U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

33–664 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019

EXAMINING THE OLYMPIC COMMUNITY’S ABILITY 

TO PROTECT ATHLETES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND 

INVESTIGATIONS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 23, 2018 

Serial No. 115–134 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

energycommerce.house.gov 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

Chairman 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

Vice Chairman 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

DAVID B. MCKINLEY, West Virginia 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana 

MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma 

RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

Ranking Member 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N, New Mexico 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, III, Massachusetts 

TONY CA ́ RDENAS, California 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

Chairman 

H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

Vice Chairman 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio) 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

Ranking Member 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey (ex 

officio) 

(II) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Gregg Harper, a Representative in Congress from the State of Mississippi, opening statement ................................................................................. 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 3 

Hon. Diana DeGette, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado, opening statement ...................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New Jersey, opening statement .......................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 9 

Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 10 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 11 

WITNESSES

Susanne Lyons, Acting Chief Executive Officer, United States Olympic Committee .................................................................................................................... 14 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 16 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 144 

Kerry Perry, President and Chief Executive Officer, USA Gymnastics .............. 23 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 25 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 148 

Timothy Hinchey III, President and Chief Executive Officer, USA Swimming . 30 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 32 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 157 

Stephen McNally, Executive Director, USA Taekwondo ...................................... 35 

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

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 165 

Jamie Davis, Chief Executive Officer, USA Volleyball ......................................... 62 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 65 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 171 

Shellie Pfohl, President and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Center for 

SafeSport ............................................................................................................... 88 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 90 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 179 

SUBMITTED MATERIAL

Subcommittee memorandum .................................................................................. 132 

Subcommittee exhibit binder 1

1The exhibit binder has been retained in committee files and also is available 

at https://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID= 

108356. 

(1) 

EXAMINING THE OLYMPIC COMMUNITY’S 

ABILITY TO PROTECT ATHLETES FROM 

SEXUAL ABUSE 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room 

2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Gregg Harper (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Harper, Griffith, Burgess, 

Brooks, Collins, Barton, Walberg, Walters, Costello, Carter, Walden 

(ex officio), DeGette, Schakowsky, Castor, Tonko, Clarke, Ruiz, 

Peters, and Pallone (ex officio). 

Also present: Representatives Bilirakis and Dingell. 

Staff present: Jennifer Barblan, Chief Counsel, Oversight and Investigations; Mike Bloomquist, Staff Director; Kelly Collins, Legislative Clerk, Energy/Environment; Adam Fromm, Director of Outreach and Coalitions; Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Oversight and 

Investigations, Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection; Brighton Haslett, Counsel, Oversight and Investigations; Brittany Havens, Professional Staff Member, Oversight and Investigations; 

Elena Hernandez, Press Secretary; Zach Hunter, Communications 

Director; Austin Stonebraker, Press Assistant; Natalie Turner, 

Counsel, Oversight and Investigations; Hamlin Wade, Special Advisor for External Affairs; Julie Babayan, Minority Counsel; Christina Calce, Minority Counsel; Jeff Carroll, Minority Staff Director; 

Zach Kahan, Minority Outreach and Members Services Coordinator; Chris Knauer, Minority Oversight Staff Director; Miles 

Lichtman, Minority Policy Analyst; Perry Lusk, Minority GAO 

Detailee; Tim Robinson, Minority Chief Counsel; Andrew Souvall, 

Minority Director of Communications, Member Services, and Outreach; and C.J. Young, Minority Press Secretary. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREGG HARPER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 

Mr. HARPER. The hearing will come to order. 

Today, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations is 

holding a hearing entitled ‘‘Examining the Olympic Community’s 

Ability to Protect Athletes from Sexual Abuse.’’ 

2 

We are here because recent events have highlighted a very troubling and concerning pattern of sexual misconduct within the U.S. 

Olympic community. There’s been a systemic failure in the system 

to protect athletes, including in how allegations of sexual misconduct have been handled—or should I say not handled—by the 

national governing bodies, the groups that run individual sports, 

and the U.S. Olympic Committee. 

And let me be clear: One case of sexual abuse is one case too 

many, and it will take a Herculean effort to regain the trust of prospective athletes, their families, and the American people. The 

USOC and NGBs play a role in keeping millions of American athletes safe from harm. 

The vast majority of the athletes involved in NGBs will never 

compete in Olympics. They are on teams affiliated with an NGB or 

play at an NGB-sponsored event. This can include little league 

teams, local tennis tournaments, or gymnastics competitions. They 

are, in many instances, children, but they still fall within the parameters of organized sport. 

So when we talk about athletes’ safety, we aren’t just talking 

about elite athletes representing their country at the highest level 

of their competition, we are also talking about our friends, our 

neighbors, and, yes, our children. 

This is why athlete safety must be the top priority of the USOC 

and NGBs, and why they should have robust policies and procedures in place that reflect this priority. 

More importantly, these policies and procedures must be followed, otherwise they aren’t worth the paper that they’re written 

on, and the culture must be such that our athletes feel safe and 

protected. 

Sadly, we’ve seen what can happen when athlete safety is not a 

priority. Too often it seems that the USOC and NGBs haven’t acted 

until they are publicly pressured to do so. When you have survivors 

saying that they were asked to stay silent, felt that they weren’t 

heard, and didn’t feel safe, there’s something horribly wrong with 

the system. 

Sexual abuse is a problem that our society must confront. According to the CDC’s statistics on sexual violence, one in three 

women and one in six men experience sexual violence involving 

physical contact during their lifetimes. 

While such focus has been on USA Gymnastics team doctor 

Larry Nassar, gymnastics is not the only NGB that has had its 

challenges. Recent public reports also include the Lopez brothers in 

Taekwondo, Rick Butler in Volleyball, and the multiple accusations 

that have come from the swimming community, as well as reports 

in many other NGBs not before us today. 

Historically, each NGB and the USOC were responsible for directly handling any complaints, allegations, or reports of sexual 

abuse within their respective sport. However, policies, procedures, 

and bylaws weren’t consistent across all NGBs, and it’s unclear 

whether there was adequate oversight to ensure that the applicable 

policies and procedures were even followed. 

There have been some recent changes to improve how allegations 

of sexual misconduct are handled in the Olympic community. The 

3 

USOC has used working groups to make recommendations for promoting and protecting athletes. 

Through these working groups, new policies and procedures were 

developed and the U.S. Center for SafeSport was created by the 

USOC and launched in March of 2017. Now all NGBs and the 

USOC are required to report all complaints or allegations that involve sexual misconduct to the Center for investigation. 

Over the course of this investigation, the committee has spoken 

with many survivors, and their experiences have informed and 

shaped our work. These conversations and the many thousands of 

pages of documents provided to the committee by survivors and 

whistleblowers helped shed light on the pervasive problem of sexual abuse in organized sport and prompted the committee to request documents from all 48 national governing bodies and the 

USOC. 

