms that are non-metallic. They are 

able to be concealed. The ingredients are readily available, and 

they are quite destructive. So the challenge then comes in being 

able to detect those types of explosives with the technology and/or 

training, of course, before they are introduced in the environment. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Yes, I appreciate your mentioning the 

Science and Technology Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security. Senator Collins and I put that into the Department 

of Homeland Security when it was created. It is comparable to an 

agency at the Department of Defense, and it has been critically important to our national security to be able to use technology to stay 

ahead of the threat. And we finally have Dr. O’Toole confirmed as 

Under Secretary, so I am glad you are going to be working with 

her. 

In a somewhat similar regard, the bulk of homeland security dollars spent on improving security within the transportation sector 

have been spent on protective and defensive measures, obviously, 

most significantly, personnel but also cameras, security gates, and 

the like. But as you noted in response to one of the Committee’s 

questions submitted to you prior to the hearing, ‘‘Resiliency is a 

hallmark of effective security.’’ And greater efforts should be made 

to enhance our capability for the continuity of operations to maintain public confidence in the safety and security of the transportation sector. 

So I wanted to ask you to develop that a little bit. What does resiliency in homeland security mean and what more do you think 

TSA should be doing to promote or require resiliency within the 

American transportation sector? 

7 

Mr. SOUTHERS. I think there are two components to resiliency, a 

pre-incident component and a post-incident component. Probably 

the best examples of pre-incident resiliency that I have observed 

are in London and in Israel. London has dedicated itself to a prevent, detect, deter, and defend posture, most notably at the Royal 

United Services Institute, an institute in which I have lectured on 

this very subject. What they have done is engage the public, educated them, made them more aware of the threat, and really 

helped them form a very integral part of the security layer in London. As you know, Israel has been quite successful with the same 

in terms of engaging their public. 

So going forward, I think what we have to do is reach out to our 

public, make them more aware, better educated. There is an active 

campaign now at TSA called WHY, and we are explaining why the 

policies are in place, what they mean, and hoping that people will 

become part of that security layer. 

Of course, in a post-incident phase, we are looking at the ability 

to have continuity of operations. We are engaged in two pilot 

projects now from DHS at LAX focused on continuity of operations 

in the event we were to have a chemical and/or biological attack. 

So the ability to respond, to be resilient, and keep our way of life 

going if we were so victimized is important as well. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. It is somber but very important, I agree 

with you. As we discussed when you came in to see me, I have had 

a concern. Understandably, after September 11, 2001, we focused 

on the security of air travel. But there is also a lot of people in this 

country who travel on buses and particularly trains and subways. 

We know from events overseas that subways, trains, have been a 

target of terrorists. Usually, when we talk about this, people talk 

about practical problems of applying the same kind of security systems to, for instance, rail and subway transport as we do to aviation. But whenever I hear that, I worry that we are accepting a 

level of risk that we may not have to accept for people who are 

traveling by rail or subway. 

I wanted to ask you if you have any over-the-horizon thoughts 

about what is possible here in terms of raising our defenses to protect people who every day ride trains or subways around our country. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Well, as we discussed, certainly looking at some 

of the attacks that have occurred in the last decade—London, 

Mumbai, and other locations—rail is certainly a concern as well as 

buses. And we have to become better in terms of our ability to be 

risk driven. I think the assessments of these locations, these 

transmodal hubs throughout the United States, are going to be important in terms of determining what risk level we have. 

I think it might be important to emphasize the use of VIPR units 

in that kind of, if you will, enhancement of presence in terms of 

deterring operations from occurring there. It has been my experience that pre-operational planning is very dependent upon a lack 

of security. And when they see a lack of presence or a lack of effective technology, it is something going forward. I have, however, 

seen a full airport-type security measure in Shanghai before the 

Olympics last summer. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. For trains or subways? 

8 

Mr. SOUTHERS. For trains. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Yes. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. I do not know if that is an effective measure. It 

certainly would slow your throughput, but it is something that was 

explored and experimented with before the games. So I think it is 

important here to have a presence and deter the threat from actually looking at those locations to target. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Well, I understand the practical problems. 

I hope you will explore some of those alternatives, including looking at the results from the Shanghai experience. And, of course, we 

can hope that technology will improve to an extent that we can do 

some kind of screening of passengers getting on trains and subways without compromising that mode of transportation in terms 

of its popularity or economic viability. 

My time is up. I thank you. Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Southers, a great many people whose judgment I respect 

have spoken very well of you to me, including the new police chief 

in Portland, Maine, who is from Los Angeles originally and told me 

that he had a very high opinion of your work. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Thank you. 

Senator COLLINS. There is one issue in your background that I 

want to explore for the record with you. In your responses to the 

Committee’s pre-hearing questionnaire, you indicated that you had 

received a letter of censure from the FBI. It was many years ago, 

more than 20 years ago, but it involved your using your official position to resolve a personal concern. 

We have asked for a copy of that letter and have not yet received 

it. So let me ask you some questions about the letter. 

Were there any administrative sanctions imposed by this letter 

or in connection with this letter? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. No, there were not. 

Senator COLLINS. And was your decision to leave the FBI approximately 6 months later connected in any way to this incident? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. No, it was not. 

Senator COLLINS. Was it connected to the censure that you received? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. No, it was not. 

Senator COLLINS. You have taken responsibility for your actions. 

You have acknowledged your mistake in the personal conversation 

that we had in my office. It is important that the public have confidence that government officials will not misuse the authority that 

they have. There is also an issue about access to personal information, which is directly related to the incident at the FBI. 

If you are confirmed, you are going to have access to databases 

that have personal information on many individuals, such as 

through the Secure Flight program, and it is going to be important 

for the public to have confidence that you would not in any way 

misuse your access to the personal information in those databases. 

So let me first ask you, have you ever in the past misused your 

access to databases that the government maintains other than this 

one incident that led to this censure? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. No, Senator, I have not. 

9 

Senator COLLINS. And do you commit today that you will respect 

the privacy and civil liberties concerns that people have with regard to the personal information in these databases? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Yes, Senator, I do. 

Senator COLLINS. And do you commit that you will never use 

your access to those databases to satisfy a personal concern? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Yes, Senator, I do. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

I would now like to go to a policy issue. The most frequent interaction that the traveling public has with TSA is through the checkpoint screenings at airports. And those of us who travel frequently 

know that there seems to be an inexplicable variation in the procedures at one airport versus another airport. These variations do not 

seem to be attributable to an increased threat level at one airport 

versus another airport. And a passenger behind me in line at the 

Boston airport just 2 weeks ago put it very well, and he said, ‘‘Why 

is it that when I am in Los Angeles, I put my shoes in a bin, but 

in Boston, it has to be directly on the screening belt?’’ And there 

does not seem to be any uniformity in what is done, and he was 

expressing frustration about it because the screener actually chastised him—and I overheard this—for putting his shoes in the bin 

rather than directly on the belt going through the x-ray machine. 

That seems like a very minor point, and in the scheme of things, 

it is. But it raises a larger issue. Should there not be consistency 

in how screening is done from airport to airport absent some threat 

level at a particular airport that would cause for a variation? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Senator, you are absolutely correct. And you are 

speaking to the public confidence issue, which was raised earlier, 

that is eroded when, in fact, those policies and procedures are inconsistent. I think what is necessary here, obviously, first is a 

training issue nationwide that is consistent from airport to airport 

for those procedures that given the absence of risk or intelligence 

should be the same. 

Second is a management in place that is going to support staff 

when they make those decisions when anomalies occur or when 

prohibited items are discovered. And then third, leadership, of 

course, if confirmed, that I would take responsibility for, to see to 

it that those practices are in place, that training is in place, and 

that their compliance is carried out in a method that makes our efficiency of our system enhanced. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. I think it is a training issue. I also 

think it is a leadership problem and a communication problem because there do appear to be inconsistent procedures, and I think 

that is something that you could remedy. 

I want to move next to an issue which I hear a lot about from 

constituents, both pro and con, largely con. And that is an area 

that Secretary Chertoff identified as a significant unaddressed vulnerability, and that is the potential for terrorists to use general 

aviation aircraft to smuggle a weapon of mass destruction into the 

country or to use the airplane itself as a weapon. And as part of 

its effort to address this vulnerability in October 2008, TSA proposed a set of security regulations for general aviation aircraft, and 

these regulations would impose significant changes to the way that 

general aviation operates today. 

10 

I have heard a lot of complaints, also, about those proposed regulations, that they are not practical for small airports where general 

aviation may be landing, that they are too burdensome, that they 

will lead to unnecessary expense. 

It is my understanding that these regulations have generated an 

astonishing 8,000 comments from stakeholders across the country. 

And a common theme is that TSA did not reach out sufficiently to 

the general aviation community to tell them, look, we have a problem here; how would you suggest that we solve it, and involve them 

more in a negotiated rulemaking rather than a top-down approach 

of just imposing regulations that may not be very practical. 

What is your response to that concern? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Well, Senator, you are absolutely correct. And, 

certainly, stakeholder input is critical to establishing effective collaborations so we can address an item like this. 

As I mentioned earlier, I have three general aviation airports 

that I am currently responsible for. And what we have tried to do 

is, if you will, mitigate some of the risk presented by those aircraft 

there in a couple of ways. First, we have reached out to educate 

the stakeholders at those airports about the threat they face and 

made them more aware. We have also given them an opportunity 

to participate in a 24-hour general aviation hotline for those anomalies, those persons that might be suspicious, those activities that 

might be suspicious, so that they can feed into our intelligence system, and then that information is provided to the fusion centers in 

the area. And most importantly, we have been able to move resources in the way of VIPR teams and canine teams to those airports on a random basis to present a different picture, a different 

view, if you will, to a would-be attacker so that our security posture 

is not seen as static or the same. 

So those have been the deterrents that we have been successful 

with in the Los Angeles area and that I would look forward to, if 

confirmed, bringing to the national scale. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Collins. 

Senator Bennett, good morning. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BENNETT 

Senator BENNETT. Good morning. Thank you very much and welcome, sir. I appreciate your willingness to serve and take on this 

responsibility. 

I want to discuss an area that has given rise to some concern in 

my home State, and this has to do with whole-body imaging now 

known as advanced imaging technology. 

Can you explain how this can improve our capability, particularly with respect to plastic explosives and ceramic knives? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Senator, the whole-body imaging technology gives 

us the ability to identify metallic and non-metallic objects without 

personal contact with the passenger. Those items you mentioned 

are the ones that would be able to be located if we had that technology. We are seeing that kind of explosive capability around the 

world. The technology at present is optional to the passenger. What 

is important here is a very concerted effort on the part of TSA to 

balance the security enhancements with the civil liberties and priVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:51 Feb 14, 2011 Jkt 056143 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\56143.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
11 

vacy concerns of the passenger, and I think that is a delicate balance that would have to be maintained going forward. 

Senator BENNETT. Yes, that was going to be my next question. 

Can you address it a little more in detail? Because a number of 

people are concerned about what they consider to be something of 

an intrusion when they are, in their view, exposed, electronically 

naked, if not physically naked, and there have been some serious 

concerns about that among some of my constituents. 

Can you get a little deeper into how you are protecting privacy? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Well, Senator, the images that are presented on 

the technology are moving toward, if you will, almost a stick-figurelike image so that what can be identified are those objects that are 

attached to the body. The operator parameters, meaning the TSA 

operator parameters, are quite strict with regard to the operator 

not being located near the passenger. The medium in which the images are collected is not stored. They are having no contact with 

the individual at all. And most importantly, it is an optional 

screening methodology for the passenger. If they choose not to go 

through it, they would be subject to a pat-down search and 

wanding, if you will. 

Senator BENNETT. Does that mean that every passenger that decides not to do it is going to be patted down? Because I go through 

the standard magnetometer now and I do not get patted down unless there is a little symbol of some kind on my boarding pass that 

says I have been identified by the computer as potential evil. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Unless there is some detection of some kind of 

threat that you might have, you would walk through the metal detector as you do now. If you went to secondary, you would be subject to a pat-down. But if there were no items detected by the metal 

detector, you would go on as you do now. 

Senator BENNETT. Now, let us address the question of speed. For 

those of us who are very frequent fliers, the biggest challenge to 

getting to the airplane is getting through the TSA screening. And 

in my observation, the biggest impediment to getting through it 

quickly is the individual watching the screen as your luggage goes 

through. Some individuals are much more willing to challenge 

things than others, and they nit pick, if you will, every single item 

that goes by, and others almost seem not to notice the images as 

they go by. Both of those make me a little nervous. 

But I have found that the magnetometer is faster than the alternative methods. If we go to the kind of screening you are talking 

about here to deal with the plastic explosives and ceramic knives 

and so on, and that becomes the norm with the opt-out, the magnetometer, is that in fact going to slow things down everywhere and 

thereby cause people to shun it simply because they want the speed 

that would come with going through the magnetometer and thereby 

cut down on your effectiveness? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Well, throughput is obviously important, but not 

at the expense of sacrificing security. 

Senator BENNETT. Right. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. The technology is improving. As I mentioned earlier, we would hope to have a greater relationship with our Science 

12 

and Technology Directorate. We have a transportation security integration facility at Regan Airport that tests these technologies. 

Senator, I think what is important here is to place the appropriate technology in the environment matched with the necessary 

training so that we can ensure security and ensure efficiency with 

throughput on our passengers and achieve a very good balance. 

Senator BENNETT. Final question in that regard, I understand 

this is a very difficult kind of coordination that TSA has to do with 

the airlines. But the biggest challenge for throughput, to use your 

term, seems to be scheduling. Unfortunately, there are times when 

the flights to Washington are always taking off from Salt Lake, 

when everything is backed up because the schedules of the airlines 

have a number of planes going at that point. And then when I fly 

someplace other than Washington at a different time of day, there 

are TSA people standing around doing nothing because there are 

not any passengers lined up. 

Is there any effort being made to try to coordinate with the airlines at each airport to say these are our heavier periods where we 

need every station manned and these are periods when we need far 

less, and we can arrange the TSA schedule to match the airline 

schedule, and thereby save a little money and maximize the times 

when we need the personnel? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Senator, that is a very valid concern, and we 

faced the same challenge when I first arrived at LAX about 3 years 

ago. 

Senator BENNETT. I would think LAX would be the poster child 

for that. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. I am happy to say in most instances we were. 

What we have done is our police department along with TSA and 

the airlines gathered the information. They gave us passenger load 

capacity 2 weeks ahead of time. TSA adjusted their staffing levels 

to those passenger loads. We then actually used that to dictate 

some of our randomized deployment of our security measures with 

those passenger loads. And so we were able to actually accomplish 

two very important things: TSA was able to match the staffing levels with the passengers, and we were able to look at some of the 

security threats presented by an increased number of people in a 

certain location at a certain time. 

Senator BENNETT. I thank you for that, and I hope you share 

that expertise gained at LAX with a number of other terminals 

that I have gone through that are not that carefully coordinated. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks, Senator Bennett. 

Mr. Southers, just to clarify, how many airports are the wholebody imaging machines at now generally? I do not expect you to 

know exactly. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Senator, I do not know that answer. Sorry. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. But as far as you know, is it the intention 

of TSA to have whole-body imaging machines at all the airports or 

at all the major airports? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. I honestly do not know. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. When you have a chance, get back to us. 