We greatly appreciate all the assistance that the survivors have 

provided and our hearts do go out to them. Our job now is to do 

everything we can to protect our athletes, many of whom are children. 

This hearing will serve as an opportunity to review whether the 

USOC and NGBs have adequate policies and procedures in place 

to protect athletes from sexual abuse. It is of the utmost importance to hold them accountable for their past failures and ensure 

that safety is their top priority going forward. It is time to change 

the culture, once and for all. 

I’d like to welcome all of our witnesses, and I do thank you for 

being here today. And I know this isn’t an easy topic, but it is one 

that we need to address to keep our Nation’s athletes safe. And we 

do look forward to hearing your testimony. 

I would also like to thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, Ms. DeGette, and other minority members and staff for 

their bipartisan hard work and assistance that we’ve seen during 

this investigation. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Harper follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GREGG HARPER

Today, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations is holding a hearing entitled, ‘‘Examining the Olympic Community’s Ability to Protect Athletes from Sexual 

Abuse.’’ We are here because recent events have highlighted a very troubling and 

concerning pattern of sexual misconduct within the U.S. Olympic Community. There 

have been breakdowns and failures in the system to protect athletes, including in 

how allegations of sexual misconduct have been handled by the National Governing 

Bodies-the groups that run individual sports-and the U.S. Olympic Committee. 

The USOC and NGBs play a role in keeping millions of American athletes safe 

from harm. The vast majority of the athletes involved in NGBs will never compete 

in the Olympics. They’re on teams affiliated with an NGB, or play in NGB-sponsored events. This can include little league teams, local tennis tournaments or gymnastics competitions. They are, in many instances, children. But they still fall within the parameters of ‘‘organized sport.’’ So when we talk about athlete safety, we 

aren’t just talking about elite athletes representing their country at the highest levels of their competition. We are also talking about our friends, our neighbors, our 

kids. 

This is why athlete safety must be the top priority of the USOC and NGBs, and 

why they should have robust policies and procedures in place that reflect this priority. More importantly, these policies and procedures must be followed-otherwise 

they aren’t worth the paper they are written on-and the culture must be such that 

our athletes feel safe and protected. Sadly, we’ve seen what can happen when athlete safety is not a priority. 

4 

Too often it seems that the USOC and NGBs haven’t acted until they are publicly 

pressured to do so. When you have survivors saying that they were asked to stay 

silent, felt like they weren’t heard, and didn’t feel safe—there is something wrong 

with the system. 

Sexual abuse is a problem our society must confront. According to the CDC’s statistics on sexual violence, one in three women and one in six men experience sexual 

violence involving physical contact during their lifetimes. While much focus has 

been on USA Gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar, gymnastics is not the only 

NGB that has had its challenges. Recent public reports also include the Lopez 

brothers in Taekwondo, Rick Butler in Volleyball, and the multiple accusations that 

have come from the Swimming community, as well as reports in many other NGBs 

not before us today. 

Historically, each NGB and the USOC were responsible for directly handling any 

complaints, allegations, or reports of sexual abuse within their respective sport. 

However, policies, procedures, and bylaws weren’t consistent across all NGBs and 

it’s unclear whether there was adequate oversight to ensure that the applicable policies and procedures were followed. 

There have been some recent changes to improve how allegations of sexual misconduct are handled in the Olympic community. The USOC has used working 

groups to make recommendations for promoting and protecting athletes. Through 

these working groups, new policies and procedures were developed, and the U.S. 

Center for SafeSport (Center) was created by the USOC and launched in March 

2017. Now all NGBs and the USOC are required to report all complaints or allegations that involve sexual misconduct to the Center for investigation. 

Over the course of this investigation, the committee has spoken with many survivors, and their experiences have informed and shaped our work. These conversations-and the thousands of pages of documents provided to the committee by survivors and whistleblowers-helped shed light on the pervasive problem of sexual 

abuse in organized sport, and prompted the committee to request documents from 

all 48 national governing bodies and the USOC. 

We greatly appreciate all the assistance that the survivors have provided. Our job, 

now, is to do everything we can to protect our athletes. This hearing will serve as 

an opportunity to review whether the USOC and NGBs have adequate policies and 

procedures in place to protect athletes from sexual abuse. These organizations are 

directly responsible for the safety of athletes. It is of the utmost importance to hold 

them accountable for their past failings and ensure that safety is their top priority 

going forward. It is time to change the culture, once and for all. 

I’d like to welcome all of our witnesses and thank you for being here today. I 

know that this isn’t an easy topic, but it’s one that we need to address to keep our 

Nation’s athletes safe. We look forward to hearing your testimony. 

I would also like to thank the ranking member of subcommittee, Ms. DeGette, and 

other minority members and staff for their hard work and assistance on this bipartisan investigation. 

Mr. HARPER. And I’ll now recognize the ranking member of the 

subcommittee, Ms. DeGette. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DIANA DEGETTE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. 

There were warning signs about sexual misconduct in amateur 

sports for decades. And yet, the systems that were supposed to protect our athletes failed. That’s why we’re here today. 

As the chairman noted, these systems failed to stop Larry Nassar 

from harming more than 250 individuals. They failed to stop a 

taekwondo coach from abusing three athletes over 7 years for 

which he was later convicted of multiple felonies. And they failed 

to stop a swim coach from abusing more than a dozen athletes over 

30 years. 

That coach was eventually sentenced to 40 years in prison, but 

even a lifetime in jail cannot erase the damage that he has done. 

5 

These cases, unfortunately, are not anomalies. Far too many athletes, from far too many sports, have come forward stating that 

they had been traumatized by the very people they trusted to help 

them achieve their dreams. 

Today we are here because we need to know that the Olympic 

sport community has learned from these survivors and is using 

that knowledge to develop and implement a new system run by the 

U.S. Center for SafeSport. 

We need to be the convinced that this new Center has a robust 

system to investigate and stop bad actors so that situations like 

this never happen again. And we need to make sure that the Center has adequate funding going forward into the future. 

I understand that the U.S. Olympic Committee and the national 

governing bodies are engaging in their own internal investigations 

into what went wrong. I hope everyone today is prepared to explain 

exactly what they’re doing to investigate and learn from past failures so that they can build a system that works. 

I also hope the Center for SafeSport, which is located right in the 

heart of my congressional district, can help us explain how the past 

failures inform its work. Because the Center doesn’t just investigate misconduct allegations, although that’s an important part of 

their job, it also has the extraordinarily important task of developing anti-abuse policies and providing education and outreach to 

promote safe environments for athletes. 

I hope the Center will be able to make real, verifiable progress 

in creating a national culture of safety in sport. 

But I’ve got to say that I have concerns about whether SafeSport 

has sufficient resources and whether it truly has the independence 

it needs from the organizations it oversees. 

I spoke yesterday with SafeSport, and I want to make sure that 

we have formal outside assessments of SafeSport’s needs and operations. And I want to make sure that the Olympic community and 

the sporting community also are committed to giving them the resources that they need. 

In case you didn’t know this, the Olympic Committee is not operating on a shoestring. Its annual revenue is hundreds of millions 

of dollars. I hope we will hear today that if SafeSport needs more 

money, the U.S. Olympic Committee and the other governing bodies are prepared to increase substantially the support that they 

provide to this much-needed watchdog. 

I also want to know how the Center for SafeSport and national 

governing bodies will ensure that the independent systems that 

they’ve designed is working as intended and its meeting its goals 

of protecting the people that it is supposed to. 

For example, will there be ongoing and periodic performance audits to ensure that the complaints are properly investigated, the 

SafeSport’s educational component is being implemented, and that 

its standards are being adopted by the many sports organizations 

under its jurisdiction? 

Ongoing audits are going to be critical to evaluating this new 

system, and I want to know that this will happen and that we have 

appropriate resources to do that work. 

6 

I also want to understand that the U.S. Olympic Committee is 

prepared to enforce consistent anti-abuse policies and procedures 

across all governing bodies. 

For example, some governing bodies post public lists of banned 

athletes and coaches, while others do not. Some governing bodies 

require SafeSport training for all affiliated individuals, and others 

only require it for their members. 

I know that various affiliates are concerned about this and are 

trying to develop consistent policies. This is going to be critical and 

the leadership of the U.S. Olympic Committee will be critical. 

Look, we’re not here today to tear down the sporting world. 

American performances at the Olympics are a source of national 

pride, and sports in general benefit children and adults at all levels. But it does no good for our athletes to stand on a podium if 

they’ve been harmed by the people and organizations that help get 

them there. 

I hope that we’re on the road to real change. Today, I want to 

hear from every witness how we truly are and that the steps that 

we are taken to date are not just window dressing, because every 

athlete, no matter what sport they play, no matter what level 

they’re playing it, deserves to complete in a heavy and a safe environment. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. DeGette follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DIANA DEGETTE

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We are here today because there have been warning signs about sexual misconduct in sports for decades. And yet, the systems that were supposed to protect 

athletes failed. 

They failed to stop Larry Nassar from harming more than 250 individuals. They 

failed to stop a taekwondo coach from abusing three athletes over 7 years, a crime 

for which he eventually was convicted of multiple felonies. And they failed to stop 

a swim coach from abusing more than a dozen athletes over 30 years. That coach 

was eventually sentenced to 40 years in prison, but even a lifetime in jail would 

not erase the damage he has done. 

These cases are not anomalies. Far too many athletes from far too many sports 

have come forward stating that they have been harmed by the very people they 

trusted to help them achieve their dreams. 

Today, I need to know that the Olympic sport community has learned from these 

survivors, and is using this knowledge to design and implement the new system run 

by the U.S. Center for SafeSport. I need to be convinced that this new Center has 

a robust system to investigate and stop bad actors so that situations like these 

never happen again. 

I understand that the U.S. Olympic Committee and the national governing bodies 

are engaging in their own internal investigations into what went wrong. I hope they 

are all prepared to explain exactly what they are doing to investigate and learn 

from past failures so that they can build a system that works. 

I also hope that the Center for SafeSport is prepared to explain how these past 

failures inform its work. This Center does not just investigate misconduct allegations. It also has the extraordinarily important tasks of developing anti-abuse policies and providing education and outreach to promote safe environments for athletes. 

I hope that this Center will make real, verifiable progress in creating a culture 

of safety in sport. 

But I must say that I still have considerable concerns about whether SafeSport 

has sufficient tools and resources and operates with enough independence from the 

organizations it oversees. I want to know that there are formal ongoing assessments 

of SafeSport’s needs and operations to ensure that it can handle its workload effectively. 

7 

The Olympic Committee is not operating on a shoestring. Its annual revenue is 

in the hundreds of millions. I hope we will hear today that if SafeSport needs more 

money, the U.S. Olympic Committee and governing bodies are prepared to increase 

substantially the support they provide to the Center. 

Similarly, I would like to know how the Center for SafeSport and national governing bodies will ensure that the independent system they have designed is working as intended and meeting the needs of those it is charged with protecting. 

For example, will there be ongoing and periodic performance audits to ensure that 

complaints are properly investigated, that SafeSport’s educational component is 

being implemented, and that its standards are being adopted by the many sports 

organizations under its jurisdiction? Ongoing audits are critical to evaluating this 

new system, and I want to know that they will happen and that there are appropriate resources already set aside to make them happen. 

I also want to understand that the U.S. Olympic Committee is prepared to enforce 

consistent anti-abuse policies and procedures across all governing bodies. 

For example, some governing bodies post public lists of banned athletes and 

coaches while others do not. Some governing bodies require SafeSport training for 

all affiliated individuals, and others only require it for members. 

There must be consistency in these policies, and the U.S. Olympic Committee 

must require the national governing bodies to adopt all changes needed. 

Let me conclude by saying that we are not here today to tear down sport. American performances at the Olympics are a source of national pride, and sports benefit 

children and adults at all levels. But it does us no good for our athletes to stand 

on a podium if those same athletes have been harmed by the individuals and organizations that helped them get there. 

I hope that we are on the road to real change. Today, I want every witness here 

to convince me that we are, and that the steps taken to date are not just ‘‘window 

dressing.’’ Because every athlete, no matter what sport they play or at what level, 

deserves to compete in a healthy and safe environment. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The Chair will now recognize the ranking member, 

Mr. Pallone, for an opening statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Today leaders of the Olympic community will tell us that they 

failed the people they were supposed to protect. We must examine 

those failures and understand whether the organizations before us 

today have learned from them. 

Reports of sexual abuse in organized sports have been in the 

press for decades, years before the world known of Larry Nassar’s 

horrific crimes. It’s shameful that many organizations share the 

blame for failing these survivors. 

The problem of sexual abuse in organized sports is bigger than 

Larry Nassar and it’s bigger than any single organization. Today 

we’ll hear from the national governing bodies of several sports, and 

each one has to address sexual abuse of their athletes. 

Unfortunately, we have seen that these cases are not rare. Too 

many athletes have come forward with accounts of abuse. 

These athletes come from different sports, but often we hear the 

same themes when we listen to them. Frequently their abusers 

held positions of power, sometimes controlling whether an athlete 

could train or compete, and frequently their abusers had powerful 

friends in their respective organizations. 

And up until recently, each sports’ governing body addressed sexual abuse allegations internally, and that system failed to protect 

athletes. 