13 

RESPONSE FROM MR. SOUTHERS 

I am told that TSA is currently piloting Advanced Imaging Technology 

(AIT) as the primary method of screening at six airports: Albuquerque, Las 

Vegas, Miami, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, and Tulsa. I also understand 

that TSA is currently using IT at 16 airports in secondary screening. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Do I have it right that the average person 

will go through the magnetometer first, and then if there is a problem, they are directed to the whole-body imaging machine or they 

can opt not to go there and then they will be patted down? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. They could actually go through whole-body imaging first. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Oh, they could? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Yes. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. By their choice or are we setting it up 

first in some airports? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. By their choice, yes, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you. Senator Voinovich, welcome. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH 

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you. I am sorry that I was not here 

for your opening statement. I really enjoyed the visit we had in my 

office. And I probably of all the members of the Senate have an intimate relationship with TSA because I have a pacemaker, and I 

have been patted down by the best and the worst. [Laughter.] 

I have experienced whole-body imaging in Cleveland. I went 

through one here recently in Washington, and the thought was 

that people that have pacemakers and others would go through the 

whole-body imaging and eliminate the need to be patted down. But 

even when you go through the whole-body imaging, after that they 

still want to, once in a while, pat you down. I really do not believe 

that this system is going to go in throughout the country, and that 

is something you are going to have to decide. But as far as I am 

concerned, it is a nice option, and if it is there, I will use it. 

I think one of the things that has been brought up is the issue 

of how you manage the TSA workforce. And one of the things I 

think some of my colleagues are not aware of is that we do have 

a different system with TSA than we have with other Federal employees under title 5. When we stood up TSA, we gave them a separate section of the code, which gave the managers an opportunity 

to have more flexibility. For example, one of the reasons why we 

are able to retain part-time people in the TSA, which we need for 

those peak travel periods where you need more personnel, is that 

TSA has been able to offer them health insurance. 

One of the things that I am very concerned about, as we discussed in my office, is the effort to return TSA to title 5, United 

States Code, which I think would be a grave mistake. On the other 

hand, I understand that there is some consideration being given to 

having Secretary Napolitano grant some collective bargaining 

rights. 

Do you believe that collective bargaining rights should be extended to transportation security officers, and if so, how do you believe the labor relations system should be crafted? If TSA provides 

for collective bargaining, will TSA alter the Performance Accounting and Standard System, our PASS system, which means that we 

14 

have 55,000 people today that are under performance evaluation, 

which I think is something that many people have encouraged us 

to be doing. 

Where do you stand right now in regard to this? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Well, Senator, what you have noted is that over 

the years, TSA has made continued improvement, and that is 

something that is going to be a priority. In fact, what I would like 

to see is some day where this agency is the international model for 

transportation security. 

Where I would stand on that at this point is I would like to take, 

if I am confirmed, an opportunity to meet with the stakeholders, 

meet with the employees, a cross section of the organization to see 

how this is going to impact them. And we want to be able to protect 

employees, but our mission is, of course, security. And in my discussions with staff and the Secretary, I have made it clear that I 

would like to review this matter with the understanding that I 

would not compromise the security mission. There are certain costs 

that need to be considered. There are certain timelines that have 

to be considered if this were going to be engaged. 

So my position right now is one of wanting to review it, wanting 

to be part of the discussion, but I want to be clear that I would 

not endorse, recommend, or suggest to the Secretary anything that 

would compromise our mission or in any way would I suggest that 

we are going to bargain on security. 

Senator VOINOVICH. That is good. When TSA stood up, there 

were problems. I met with several of the managers of the airports 

and some of the screeners that were complaining. And I think one 

of the most satisfying things—it just happened recently—is I had 

an individual who was there just last—yesterday, as a matter of 

fact. And about 3 years ago, all he did was moan and groan about 

how bad things were, how they needed a union, and so on and so 

forth. And in this particular instance, he had nothing to say except 

that things are going good. 

So there has been some real progress, I think, made there. It is 

not perfect. But, again, I would hate to give up the flexibilities that 

you have and return the TSA to title 5. If there is some compromise that can be worked out, I think that is good. I am glad to 

hear that you are not going to compromise the flexibility that we 

now have so that we can do the job of securing our people just because you get lobbied very hard by some folks out there that want 

to see TSA come under title 5. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator COLLINS [presiding]. Thank you. 

In Senator Lieberman’s absence, I temporarily have the gavel. It 

feels great to have it once again. [Laughter.] 

And I am going to recognize our newest member, Senator Kirk, 

for his questions. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR KIRK 

Senator KIRK. Thank you very much, Senator Collins. The gavel 

looks comfortable in your hands. 

Welcome, Mr. Southers. Thank you for your service. I know some 

of your relatives are here with you, and we welcome them as well. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Thank you, sir. 

15 

Senator KIRK. Massachusetts is my home. Boston, the capital 

city, is on a port. We have rail service, highways, and airports like 

so many others. So we obviously have a great interest in and gratitude for what your administration does, and we thank you for your 

service in that regard. 

Understanding fully that your mission is one of security, and 

that should be foremost, I wanted to ask you about the tensions 

that sometimes come into play with making sure that security is 

thorough and enforced, and I am referring to the No-Fly list. I 

know my predecessor Senator Edward Kennedy found his name on 

a No-Fly list and had considerable difficulty and challenges getting 

his name removed from that list. And I wondered if it was difficult 

for a U.S. Senator to have his name removed from a No-Fly list, 

what measures or what challenges do you see going ahead for people who perhaps may not be or should not be warranted as no-fly 

personnel or travelers, and how they can be removed from the list 

or better protected? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Thank you, Senator. The implementation of the 

Secure Flight Program is going to mitigate a lot of those challenges 

that we have been facing in the past with regard to mismatches on 

the No-Fly list. The redress program known as the Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP) is one that is working its way forward. Passengers will be given an identification number and then, 

as you know, with Secure Flight, that vetting is actually occurring 

before a person gets to the airport. 

The goal of the program is to clear people before they even get 

to the airport. So we are reducing the number of near misses or 

mismatches on names. We are also reducing the need to have to 

go to the ticket counter when they arrive. So once this program is 

rolled out and it has been endorsed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), I think it is going to greatly reduce those challenges and the problems that we have had in the past as it relates 

to No-Fly. 

Senator KIRK. And when will that be in effect, do you expect? 

Mr. SOUTHERS. I believe it is going to be rolled out in the next 

fiscal year. 

Senator KIRK. Another question I had was with respect to the 

process by which small businesses might be eligible to compete for 

some of the things that they produce. We have a lot of small technology companies in Massachusetts that are creative with respect 

to hand devices and other kinds of technology that I would expect 

would be helpful to advancing the mission of TSA. And I wondered 

if you could just describe for us what the process is so that small 

businesses would be able to compete and have their products assessed and evaluated so that they could perhaps be a part of helping you in your mission. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Well, I know that this was part of the efficiency 

review in which the Secretary engaged earlier this year. The process is going to involve looking at the appropriate requests for proposals, making themselves available to that process, and then competing. We have been quite successful in the Los Angeles area in 

looking at businesses of all sizes to address some of the challenges 

that we have. 

16 

We do encourage SAFETY Act certification by the Department so 

they have been recognized by DHS and so we understand that a 

certain level of vetting has occurred. 

But it is a process really of knowing when those opportunities 

exist and then engaging with the appropriate agency, meaning us, 

to get into the comparative pool for technologies that we might consider in the future. 

Senator KIRK. I would encourage you to consider symposia and 

other things that might showcase some of the creative and innovative technologies that are coming on stream for two purposes: First, 

to help you fulfill your mission, and second, to allow the small businesses, which are basically the fuel in a lot of our economic areas, 

to participate. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Thank you, sir. 