8 

There was a great need for an independent organization, and last 

March the U.S. Center for SafeSport opened its doors with a mission to prevent abuse and foster a culture of safety in sports. 

Now sport governing bodies can and must report allegations of 

sexual misconduct to the Center for SafeSport. And the Center continues to receive new cases, as well as cases from athletes who had 

reported sexual misconduct in the past. 

On top of that, it offers education and training for sports governing bodies and athletes, and already the organization has provided training to more than 300,000 and has received more than 

500 reports. 

And clearly all of this takes resources, and we need to make sure 

that the Center for SafeSport has the resources and personnel it 

needs to do its work. 

I also want to hear what the U.S. Olympic Committee is doing 

to support the Center for SafeSport. Special language in the Tax 

Code designates the U.S. Olympic Committee as a tax-exempt, nonprofit organization, but few nonprofit organizations can report revenues in the hundreds of millions of dollars as the U.S. Olympic 

Committee did in its most recent tax filing. 

The U.S. Center for SafeSport gets its funding from diverse 

sources, including fundraising and government grants. It also gets 

a portion of its funding from the U.S. Olympic Committee. 

So I hope we’ll hear today that the U.S. Olympic Committee and 

the sports governing bodies are prepared to provide consistent and 

continuing support to the Center for SafeSport. It is critical for the 

Center for SafeSport to have a permanent and dedicated source of 

funding, and these sports organizations should make sure that that 

happens. 

I also hope we will hear that the U.S. Olympic Committee will 

use its position of leadership and authority to require sports governing bodies to adopt reforms as needed to reduce the risk of 

harm to athletes. 

For example, questions such as, who is subject to background 

checks, how these checks are done, and whether lists of individuals 

banned from the sport are made public, are all important safety 

standards that should be applied consistently across all sports. 

I also want to hear that the Center for SafeSport, the Olympic 

Committee, and all governing bodies are committed to completing 

ongoing formal assessments and evaluations to determine what is 

working and what needs additional improvement or additional resources. 

Before we leave today, I want to hear from all of our witnesses 

about the reforms they’ve implemented to keep athletes safe. I 

want you to convince me that you’re thoroughly examining how you 

failed athletes in the past and that those lessons are shaping the 

reforms you’re putting in place. 

And I need to be convinced that you are building a system with 

the right people, structure, and resources to protect athletes under 

your leadership. I also want to hear that there will be zero tolerance for the kinds of abuses that brought us here today. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, unless someone wants my minute, I 

will yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:] 

9 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR. 

Today leaders of the Olympic community will tell us that they failed the people 

they were supposed to protect. We must examine those failures, and understand 

whether the organizations before us today have learned from them. 

Reports of sexual abuse in organized sports have been in the press for decades— 

years before the world learned of Larry Nassar’s horrific crimes. It is shameful that 

many organizations share the blame for failing these survivors. 

The problem of sexual abuse in organized sports is bigger than Larry Nassar, and 

it is bigger than any single organization. Today we will hear from the National Governing Bodies of several sports. Each one has had to address sexual abuse of their 

athletes. 

Unfortunately, we have seen that these cases are not rare. Too many athletes 

have come forward with accounts of abuse. These athletes come from different 

sports, but often we hear the same themes when we listen to them. Frequently their 

abusers held positions of power—sometimes controlling whether an athlete could 

train or compete. And frequently their abusers had powerful friends in their respective organizations. 

Up until recently, each sports’ governing body addressed sexual abuse allegations 

internally. 

That system failed to protect athletes. 

There was a great need for an independent organization. Last March, the U.S. 

Center for SafeSport opened its doors, with a mission to prevent abuse and foster 

a culture of safety in sports. Now sports governing bodies can—and must—report 

allegations of sexual misconduct to the Center for SafeSport. 

The Center continues to receive new cases, as well as cases from athletes who had 

reported sexual misconduct in the past. On top of that, it offers education and training for sports governing bodies and athletes. Already, the organization has provided 

training to more than 300,000 people, and has received more than 500 reports. 

Clearly, all of this takes resources, and we need to make sure the Center for 

SafeSport has the resources and personnel it needs to do its work. 

I also want to hear what the U.S. Olympic Committee is doing to support the Center for SafeSport. Special language in the Tax Code designates the U.S. Olympic 

Committee a tax-exempt nonprofit organization. But few nonprofit organizations can 

report revenues in the hundreds of millions of dollars, as the U.S. Olympic Committee did in its most recent tax filing. 

The U.S. Center for SafeSport gets its funding from diverse sources, including 

fundraising and Government grants. It also gets a portion of its funding from the 

U.S. Olympic Committee. 

I hope we will hear today that the U.S. Olympic Committee and the sports’ governing bodies are prepared to provide consistent and continuing support to the Center for SafeSport. It is critical for the Center for SafeSport to have a permanent and 

dedicated source of funding, and these sports’ organizations should make sure that 

happens. 

I also hope we will hear that the U.S. Olympic Committee will use its position 

of leadership and authority to require sports governing bodies to adopt reforms as 

needed to reduce the risk of harm to athletes. 

For example, questions such as who is subject to background checks, how those 

checks are done, and whether lists of individuals banned from a sport are made 

public are all important safety standards that should be applied consistently across 

all sports. 

I also want to hear that the Center for SafeSport, the Olympic Committee, and 

all governing bodies are committed to completing ongoing formal assessments and 

evaluations to determine what is working, and what needs additional improvement 

or additional resources. 

Before we leave today, I want to hear from all of our witnesses about the reforms 

they have implemented to keep athletes safe. I want you to convince me that you 

are thoroughly examining how you failed athletes in the past, and that those lessons 

are shaping the reforms you are putting in place. 

I need to be convinced that you are building a system—with the right people, 

structure, and resources—to protect athletes under your leadership. I also want to 

hear that there will be zero tolerance for the kinds of abuses that brought us here 

today. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

10 

The Chair will now recognize the chairman of the full committee, 

Mr. Walden, for an opening. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for leading 

this investigation and holding this very important hearing today. 

Every one of us in this room has an Olympic memory. For a select few, it is actually competing in the Olympic Games on behalf 

of our great country. For the vast majority of us, it is watching our 

athletes compete. 

The Olympics inspire, they unite us, as we cheer them on to victory with great pride. Our children watch the Olympics with their 

own dream that one day they, too, may compete at the most elite 

level and represent our country. 

But the system of organized sport headed by the United States 

Olympic Committee and 48 national governing bodies, or NGBs, is 

much bigger than the Olympics and includes millions of athletes 

who don’t necessarily compete at the highest levels. 

The four NGBs before us today—Gymnastics, Taekwondo, 

Volleyball and Swimming—collectively represent some 979,000 

members. USA Swimming includes everyone from Michael 

Phelps—who, by the way, testified before this committee last 

year—to children competing in a local recreational league. 

And the same is true not for the three other NGBs at the table 

today, but for all the other NGBs in existence. 

In pursuit of their dreams, athletes of all levels have frequent 

contact with coaches and doctors and trainers and volunteers, who 

are given responsibility beyond simply enabling these young athletes to achieve excellence in their chosen sport. We entrust them 

with athletes’ safety and their well-being. 

These individuals often hold positions of great power and authority over the athletes. Not only can they control an athlete’s training 

schedule or medical treatment, those very individuals often have a 

direct say in that athlete’s career, such as deciding who competes 

in an upcoming event. 

As has become abundantly clear, too many authority figures have 

abused their power and influenced and harmed the very athletes 

that were trusted to them. Athletes have very little power, by comparison, and too many have been failed by the system that purports to protect them. 

Much attention has been paid to the case of Larry Nassar, in 

part because of the sickening number of athletes he abused. To 

date, hundreds of women and girls have come forward as victims 

of Nassar’s abuse that spanned two decades. 

But the sad truth is, that abuse in the Olympic community extends well beyond Larry Nassar and USA Gymnastics. The U.S. 

Center for SafeSport, established in March of 2017, has already received 488 reports regarding sexual abuse involving 35 of the 48 

total NGBs. 

The committee has spoken with numerous survivors in the 

course of this investigation. And we thank all of them for their assistance in this work, and we know that their stories are not easy 

to tell. 

11 

There were far too many similarities in what we heard. Individuals in positions of power not only abused their trust, but physically abused their persons. And when survivors sought help, far 

too many felt the system protected not them, but their abusers. 

They felt silenced. 

In the eyes of many survivors, the culture of medals and money 

won out over athlete safety and protection. 

Changes have been made in the Olympic community over the 

past decade, in particular within the last year, that show how 

things are moving in the right direction. However, many questions 

remain about whether the community has come far enough and 

moved fast enough. More must be done to ensure that athlete safety is the top priority of the USOC and the NGBs. 

Today this committee will examine how to protect young athletes 

now and in the future. Among our concerns are: 

Whether the culture within the Olympic community fosters a 

safe environment for victims to come forward; 

Whether the policies and procedures that have been put in place 

over the past several years are enforced in a way that promotes 

transparency and accountability; 

Whether the Center for SafeSport is the most effective organization it can be; 

And, whether the USOC has exercised its full authorities over 

the Olympic community when it comes to creating and enforcing 

policies that protect our athletes from sexual abuse and misconduct. 

So I look forward to hearing about what Congress can do further 

to improve and strengthen the system so we’re actually protecting 

athletes at all levels, and all ages, in all sports. 

Thank you for being here as part of this discussion. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for leading this investigation and holding this important hearing today. 

Every one us in this room has an Olympic memory. For a select few, it is competing in the Olympic games on behalf of our Nation. For the vast majority of us, 

it is watching our athletes compete. The Olympics inspire and unite us as we cheer 

on our athletes with great pride. Our children watch the Olympics with the dream 

that one day they will get to compete at the most elite level and represent our country. 

But the system of ‘‘organized sport’’ headed by the USOC and 48 National Governing Bodies, or NGBs, is much bigger than the Olympics, and includes millions 

of athletes who don’t compete at the highest levels of organized sport. The four 

NGBs before us today—Gymnastics, Taekwondo, Volleyball, and Swimming—collectively represent nearly 979,000 members. USA Swimming includes everyone from 

Michael Phelps to children competing in a local recreational league. And the same 

is true not just for the three other NGBs at the table today, but for all of the other 

NGBs in existence. 

In pursuit of their dreams, athletes of all levels have frequent contact with coaches, doctors, trainers, and volunteers who are given responsibility beyond simply enabling these young athletes to achieve excellence in their chosen sport; we entrust 

them with athletes’ safety and well-being. These individuals often hold positions of 

great power and authority over the athletes. Not only can they control an athlete’s 

training schedule or medical treatment, those very individuals often have a direct 

say in that athlete’s career, such as deciding who competes in an upcoming event. 

As has become abundantly clear, too many authority figures have abused their 

power and influence and harmed the very athletes that trusted them. Athletes have 

12 

very little power by comparison, and too many athletes have been failed by the system that purports to protect them. 

Much attention has been paid to the case of Larry Nassar, in part because of the 

stunning number of athletes abused by Nassar. To date, hundreds of women and 

girls have come forward as victims of Nassar’s abuse that spanned two decades. But 

the sad truth is that abuse in the Olympic community extends well beyond Larry 

Nassar and USA Gymnastics. The U.S. Center for SafeSport, established in March 

of 2017, has already received 488 reports regarding sexual abuse, involving 35 of 

the 48 total NGBs. 

The committee has spoken with numerous survivors in the course of this investigation, and we thank all of them for their assistance in this work. We know that 

their stories are not easy to tell. 

There were far too many similarities in what we heard. Individuals in positions 

of power not only abused their trust, but physically abused their persons. And when 

survivors sought help, far too many felt that the system protected not them, but 

their abusers. They felt silenced. In the eyes of many survivors, the culture of ‘‘medals and money’’ won out over athlete safety and protection. 

Changes have been made in the Olympic community over the past decade, in particular in 2017, that show that the way these cases are handled is changing for the 

better. However, many questions remain about whether the community has come 

far enough and moved fast enough. More must be done to ensure that athlete safety 

is the top priority of the USOC and NGBs. 

Today this committee will examine the progress that has been made. Among our 

concerns are whether the culture within the Olympic community fosters a safe environment for victims to come forward; whether the policies and procedures that have 

been put in place over the past several years are enforced in a way that promotes 

transparency and accountability; whether the Center for SafeSport is the most effective organization it can be; and whether the USOC has exercised its full authorities 

over the Olympic community when it comes to creating and enforcing policies that 

protect our athletes from sexual abuse and misconduct. I also look forward to hearing about what the Congress can further do to help improve and strengthen the systems that protect athletes of all levels, and all ages. 

I thank our witnesses for being here today, and being part of this important discussion. I yield back. 

Mr. WALDEN. With that, I yield the balance of my time to the 

gentlelady from Indiana, Mrs. Brooks. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank 

you for holding this hearing today. 

Abuse of all kinds has come under close scrutiny across the country this past year. Sexual abuse in particular has shown itself to 

be far more pervasive and insidious that many would have imagined. 

Thanks to the diligent work of my hometown newspaper, the Indianapolis Star, we’ve learned about the revelations about 

Dr.Nassar and his systemic abuse of U.S. gymnasts, but also more 

about our Nation’s Olympic athletes and what they’ve had to endure for so many years in their Olympic quest, and this is unacceptable. 

I’m proud that I led, along with a colleague, Lois Frankelfrom 

Florida. We saw the passage of the bill Protecting Young Victims 

from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017. 