Senator KIRK. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN [presiding]. Thanks, Senator Kirk. Thank 

you, Madam Interim Chairman. 

Senator COLLINS. You can say it. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. For presiding while I had to be out. 

Senator KIRK. Who has the gavel now? 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I have retaken it. It was a peaceful transition. [Laughter.] 

Senator COLLINS. We believe in that in America. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Mr. Southers, thank you very much. We 

do not have any more questions. We want to move on to the next 

nominee, but I appreciate all the background that you bring to this. 

And we are going to keep the record on your hearing open until the 

close of business on Thursday so we can give people another day 

to submit any additional questions they want because as soon as 

we come back, I hope we can move you through as soon as possible. 

But my thanks to you, and I look forward to working with you. 

Mr. SOUTHERS. Thank you, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you. Let us now go to Daniel Gordon. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN 

We will now reconvene and move to the nomination of Daniel 

Gordon to be the Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at the Office of Management and Budget. 

The purpose of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy is to 

bring economy, efficiency, and effectiveness to Federal procurement. And, of course, the job of the Administrator has grown more 

challenging by the year. The sheer size of Federal contracting puts 

an enormous amount of responsibility on this office. Just to give 

you a sense of it, in fiscal year 2008, the latest year for which we 

have complete data, the Federal Government spent $539 billion on 

contracts, an amount that is about two and a half times above 

what the government was spending at the beginning of the decade. 

And as the amount of contracting has grown, so has the complexity 

of what we purchase. Agencies, of course, still make traditional 

purchases like office supplies and furniture, but they also contract 

for an astounding array of goods and services, from information 

technology (IT) systems to pharmaceuticals to intelligence analysis. 

17 

I am grateful that President Obama has turned to a real experienced expert in this field to serve as Administrator of OFFP. Since 

1992, Mr. Gordon has been an attorney at the Government Accountability Office, so we feel a particular closeness to him, rising 

up through the ranks to be Deputy General Counsel. Since May, 

he has served as Acting General Counsel at GAO, and I think it 

is fair to say he is known throughout the procurement community 

as a very informed and experienced and thoughtful lawyer. 

Mr. Gordon will have no shortages of challenges at OFPP. He is 

going to need to push agencies to replenish their acquisition 

workforces, which simply have not kept pace with the growth in 

contracting. He is going to have to be sure that competition remains the cornerstone of contracting. He will have to improve our 

Federal data systems that provide transparency into contracting, 

which too often have inaccurate or untimely information. And he 

is going to have to help guide agencies in the important task of deciding when it is appropriate to turn to the private sector to perform work and when a function is so central to an agency’s public 

mission that it should remain in the hands of public employees. 

If you are still willing to proceed with this hearing after that description of your responsibilities, Mr. Gordon, I welcome you, and 

I will have questions for you after your opening statement. 

Senator Collins. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COLLINS 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Seldom has a nominee for Administrator of the Office of Federal 

Procurement Policy come before the Committee at a more critical 

time. The Federal acquisition system is under tremendous stress. 

Between fiscal years 2000 and 2008, acquisition spending by the 

Federal Government expanded by 163 percent from $205 billion to 

$539 billion. 

OFPP plays a central role in shaping the policies and practices 

Federal agencies use to acquire goods and services that they need 

to carry out their missions. In so doing, the OFPP has an obligation 

to ensure that the Federal acquisition system promotes the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness that provide best value to taxpayers. 

As a long-time advocate for stronger competition, accountability, 

and transparency in government contracting, I applaud the steps 

the Administration has taken to improve Federal contracting. 

Many of these initiatives originated from contracting reform legislation I co-authored with Senator Lieberman during the last Congress. 

But the fact remains that no matter how many laws we pass or 

how many guidance documents OMB issues, the effectiveness of 

our Federal acquisition system depends on a vital human component, the acquisition workforce. 

While contracting spending has risen dramatically, the number 

of acquisition personnel who help plan, award, and oversee these 

contracts has been stagnant. And with roughly half of the current 

acquisition workforce eligible to retire over the next decade, the difficulties of strengthening that workforce will only become more 

acute. A well-trained and well-resourced workforce is critical to 

18 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Gordon appears in the Appendix on page 141. 

keeping pace with increased Federal spending on contracts and 

with the much more complex procurements of goods and services. 

The Administration has identified acquisition workforce development as a pillar for improving acquisition practices and contract 

performance. I am disappointed, however, by OFPP’s latest proposal to supposedly strengthen the acquisition workforce. The 5- 

year plan released a few weeks ago falls far short of the critical 

changes that this Committee identified and mandated last year. 

The plan lacks adequate analysis or substance to serve as a meaningful blueprint to bolster this overburdened cadre of professionals 

and to foster the training and development of analytical skills necessary to protect the taxpayers’ investment. 

We must also consider current staffing levels within the OFPP 

itself. In many ways, they mirror the problems that I have just described in the overall Federal acquisition workforce. OFPP has 

broad responsibilities and a staff of roughly a dozen appears to me 

to be simply inadequate. This lack of staffing may explain why 

OFPP has become increasingly reactive to procurement failures instead of working proactively to prevent them from occurring in the 

first place. 

Mr. Gordon brings with him more than 20 years of public and 

private experience in the Federal acquisition system ranging from 

litigating and adjudicating bid protests to teaching about the Federal procurement system. I look forward to hearing from him how 

he would address these many challenges if he is confirmed to be 

the next OFPP Administrator. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks very much, Senator Collins. Mr. 

Gordon has filed responses to a biographical and financial questionnaire, answered pre-hearing questions submitted by the Committee, and had his financial statements reviewed by the Office of 

Government Ethics. 

Without objection, this information will be made a part of the 

hearing record with the exception of the financial data, which are 

on file and available for public inspection in the Committee offices. 

Mr. Gordon, I think you know that our Committee rules require 

that all witnesses at nomination hearings give their testimony 

under oath, so I would ask you to stand please and raise your right 

hand at this time. 

Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give to this 

committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth, so help you, God? 

Mr. GORDON. I do. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I thank you. 

Please be seated. We would welcome an opening statement or an 

introduction of any family or friends that you have with you this 

morning. 

TESTIMONY OF DANIEL I. GORDON1 TO BE ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 

Mr. GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Collins, and Members of the Committee. 

19 

I am honored to appear before you today as President Obama’s 

nominee to serve as the Administrator for Federal Procurement 

Policy. Because, as you noted, Mr. Chairman, I am a career Federal 

civil servant, it is especially humbling to be considered for a position that plays such an important role in helping our government 

achieve better results for the American people. 

I am very grateful to have my family and friends with me this 

morning, and with your indulgence, I would like to introduce my 

mother, Mae Mace, who I might add, Mr. Chairman, is a graduate 

of the Norwich Free Academy and Willimantic State Teachers College, as it was known then. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I had a feeling that there was something 

special about your mom. Thank you, sir. 

[Applause.] 

That is actually a great school with a proud tradition. 

Mr. GORDON. My stepfather, Colonel Herman Mace, who I am 

proud to say is a World War II veteran. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you, sir. Thanks for your service. 

[Applause.] 

Mr. GORDON. My wonderful partner of 23 years, Paul Cadario; 

my brother and sister-in-law, Mike and Donna Gordon; my other 

sister-in-law, Harriet Gordon; and other family members. I am also 

delighted to be joined by colleagues from GAO, particularly the Office of General Counsel, as well as from the George Washington 

University Law School where I have been on the adjunct faculty. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. It is great to see everybody here in your 

support. 

Mr. GORDON. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. And you began, I presume, not in terms 

of age but in terms of location. 