Our President signed into law in February of 2018 this bipartisan, game-changing bill that prioritizes the safety and well-being 

of our Nation’s athletes, because we must ensure that our youth 

are safety when they go to the gym, when they take the ice, when 

they go out onto the field to practice their sport. 

Young athletes look to their coaches, their instructors, their 

trainers as role models. And our bill, now law, works to ensure that 

our athletic national governing bodies will support a culture within 

their organizations to foster safe and healthy relationships between 

13 

coaches, instructors, trainers, and athletes, through their policies 

and procedures that will prevent, detect, and report allegations of 

abuse to law enforcement in an appropriate and timely manner. 

And I’m proud that this was signed into law, because our past, 

our present, and our future athletes, who are dedicating their lives 

to perfect their sport, the dream of the Olympic stage, need to be 

protected. They need to be safe and free from sexual abuse. 

And I thank you all for being here today. I look forward to your 

testimony. 

Mr. HARPER. I ask unanimous consent that the Members’ written 

opening statements be made part of the record. Without objection, 

they will be entered into the record. 

Additionally, I ask unanimous consent that Energy and Commerce members not on the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations be permitted to participate in today’s hearing. Without 

objection, so ordered. 

I would now like to introduce our witnesses for today’s hearing. 

First, we have Ms. Susanne Lyons, acting chief executive officer 

at the United States Olympic Committee. 

Next is Ms. Kerry Perry, president and chief executive officer at 

USA Gymnastics. 

Mr. Tim Hinchey, president and chief executive officer at USA 

Swimming. 

Mr. Steve McNally, executive director at USA Taekwondo. 

Then we have Mr. Jamie Davis, chief executive officer at USA 

Volleyball. 

And finally, Ms. Shellie Pfohl, president and chief executive officer at the U.S. Center for SafeSport. 

You’re aware that the committee is holding an investigative 

hearing, and when doing so has had the practice of taking testimony under oath. Do you have any objection to testifying under 

oath? 

Let the record reflect that all witnesses have responded no. 

The Chair then advises you that under the rules of the House 

and the rules of the committee, you’re entitled to be accompanied 

by counsel. Do any of you desire to be accompanied by counsel during your testimony today? 

Let the record reflect that all witnesses have responded no. 

In that case, if you would please rise. I ask you to raise your 

right hand, and I will swear you in. 

Do you swear that the testimony you’re about to give is the 

truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? 

Thank you. You may be seated. 

You’re now under oath and subject to the penalties set forth in 

Title 18, Section 1001 of the United States Code. 

You may now give a 5-minute summary of your written statement. 

And we will begin with you, Ms. Lyons. You have a light system 

that’s there that should turn yellow when you have a minute left 

and red when your 5 minutes are up. 

So, Ms. Lyons, welcome. 

14 

STATEMENTS OF SUSANNE LYONS, ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE 

OFFICER, UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE; KERRY 

PERRY, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, USA 

GYMNASTICS; TIMOTHY HINCHEY III, PRESIDENT AND 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, USA SWIMMING; STEPHEN 

MCNALLY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, USA TAEKWONDO; JAMIE 

DAVIS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, USA VOLLEYBALL; AND 

SHELLIE PFOHL, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, U.S. CENTER FOR SAFESPORT 

STATEMENT OF SUSANNE LYONS 

Ms. LYONS. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, and members of the subcommittee. 

Three months ago, I agreed to serve as the acting CEO of the 

U.S. Olympic Committee because I felt an obligation to help address the significant and important issues that bring us here today. 

Like you, I was deeply saddened and also angry to hear the 

statements of the girls and women who were the victims of Larry 

Nassar. I heard the powerful and compelling stories of victims and 

survivors, including those that had sought help from people in the 

Olympic community. They found the system unresponsive, needlessly complex, and fraught with risks to their Olympic dreams. 

This is appalling and unacceptable. 

The Olympic community failed the people it was supposed to protect. And I would like to apologize once again to those individuals 

and to their families, some of whom I believe are with us today. 

I know we can do better, and we will do better. 

When I accepted this role, I announced a series of initiatives to 

address issues of abuse and other structural weaknesses. We committed to providing funding for gymnastics and athletes from other 

sports affected by abuse. We committed to doubling our funding for 

the Center for SafeSport. 

We announced a governance review. And we committed to 

strengthen the voices of the athletes, both young and adult, in our 

community. And importantly, we reiterated our commitment to reform USA Gymnastics. 

Last year, we demanded the resignation of the USA Gymnastics 

CEO, and this year we required a complete turnover of the USA 

Gymnastics board, along with several additional reforms. 

Mr. Chairman, we are already making progress, but we have a 

long way to go. I would like to update the subcommittee on our efforts. 

First, we are redoubling our efforts with the Center for 

SafeSport. After only 1 year it is already clear that the Center is 

serving an essential role in protecting athletes. 

The Center has experienced a significant increase in the number 

of reports of abuse. And although any report is disheartening, 

that’s the reason we need the Center. It provides a safe and independent path for athletes to report these concerns. 

We doubled our grant to the Center to $3.1 million this year to 

enable it to hire more investigators and to resolve cases more 

quickly. We are also working with the Center to identify potential 

improvements in their policies and procedures. 

15 

Second, we are listening to and enhancing the voices of athletes 

in the community through athlete surveys and through a series of 

athlete working sessions. 

Third, we announced a governance review to inform our engagement with the national governing bodies and athletes and our oversight of the Olympic movement in the United States. We need to 

make sure that we are organized and empowered to take appropriate steps to protect athletes. 

Rebuilding gymnastics is the fourth category. We committed to 

a $1.3 million grant to the National Gymnastics Foundation entirely for athlete assistance programs, medical support, and counseling. 

We are in nearly constant contact with CEO Kerry Perry, the 

Gymnastics interim board, and others at Gymnastics. Recently, we 

supported Gymnastics as they established that interim board, and 

we supported them as they made governance reforms to implement 

best practices. 

Even as we move ahead, a fifth category of effort will develop in 

the coming months when we receive the report of the independent 

investigation of Nassar’s abuse. 

The investigation covers both the Olympic Committee and USA 

Gymnastics, as well as any other relevant information on abuse 

that the investigation reveals. We will make that report public in 

its complete and unabridged form, and we will take whatever actions are appropriate based on the report’s findings. 

We have made significant progress in strengthening protections 

for athletes over the last few years, but our collective efforts must 

not cease. We must support the victims and survivors and honor 

those who have stood up against abuse. We promise to lead the 

Olympic community to bring real and lasting change. 

I would be happy to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Lyons follows:] 

16 


Statement of 

Susanne Lyons 

Acting Chief Executive Officer 

United States Olympic Committee 

before the 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

U.S. House of Representatives 

May 23,2018 

Good morning Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, and Members of the 

Subcommittee. Three months ago, I agreed to serve as the acting CEO of the U.S. Olympic 

Committee because I felt an obligation to help address the significant and important issues that 

bring us here today. Like all of you, I was deeply saddened to hear the statements of the girls 

and women who were the victims of Larry Nassar. I was devastated to find that he was able to 

perpetuate his abuse for so long. 

I heard the powerful and compelling stories of victims and survivors in court and in 

testimony before Congress, including those that had sought help from people in the Olympic 

community. They said that they found the system unresponsive, needlessly complex, or fraught 

with risks to their Olympic dreams. This is appalling and unacceptable. The Olympic 

community failed the people it was supposed to protect. 

I know that we can do better. We will do better. 

When I accepted this role, I announced a series of initiatives to strengthen our handling 

and response to issues of abuse and address other structural weaknesses. We committed to 

providing funding and resources for gymnasts, and athletes from other sports, affected by abuse. 

We committed to doubling the Olympic Committee's funding for the Center for SafeSport, 

enabling it to hire more investigators and resolve cases more quickly, while also supporting its 

important efforts to educate athletes and deter abuse before it occurs. 

We announced a review of our governance structures and SafeS port procedures to ensure 

we have the ability to act quickly and decisively when necessary to protect athletes. We 

committed to strengthening the voices of the athletes in our community, including in the 

operations of the Olympic Committee. 
17 


2 

And importantly, we reiterated our commitment to ensuring the reform of USA 

Gymnastics. Last year we demanded the resignation of the USA Gymnastics CEO, and earlier 

this year we required a complete turnover of the USA Gymnastics board of directors, along with 

several additional reforms, as a condition of its continued recognition as a national governing 

body. This includes full cooperation with the independent investigation we commissioned from 

the law firm Ropes & Gray. 

Mr. Chairman, we are already making progress. Our longer term reform efforts fall 

generally into four categories, and I would like to update the Subcommittee on each of them. 

First, we are redoubling our efforts with the Center for SafeSport. Although it launched 

just last year as an independent entity, culminating the Olympic Committee's eight-year effort to 

strengthen protections for athletes, it is already clear that the Center is serving an essential role in 

protecting athletes. The Center has experienced a significant increase in the number of reports of 

abuse. Although any report is disheartening, this is precisely the reason that we need the Center: 

It provides a safe and independent path for athletes to report concerns so that the Olympic and 

Paralympic community can address them. We fulfilled our commitment to double the Olympic 

Committee's funding of the Center, adding $1.55 million to our existing annual grant to enable 

the Center to hire more staff, conduct more investigations, and undertake additional educational 

activities. At its launch, the Center focused on sexual abuse cases, as that was the most pressing 

need. Now we are supporting their work to find ways to investigate other abuses such as 

bullying and hazing in appropriate cases. Additionally, after one year of experience, the Center 

is working hard on its policies and procedures to identify potential improvements, and we are 

working hard to support that effort as well. 

Second, we are listening to and enhancing the voices of athletes in the Olympic 

Committee and the Olympic and Paralympic community. The Ted Stevens Act already requires 

all Olympic goveming bodies to include a significant number of athletes in their governance, and 

we want to increase the involvement of the broader community of athletes in providing feedback 

and assistance in strengthening our policies and procedures. The cornerstones of this effort are a 

number of athlete surveys, one of which we recently completed, and a series of athlete working 

sessions that we have begun and will continue this year. We arc also launching leadership 

training for athletes who are part of the governance process at the Olympic and Paralympic 

Assembly. 

Third, we announced a governance review to inform our engagement with national 

governing bodies and athletes, and our oversight of the Olympic and Paralympic movements in 

the United States. In recent years, the relationship between the Olympic Committee and the 

national governing bodies has evolved, particularly with respect to the Center, which removed 

the national governing bodies' authority to investigate and resolve issues of sexual abuse. More 

recently, the Olympic Committee took a very active role in the reform of USA Gymnastics. We 

need to make sure we are organized and empowered to take appropriate steps like this especially 

where needed to protect athletes. 

Rebuilding USA Gymnastics is the fourth category of our ongoing focus. We committed 

to a $1.3 million grant to the National Gymnastics Foundation, entirely for athlete assistance 

programs, medical support, and counseling, matching USA Gymnastics' commitment to that 
18 


3 

effort. The Olympic Committee's leadership is in nearly constant contact with CEO Kerry Perry, 

the USA Gymnastics interim board, and others at USA Gymnastics. After we insisted that the 

CEO and then the entire board resign, we worked closely to advise USA Gymnastics on seating 

the interim board composed of new voices with more independence. Recently, we supported the 

interim board as they implemented governance reforms consistent with best practices. We 

provided financial assistance for USA Gymnastics to engage outside assistance in the seating of 

a new board and training in board best practices. 

Even as we push forward on these four categories, there is an important fifth category of 

effort that will develop in the coming months when we receive Ropes & Gray's report. The 

Olympic Committee's board of directors retained Ropes & Gray to conduct a fully independent 

investigation into Nassar's abuse. We instructed the investigators to identify who knew about 

the abuse, what they knew and when, and what they did or did not do with this information. 

Importantly, Ropes & Gray will also investigate the circumstances that allowed the abuse to 

continue for so long. They are authorized to report on any other findings on abuse in other sports 

or related information that they deem important. The investigation covers both the Olympic 

Committee and USA Gymnastics. We have committed to taking any necessary step to ensure 

that Ropes & Gray has independence in the conduct of the investigation and the resources 

needed to carry it out fully and elfectivcly. We will make the report public in its complete and 

unabridged form. The Olympic Committee's board has committed to taking whatever actions 

are appropriate based on the facts that emerge from the investigation and the report. 

The Olympic Committee and the broader Olympic and Paralympic community have 

made significant progress in strengthening protections for athletes, but our collective efforts must 

never cease. We must support the victims and survivors, and honor those who have stood up 

against abuse. We promise to lead the Olympic community to bring real and lasting change. 

U.S. Olympic Committee and National Governing Bodies 

The Olympic Committee was founded in 1894. It serves as both the National Olympic 

Committee and National Paralympic Committee for the United States. The Olympic Committee 

is responsible for the training and funding of the United States' teams for the Olympic, 

Paralympic, Youth Olympic, Pan American, and Parapan American Games, and serving as a 

steward of the Olympic movement throughout the country. 

In 1978, the Amateur Sports Act (now called the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur 

Sports Act) appointed the Olympic Committee as the coordinating body for all Olympic athletic 

activity in the United States. Pursuant to the statute, the Olympic Committee supports athletes 

through funding, health insurance, tuition grants, marketing opportunities, and career services. 