Mr. GORDON. Yes, sir. Thank you. I would not be here today 

without the loving support of my family and their guidance as well. 

The challenges that face us in the acquisition system require 

dedicated management attention if we are going to achieve the type 

of sustainable improvement that I believe the President envisioned 

in his March 4 memorandum on government contracting. Accordingly, if I am confirmed as Administrator, I would work with Congress and the agencies to address the following four priorities. 

First, as noted by the Ranking Member, increasing the size and 

improving the training of our acquisition workforce. Our procurement spending, as you have noted, has increased dramatically in 

the past decade, and the growth in the workforce has not kept 

pace. We need to focus our attention on developing the acquisition 

workforce and ensuring that its members get the training that they 

need. 

Second, we need to find ways to save money and reduce risk in 

our acquisitions. As you know, we are operating in a period of 

record deficits. A well-trained empowered acquisition workforce can 

help us structure our procurements in ways that save money and 

mitigate risk. Moreover, I believe that technology gives us the tools 

to make the procurement system much more transparent and that 

the visibility that transparency brings can discourage the improper 

use of high-risk contracting practices. 

20 

Third, improving acquisition planning. We need to work to ensure that our program staff and our contracting staff are working 

together, that they have the capacity and the tools they need to effectively plan acquisitions because good planning is critical to successful acquisitions. 

Finally, strengthening contract management. As stewards of the 

taxpayers, we must make sure that those who contract with the 

government deliver what they promise in terms of price, schedule, 

and performance. 

There are no silver bullets. There are no quick solutions for any 

of these challenges. Each one will require hard work and coordinated actions on the part of multiple stakeholders. If confirmed, I 

welcome the opportunity to join the topflight team led by Director 

Peter Orszag, Deputy Director Rob Nabors, and Deputy Director 

for Management Jeff Zients. 

Let me close this brief statement by thanking you again for the 

honor and the opportunity to be here today. I would also like to 

thank your staff for the time that they spent with me in preparation for this hearing. If I am confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to continue to work with this Committee and other Members 

of Congress. 

I would be pleased to answer questions that you may have. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks, Mr. Gordon. That was an excellent opening statement. And I want to note for the record that Jeff 

Zients, the aforementioned Deputy Director for Management at 

OMB, is right here. And that speaks to what I am sure will be a 

very important and good working relationship. 

I am going to start with the standard questions we ask of all 

nominees. First, is there anything you are aware of in your background that might present a conflict of interest with the duties of 

the office to which you have been nominated? 

Mr. GORDON. No, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Do you know of anything personal or otherwise that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably 

discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have been 

nominated? 

Mr. GORDON. No, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Do you agree without reservation to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any 

duly constituted committee of Congress if you are confirmed? 

Mr. GORDON. Yes, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much. 

I am going to ask a few of the questions that I touched on and 

then perhaps Senator Collins as well touched on in the opening 

statements. From the beginning of the Obama Administration, the 

President, as you noted, has put some emphasis on improved contract management. Back in February, Senator Collins and I participated in the procurement session of the President’s Fiscal Responsibility Summit, and I have been pleased that OMB has followed 

up on some of the ideas that were discussed at that session by 

issuing two rounds of guidance on contracting, first in July and 

then again last month. 

This guidance does not rewrite Federal procurement rules, which 

is wise, in my opinion, given that we already have very detailed 

21 

rules in the Federal acquisition regulation. But the guidance does 

lay out some best practices for agencies to increase competition, reduce the risk in contracting, and engage in better human resource 

planning so that the agencies find the right balance between their 

in-house workforces and outside contractors. 

So I wanted to ask you what role you think the Administrator 

of OFPP should play in making sure that the agencies follow the 

new guidance. 

Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, OFPP and its Administrator can 

play an important role in ensuring the implementation of the guidance as well as, more generally, the implementation of the statutes 

and regulations about procurement. 

As I understand it, the OFPP Administrator works closely with 

chief acquisition officers through the Chief Acquisition Officers 

council and with senior procurement executives. The work with 

other agencies across the government is critical for the Administrator to hear what is happening, hear lessons learned, and share 

best practices so that we can implement the guidance and move 

forward. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. The July guidance from OMB lays out a 

couple of specific goals, which are, I say with appreciation, real, but 

I think they are also manageable, which is a reduction in 7 percent 

of contract spending and a 10 percent reduction in high-risk contracts; that is, non-competitive contracts or cost-reimbursement 

contracts over the next fiscal year. 

So as I said, I think these are achievable goals, but over the long 

run, the efficiencies that can be wrung out of contracting are going 

to vary from agency to agency. And I think, therefore, handing 

down numerical targets may not be the logical way and the next 

step to proceed to better management. 

So I wanted to ask you once we get by these initial reduction targets, what do you think OFPP can do? And in another sense, what 

leverage does the office have to sustain the momentum for better 

contract management and how will you manage, what kinds of 

benchmarks do you think might be established to measure the performance of each agency in this regard? 

Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, one of the challenges in this area 

is more transparency and the need for more transparency. We need 

to know what is happening out there. In particular, for example, 

with the use of cost-reimbursement contracting where I know GAO 

just recently issued a report expressing concern that we do not 

have enough data on the number of cost-reimbursement contracts. 

When we have more transparency, as I said in my opening statement, that transparency can highlight the use of high-risk contracting methods, cost reimbursement, non-competed contracts, 

time and materials contracts. And in my view, that transparency 

itself can help. 

In addition, OFPP and its Administrator can, as I said, ensure 

that there is communication among the agencies and a sharing of 

lessons among the agencies to look for ways to reduce our risk and 

to get away from these higher risk contracting methods. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. That is a good answer, and I thank you. 

Let me ask you a very different kind of question about automated 

contract writing, which is a tool that I think can be very useful as 

22 

we move to an electronic-based procurement system and away from 

a paper-based system. An automated system, I think, would help 

supervisors flag potentially troublesome contracts. And finally, an 

automated system, I think, would help us get better real-time 

transparency, which you focused on, of Federal spending. 

My understanding is that agencies vary quite a lot in their use 

now of automated writing systems. And I wanted to ask you if you 

have any plans to review this area and to see what efficiencies we 

might gain from better governmentwide contract-writing systems. 

Mr. GORDON. If I am confirmed, Mr. Chairman, I would very 

much like to look into that. I would point out a couple of things. 

One is that uniformity, using, as you said, a standard contract 

writing software across the government, has certain advantages. 

Uniformity in our procurement system can make training easier 

and less expensive, can make it easier for people to transfer from 

agency to agency and take their skills with them. 

Obviously, there are situations when uniformity is not appropriate where you have agency-specific issues. There are some 

issues in the Department of Defense (DOD) obviously where they 

would have different regulations governing their acquisitions. So 

their system may need to be different. But it is certainly an area 

that I would want to explore to see if we can squeeze more efficiency out of our system. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good. A final question, which is also to 

raise something on your screen, we are holding this hearing as part 

of our traditional governmental affairs responsibility. We also now 

in recent years have had a homeland security responsibility. And 

we are focused this year, among other things, on cybersecurity as 

the rest of the government is. 

At a hearing we held in April on this subject, there was a very 

interesting point made, I thought, by one of the witnesses, that the 

Federal Government itself has tremendous buying power with regard to information technology. One estimate we heard was that in 

fiscal year 2010, we will spend approximately $76 billion on information technology matters. 

The challenge was raised as to the way in which we can use that 

spending strategically to improve Federal cybersecurity, and cybersecurity generally, by requiring more of the IT industry in the area 

of cybersecurity, particularly for such a large client base. I want to 

ask you if this makes sense to you and if you would take a look 

at it and hopefully act on that idea once you assume this office, if 

confirmed. 

Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, I would welcome the opportunity to 

look into that. I see the issue as being part of strategic sourcing 

more broadly. The government, our Federal Government, as you 

know, is the largest buyer in the world. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Right. 

Mr. GORDON. We need to be sure that we are taking advantage 

of our buying power and that we are using it to save money but 

also to leverage in an area such as cybersecurity, which I would 

welcome the opportunity to look into. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Very good, thanks very much. Senator 

Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

23 

Mr. Gordon, I mentioned in my opening statement my concern 

about a recent OFPP document on the Acquisition Workforce Development Strategic Plan. It is dated October 27, 2009. 

Have you had a chance to read this document yet? 

Mr. GORDON. I have, Senator Collins, although, of course, I was 

not privy to the development of it. 

Senator COLLINS. Do you think that we could strengthen the acquisition workforce planning beyond what is in this document? 

Mr. GORDON. I heard your statements both today and in the 

hearing that I think the contracting subcommittee held last week 

or the week before, and I very much appreciated the point you 

made. I know that you are an advocate for strengthening our acquisition workforce, and if I am confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work with you and your staff to find ways to be sure that 

we do strengthen the acquisition workforce across the civilian agencies. 

Senator COLLINS. I think that is absolutely critical. As I have 

said, it does not matter how many executive orders are promulgated, how much guidance is issued, or how many laws we pass if 

we do not have a high quality and sufficiently sized workforce to 

implement it. So I look forward to working with you on that, which 

leads me to another workforce issue, which is OFPP’s own workforce. 

OFPP in recent years has been largely reactive rather than 

proactive on procurement reforms, and I cannot help but wonder if 

that is attributable to the small size of the office. I am not looking 

to create some huge new bureaucracy, but I believe OFPP has only 

about a dozen full-time employees. 

Do you think that is adequate for the mission of the office? 

Mr. GORDON. It is an issue that, if I am confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to look into. I will tell you that I am committed to ensuring that OFPP has adequate staff with the right 

skill set. 

Senator COLLINS. Let me turn to two specific policy concerns that 

I have. The Acquisition Advisory Council, which was created by 

Congress in 2003, recommended that multi-agency contracts and 

certain large dollar single agency indefinite delivery and indefinite 

quantity (IDIQ) contracts—referred to as enterprise-wide contracts—be centrally coordinated by OMB. And a lot of times, these 

enterprise contracts are huge. They are enormous. The Navy’s SeaPort-e contract has an aggregate ceiling of $209 billion. The DHS 

Enterprise Acquisition Gateway for Leading Edge Solutions 

(EAGLE) contract has an aggregate ceiling of $45 billion. Both of 

these are multi-year contracts. And the advisory panel has also observed that the proliferation of contract vehicles dampens the government’s ability to leverage its buying power. 

How would you address the problem of unnecessary duplication 

in similar contracts in various Federal agencies? 

Mr. GORDON. Senator Collins, I very much appreciate the report 

of the Acquisition Advisory Council and their recommendations. 

And the issue of duplication in these IDIQ contracts is a tough 

issue. I appreciate the logic, as the report pointed out, that sometimes a little bit of competition can be healthy. 

24 

But I have heard considerable concern, both on the government 

side and on the private sector side, that the duplication has gone 

too far, that there are wasted efforts and wasted money. And potentially, it is acting as the opposite of strategic sourcing. It is essentially dividing up the Federal buying power instead of building 

it up. 

It is an issue that definitely merits attention. I know that OFPP 

has been looking at insisting that new IDIQ contracts come forward with a business case to justify them. It is definitely an issue 

that, if I am confirmed, I would want to look into to be sure that 

duplication is not wasteful of our very limited resources. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. I am pleased to hear you mention 

talking with the private sector. I think we should view the private 

sector as our partners in trying to procure services and goods that 

the Federal Government needs. Sometimes the relationship becomes too adversarial. On the other hand, there are rampant 

abuses that have occurred in some contracts because of insufficient 

oversight. So we need to reach out to the private sector to learn 

from them, but at the same time, make sure we have aggressive 

oversight. 

The relationship with the private sector brings up an issue that 

the Chairman and I have focused on many times. As you know, 

contractors are prohibited by law from performing inherently governmental functions. But defining what is an inherent government 

function is not always easy. Our Committee, however, has concluded that in the case of DHS, contractors were performing many 

functions, such as writing specifications for contracts, that clearly 

should be done in-house. 

What would you do to ensure that the proper balance is struck 

and that agencies are maintaining their ability to perform core 

functions? 

Mr. GORDON. I very much appreciate the concerns that you raise, 

Senator Collins, on both sides. That is to say, I very much agree 

that contractors perform important functions. We need to work 

with the contractors that are helping the government carry out its 

tasks. But as you said, and I also very much agree with this, we 

need to be careful that we have not become overly reliant on contractors. 

As both the President and the Director of OMB have said, there 

is real concern that we have gone overboard in contracting out. We 

need to revisit the contracting out that we have done to be sure not 

only that inherently governmental functions are performed by Federal employees; that should be a given. But in addition, there are 

other functions which are critical to the agency’s performance of its 

mission that need to be performed by Federal employees. The agency must not lose control of its operations by outsourcing too much. 

I understand that OMB is committed to developing clearer guidance on inherently governmental functions, and if I am confirmed, 

I would welcome the opportunity to be part of that process. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. My time has expired, so I am going 

to submit my further questions for the record. 

Let me just in closing say that you also need to pay attention to 

the use of blanket purchase agreements (BPA). GAO has a new report that indicates that in over half of the sample BPAs that were 

25 

reviewed, there was no evidence that agencies sought discounts 

when establishing these agreements. This is an issue that definitely OFPP needs to take a look at. 

Mr. GORDON. I agree. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks, Senator Collins. Senator Voinovich. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you. I would like to build on a couple 

of questions that Senator Collins mentioned. First of all, have you 

had a chance to evaluate OFPP’s resources? 

Are there enough people in your shop to get the job done? Does 

OFPP have the quality and the numbers to get it done? 

Mr. GORDON. I have been very impressed by the people in OFPP 

that I have worked with over the years, including more recently. 

I have been impressed by the quality of the work that they do, but 

I have not formed an opinion yet about the appropriate number. 

Senator VOINOVICH. If you find that the right people are not 

there, are you going to tell Mr. Zients that you need more people? 

Mr. GORDON. The good thing about working for Jeff Zients is I 

think he would view me as part of the team and we would be communicating very frankly and freely. 

Senator VOINOVICH. The second question deals with the issue of 

having the in-house people to have the expertise to work with the 

contractors that you hire. I have found from my career in the management side that too often agencies farm out acquisition functions 

and do not have the people in-house to make sure that the people 

that they have farmed the work out to are doing the job that they 

are supposed to be doing. And I would be very interested in having 

an appraisal, assuming you are confirmed, of agencies that you feel 

lack the capacity in-house to get the job done. I think that is real 

important, and I am sure there is going to be some standards developed on this issue. But I would like to know after maybe 6 

months which agencies you think need to bring some folks back inhouse or develop the capacity in-house to get the job done. 

The other issue is we had a hearing in August, and we were dismayed to learn that the chief acquisition officer of one of the Federal Government’s top purchasers was not aware he could access 

direct hire authority for acquisition personnel. 

If confirmed, what are you going to do to make sure that agencies know what flexibilities they have to get the people they need 

to get the job done? Also, I would be interested in knowing whether 

or not you think that the salary levels are adequate to compete for 

acquisition personnel because there is a big need out there in this 

area. 

Mr. GORDON. There is. Senator, thank you for the questions. If 

I could say first of all more broadly before addressing some of the 

specific points you raised, I think we are in a very good situation 

in that we have a broad consensus from this Committee, from Congress generally, and across the agencies, and obviously at OMB, 

that we must increase the size of the acquisition workforce. We 

must increase their training. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Now, do you have the flexibilities and the 

salary schedule to go out and get those individuals? 

26 

Mr. GORDON. We absolutely need to be sure that we have that 

capacity. On the salary, I do not feel like I know enough about the 

facts, but I have noted it down. I do want to look into that. I am 

encouraged by the fact that the Office of Personnel Management 

under the new Administrator, John Berry, is working to streamline 

the Federal hiring practices. We need to be able to hire people. We 

need to hire qualified people. Fortunately, the job market today actually facilitates hiring in the Federal Government, but we then 

need to train them. We need to reward them so that they feel appreciated in our acquisition workforce—very important things that 

I would view as high priorities if I am confirmed as Administrator. 

Senator VOINOVICH. It has been mentioned that you are going to 

have a lot of retirements from the acquisition workforce. 

What policies are in place for hiring back annuitants to train the 

new people coming on board? 

Mr. GORDON. I understand, Senator, that there are some flexibilities there, but I should note that there has actually been growth 

in the acquisition workforce over the past year and a half, 2 years, 

and that is somewhat encouraging. But we do need to look to flexibilities such as rehired annuitants, if that is appropriate, and to be 

sure that agencies, as you say, know what flexibilities they have 

in hiring. 

Senator VOINOVICH. The National Defense Authorization Act of 

2008 required OFPP to develop a sustainable funding model to support the hiring, training, and retention of acquisition personnel. 

The recently released OFPP guidance on acquisition workforce development strategic planning did not provide a specific discussion 

of the funding mechanism. 

Would you please share your views on how efforts to grow the 

civilian acquisition workforce should be funded and would you support a centralized fund similar to the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund in order to get the job done? In other 

words, what we are doing, we are giving the budgets of each of the 

departments and acquisition is included under the personnel line 

item probably, and then they have to decide how much goes to the 

acquisition workforce. 

If we do have this great need, do you think we should continue 

that practice or should we set up a separate fund as has been the 

case with the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Fund? 

Mr. GORDON. I appreciate the appeal of having a fund as we have 

on the DOD side. Senator, to tell you frankly, I just do not feel like 

I know enough of the different aspects of the issue to have an opinion yet, but I can commit to you that I would want to look into it. 

We need to be sure that we have a way to bring on board the acquisition employees that we need. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Good. I just think so often we ask people to 

do a job like the one we are going to be asking you to do, and then 

we do not have the infrastructure in place so that you can achieve 

that job. And I would hope that you would be as candid as you can 

be with Mr. Zients and also with this Committee in terms of 

whether or not you feel that you are in position to do the job we 

are going to ask you to do. 

Mr. GORDON. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks, Senator Voinovich. Senator Kirk. 

27 

Senator KIRK. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, Mr. Gordon. Welcome to your family. To your father, 

we celebrate all veterans, but your service to the country at this 

particular time is poignant, and we thank you for that. 

First of all, I want to identify myself with Senator Collins’ comments about the clarification between those contracts that are 

clearly governmental and those that might be available for commercial bidding and competition. It is clear from the President’s 

memorandum of March 4 that there is a need for greater clarity 

and clearing the blurs in the lines and so forth. 

Can you be more specific about what you would do, if you are 

confirmed for your new position, to make sure that those lines are 

clear so people in the commercial sector can know whether and 

when they can compete? 

Mr. GORDON. Yes, Senator. My understanding is that OMB is already working with the Executive Branch agencies to get those 

agencies to identify on a pilot basis functions where there is a risk 

that they are, in fact, overly reliant on contractors. I do not know 

the details, obviously, because I am not in the position. But if I am 

confirmed, I very much would want to look into that. 

As one of your colleagues mentioned earlier, acquisition is a particularly sensitive area. If we have contractors that are playing a 

role in acquisition, we need to be sure at the minimum that there 

are not conflicts of interest that would make it inappropriate for a 

contractor to be working in that area. But as I think is implicit in 

your question, OMB needs to give Executive Branch agencies guidance and the private sector guidance about what work should not 

be contracted out but rather needs to be performed by Federal employees. And if I am confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity 

to be part of that. 

Senator KIRK. Thank you. One of the tangential tensions, if you 

will, with contracting out inherently Federal functions is the risk 

that personal information of Americans and contractors might be 

mishandled. And I think most folks would rely on and hope to have 

assurances that security of their personal information would not be 

compromised. And I wondered whether you know whether OMB 

will provide additional guidance on this issue to agencies that handle personal information such as I am describing. 

Mr. GORDON. Senator, the issue of personally identifiable information and the need to protect it is a very high priority. I would 

need to look into the specifics of any role that OFPP might have 

in that, but I commit to you that, if I am confirmed, I will be happy 

to look into that issue. 

Senator KIRK. Thank you very much. One other important area 

about no-bid contracts is that they prevent many well qualified 

small businesses from competing on a level playing field. One of 

the leaders of small business in my State in Massachusetts said 

that, ‘‘The record has been pretty dismal,’’ when it comes to the 

ability to compete for Federal contracts. 

Would you agree with that characterization? And I wondered 

what efforts might be made to perhaps make small business more 

accessible to an ability to compete for some of these contracts? 

Mr. GORDON. Opening up opportunities, Senator, for small businesses to compete for Federal contracts is a bedrock principle of 

28 

our Federal procurement system, and obviously, it is enshrined in 

law through the Small Business Act and the regulations implementing it. One of OFPP’s functions is to work with the Small 

Business Administration and through that cooperation remove barriers to entry so that small businesses can participate in the competition for contracts. 

I would note that there has actually been quite a bit of success. 

I appreciate that a small business that does not get a contract may 

feel frustrated, but, in fact, there is, I understand, a Federal target 

of roughly 23 percent and we are close to that target. And I think 

under the Recovery Act, contracts are actually above that target. 

So progress is made, but as we often say at GAO, more work remains to be done. 

Senator KIRK. It is an area where I think a small business is 

very much the touchstone of our economy and particularly in certain areas of our country, so I would encourage you to keep pushing that forward. 

Mr. GORDON. Yes, sir, I will do that. 

Senator KIRK. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, that is all 

I have for this morning. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Kirk. I appreciate those questions. More work needs to be done. You are 

right. 

Thank you. You have been very responsive to the Committee’s 

questions. I hope I do not jinx your nomination by saying it is, in 

my experience on the Committee, one of the most broadly supported, uncontroversial nominations, so I hope it continues to be 

that way. 

Mr. GORDON. You are very kind, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. You have earned it. 

We are going to keep the record of this hearing open until the 

close of business on Thursday for additional questions or statements, and then we will try to move your nomination through the 

Committee and the floor as soon as possible to get you to work. I 

thank you for being here. I thank your family. I cannot repeat too 

many times how exciting it is to have a graduate of the Norwich 

Free Academy here in the room. [Laughter.] 

Mr. GORDON. You made her day, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. She made mine. With that, the hearing is 

adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(29) 

A P P E N D I X 


56143.001
30 


56143.002
31 


56143.003
32 


56143.004
33 


56143.005
34 


56143.006
35 


56143.007
36 


56143.008
37 

Statement of Erroll G. Southers to be Assistant Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

November 10, 2009 

Good morning Chairman Lieberman, Ranking Member Collins, 

and distinguished Members of the Committee. Before I begin, I 

would like to extend my most heartfelt sympathy and support for 

the victims of the shooting at Ft. Hood and their families. 

I am honored to appear before you today as President Obama’s 

nominee to lead the Transportation Security Administration as Assistant Secretary. It is a privilege to be selected by the President 

and to receive the support of Secretary Napolitano. I look forward 

to the great challenge of continuing the exceptional work that the 

men and women of TSA do in protecting our homeland. 

With the Committee’s indulgence, I would like to thank my parents, James and Thelma, my wife, Caryn, and our children, James 

and Maia, for their love and support. I am so very pleased that 

Caryn and Maia are able to join me today. I also must thank and 

acknowledge the outstanding officers and employees of the Los Angeles World Airports Police Department and my esteemed colleagues at the University of Southern California. 

I share Secretary Napolitano’s vision that keeping our homeland 

safe from terrorism is a collective responsibility in which all Americans have a role to play. Protecting our transportation network requires the work of many hands—TSA, the unified resources of the 

Department of Homeland Security, other federal agencies, private 

industry, state, local, and tribal governments, our international 

partners, and most importantly, the traveling public. By engaging 

these partners, and with the oversight and guidance from Congress, we will more effectively ensure the free movement of the 

American people and the flow of commerce. 

If confirmed, I know that the honor of leading TSA will come 

with great challenges and responsibilities. When Congress created 

TSA following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, you gave TSA the mission to provide for the security of all modes of transportation. 

While TSA has made great strides in fulfilling this responsibility, 

I fully understand that the work will never be complete. We are 

challenged by a dynamic threat and adaptive enemies who seek to 

harm Americans and our way of life. 

I believe that I am up to the challenge of leading TSA. TSA, and 

its most valuable resource, its people, need leadership. I understand what type of leadership and support the front-line workforce 

needs to execute a security mission. For the past thirty years I 

have dedicated myself to the mission of counterterrorism and public safety at the federal, state, and local levels. This has given me 

the important perspective to understand how partnerships are critical to success. The crucial need to effectively share information, be 

it threat information, intelligence, coordinated response planning, 

or best practices, is something that I have lived with, practiced, 

and experienced. If confirmed, I will bring this same dedication and 

commitment with me to TSA. 

Since 2007 I have served as the Assistant Chief for Homeland 

Security and Intelligence for the Los Angeles World Airports Police 

Department. I am proud to wear the uniform of the airport police 

38 

with the responsibility, in partnership with TSA and other agencies, to protect the people and goods that pass through one of the 

world’s major airports, Los Angeles International Airport, as well 

as Van Nuys Airport, one of the busiest general aviation airports 

in the United States. LAX has the largest aviation law enforcement 

agency in the United States, with the largest complement of explosives detection canine teams of any U.S. airport. LAX is also an 

intermodal hub with an important nexus to surface transportation 

with its nearby light rail system and transit buses. 

LAX has served as an interdisciplinary laboratory in a real world 

setting for advances in risk modeling and infrastructure protection. 

If confirmed, I will seek to further develop and deploy innovative 

security strategies and technologies to protect our transportation 

systems. 

Since 2006, I have served as Associate Director of the University 

of Southern California’s Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of 

Terrorism Events (CREATE), a DHS Center for Excellence. My responsibilities include the development and enhancement of special 

programs to provide the intellectual underpinnings for the fight 

against terrorism. At CREATE, I developed an Executive Program 

in Counterterrorism, designed to challenge international counterterrorism leaders and enhance their analysis, coordination, and response capabilities. 

My experience with LAWA and CREATE has afforded me the opportunity to collaborate with my international counterparts and 

other world experts in sharing best practices to combat terrorism. 

If confirmed, I will continue to draw on these relationships to benefit TSA’s mission. 

I also had the honor to serve Governor Schwarzenegger as the 

Deputy Director of the Office of Homeland Security for California. 

I was responsible for counterterrorism policy, the protection of California’s critical infrastructure in the post-September 11, 2001 environment and participated in the development of DHS’s first National Infrastructure Protection Plan. 

If confirmed, I will serve as a key member of Secretary 

Napolitano’s leadership team as she continues to forge a unified 

agency. Having served at both the operational level and as a stakeholder of the Department, I hope that I will bring a fresh perspective to fully integrating TSA operations as part of ‘‘One DHS.’’ 

Every day at LAX I witness firsthand the great work of the 

Transportation Security Officers and I understand the challenges 

they face. I would be honored to serve as their Assistant Secretary. 

I will provide them with an effective voice within TSA while fulfilling the agency’s critical security mission. A professional, effective workforce will further promote public confidence in TSA while 

enhancing our country’s resilience. 

If confirmed, I hope to forge a close relationship with this Committee and with Congress. This is a partnership, and the threat the 

United States faces requires a unified effort. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Collins, and Members of the 

Committee, thank you again for the opportunity to meet with you 

and your staff, and appear before you today. I look forward to answering your questions. 

39 


56143.010
40 


56143.011
41 


56143.012
42 


56143.013
43 


56143.014
44 


56143.015
45 


56143.016
46 


56143.017
47 


56143.018
48 


56143.019
49 


56143.020
50 


56143.021
51 


56143.022
52 


56143.023
53 


56143.024
54 


56143.025
55 


56143.026
56 


56143.027
57 


56143.028
58 


56143.029
59 


56143.030
60 


56143.031
61 


56143.032
62 


56143.033
63 


56143.034
64 


56143.035
65 


56143.036
66 


56143.037
67 


56143.038
68 


56143.039
69 


56143.040
70 


56143.041
71 


56143.042
72 


56143.043
73 


56143.044
74 


56143.045
75 


56143.046
76 


56143.047
77 


56143.048
78 


56143.049
79 


56143.050
80 


56143.051
81 


56143.052
82 


56143.053
83 


56143.054
84 


56143.055
85 


56143.056
86 


56143.057
87 


56143.058
88 


56143.059
89 


56143.060
90 


56143.061
91 


56143.062
92 


56143.063
93 


56143.064
94 


56143.065
95 


56143.066
96 


56143.067
97 


56143.068
98 


56143.069
99 


56143.070
100 


56143.071
101 


56143.072
102 


56143.073
103 


56143.074
104 


56143.075
105 


56143.076
106 


56143.077
107 


56143.078
108 


56143.079
109 


56143.080
110 


56143.081
111 


56143.082
112 


56143.083
113 


56143.084
114 


56143.085
115 


56143.086
116 


56143.087
117 


56143.088
118 


56143.089
119 


56143.090
120 


56143.091
121 


56143.092
122 


56143.093
123 


56143.094
124 


56143.095
125 


56143.096
126 


56143.097
127 


56143.098
128 


56143.099
129 


56143.100
130 


56143.101
131 


56143.102
132 


56143.103
133 


56143.104
134 


56143.105
135 


56143.106
136 


56143.107
137 


56143.108
138 


56143.109
139 


56143.110
140 


56143.111
141 


56143.112
142 


56143.113
143 


56143.114
144 


56143.115
145 


56143.116
146 


56143.117
147 


56143.118
148 


56143.119
149 


56143.120
150 


56143.121
151 


56143.122
152 


56143.123
153 


56143.124
154 


56143.125
155 


56143.126
156 


56143.127
157 


56143.128
158 


56143.129
159 


56143.130
160 


56143.131
161 


56143.132
162 


56143.133
163 


56143.134
164 


56143.135
165 


56143.136
166 


56143.137
167 


56143.138
168 


56143.139
169 


56143.140
170 


56143.141
171 


56143.142
172 


56143.143
173 


56143.144
174 


56143.145
175 


56143.146
176 


56143.147
177 


56143.148
178 


56143.149
179 


56143.150
180 


56143.151
181 


56143.152
182 


56143.153
183 


56143.154
184 


56143.155
185 


56143.156
186 


56143.157
187 


56143.158
188 


56143.159
189 


56143.160
190 


56143.161
191 


56143.162
192 


56143.163
193 


56143.164
194 

Æ 


56143.165