The Olympic Committee supports the Olympic Training Centers and Olympic Training Sites for 

athletic training, conditioning, sports medicine, and nutrition assistance. The Olympic 

Committee also oversees the process by which U.S. cities bid to host the Olympic and 

Paralympic Games, the Youth Olympic Games, and the Pan/Parapan American Games. 

The Ted Stevens Act also authorizes the Olympic Committee to recognize a national 

governing body for any sport that is included in the various Olympic Games. The Olympic 

Committee may recognize only one such governing body for each sport (except as it may relate 
19 


4 

to the Paralympics). Once selected, that organization takes on a number of obligations related to 

amateur athletic activity in that sport in the United States, including sanctioning and conducting 

competitions, and recommending teams to represent the United States in the Olympic Games. 

The national governing bodies also oversee the training and development of athletes in their 

respective sports. 

Today, there are 49 organizations that have been recognized by the Olympic Committee 

as a national governing body. There is a large degree of variation among these organizations. 

For example, U.S. Soccer manages national soccer activities that range from local recreational 

soccer programs for children to the U.S. National Men's and Women's soccer teams. These 

diverse soccer programs include thousands of coaches and officials and hundreds of thousands of 

athletes. Olympic activity, therefore, is a small part of U.S. Soccer's focus and activities. 

Conversely, USA Pentathlon is a smaller organization and Olympic activities are a primary focus 

of the organization. 

Because each national governing body is the primary organization that manages and 

oversees the activities of coaches and athletes, each organization has its own rules and 

procedures related to athletes and coaches. On key areas of governance, however, the Olympic 

Committee uses its designation authority under the Ted Stevens Act to require each national 

governing body to adopt certain standards. And in challenging areas that affect the entire 

Olympic and Paralympic community, we have gone even further to establish entities that are 

independent of any individual national governing body and dedicated to addressing specific 

challenging topics. This is the approach that we took in response to doping issues in the late 

1990s, and it is the approach we have taken with the Center for SafeSport. 

U.S. Center for SafeS port 

The Olympic Committee has long worked with the national governing bodies on efforts 

to protect athletes from sexual and other abuses. In 2010, the Olympic Committee determined 

that the issue warranted renewed attention following public reports of sexual abuse cases 

concerning swimmers. The Olympic Committee convened a working group to study the problem 

and make specific recommendations for improvements to the Olympic Committee board. Nina 

Kemppel, a four-time Olympic skier and current board member of the Olympic Committee, 

chaired the working group. The working group produced six comprehensive recommendations 

for action by the Olympic Committee: Increase its leadership role; lead by example; develop 

training materials; develop resources for use by local clubs and organizations; standardize 

services that promote safe training environments; and encourage national governing bodies to 

adopt policies to address sexual and physical misconduct. 

Since then, the Olympic Committee has implemented each of the working group's 

recommendations. As it was implementing the working group's recommendations, the Olympic 

Committee concluded that the Olympic sports program would benefit from an independent entity 

dedicated to protecting youth athletes' safety. In June 2014, the Olympic Committee's board 

approved the creation of an independent SafeS port entity and began the process of establishing 

the Center for SafeSport. In September 2015, the Olympic Committee established the Center's 

nominating and governance committee. In January 20 I 6, the first board of the Center was seated 

and held its first meeting. In June 2016, the Olympic Committee's board approved the launch of 
20 


5 

the Center. In November 2016, the Center selected its first chief executive officer, Shellie Pfohl, 

who previously served as the executive director of the President's Council on Fitness, Sports, 

and Nutrition. In March 2017, the Center officially opened. 

The Center's activities are guided by a SafeSport Code that covers everything from 

harassment and hazing to physical and sexual misconduct. In addition to the Code, the Center 

for SafeSport has adopted practices and procedures and procedural rules for arbitration that 

govern its investigation and resolution of alleged violations. These important procedural 

improvements centralize and clarify the process by which allegations of abuse are investigated 

and resolved. By adopting clear procedures that apply to all investigations by the Center, we 

seek to ensure a fair process that permits swift actions to protect children. 

The Olympic Committee requires each national governing body to participate in the 

Center for SafeS port as a condition of being recognized by the Olympic Committee. 

Specifically, under section 8.7(1) of the Olympic Committee's bylaws, each national governing 

body must comply with the Olympic Committee's policies related to SafeS port and, additionally, 

the policies and procedures of the Center for SafeS port. These provisions require all national 

governing bodies and their personnel to report suspected sexual abuse to the Center and to law 

enforcement. The Center has exclusive authority within the Olympic and Paralympic 

community to investigate and resolve violations involving sexual misconduct. Additionally, the 

Center has discretionary authority to assume responsibility for the investigation and resolution of 

other violations of the Code; if not exercised, the applicable governing body retains the authority 

and obligation to investigate and resolve the allegation. 

The Olympic Committee's regular and periodic audits of the independent national 

governing bodies include auditing of the organizations' compliance with the requirements of 

SafeSport. In 2017, the Olympic Committee engaged a third-party auditor, Baker Tilly Virchow 

Krause, to audit the compliance of the Olympic Committee and all the national governing bodies 

with SafeS port policies and procedures. The audit focused on compliance with the Athlete 

Safety Policy and the policies associated with the then-new Center for SafeS port. After the 

initial audit, each organization (including the Olympic Committee) was required to address 

deficiencies, and the Olympic Committee is monitoring and reviewing follow up. The audit 

results are available on our website. The Olympic Committee is now undertaking rolling audits 

of national governing bodies throughout the year, using its internal audit division supplemented 

by outside assistance. 

The Center for SafeSport seeks to address the barriers and disincentives that victims may 

face when seeking to report abuse. The Center creates an independent path for reporting and an 

independent system for investigating and resolving cases of sexual abuse. With the Center, we 

have created a system that removes the investigation and resolution of allegations of sexual 

abuse from the control of any national governing body, including USA Gymnastics, and a 

resource dedicated to education and awareness of the importance of reporting abuse. We believe 

that these changes will significantly improve the protection of youth athletes from sexual and 

other abuses. 

The approach that we have taken with the Center for SafeSport is similar to the approach 

that we previously adopted in establishing the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency in 1999. The U.S. 
21 


6 

Anti-Doping Agency has been very successful at concentrating expertise and ensuring 

independence in investigations of doping issues. By following this model in the creation of the 

Center for SafeS port, we will also bring expertise and independence to our efforts to prevent 

abuse of youth athletes. 

Recently, Congress and the President enacted the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual 

Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act, which complements and further strengthens the 

reporting requirements of the Olympic Committee and the Center. The law imposes a mandatory 

reporting requirement on any adult authorized by a national governing body or member to 

interact with a minor or amateur athlete at an amateur sports organization facility or at an event 

sanctioned by a national governing body or member. The legislation also provides federal 

authorization for the Center. The Olympic Committee supported this legislation and worked 

with Congress on its passage. The legislation helpfully brings the force of federal law behind the 

mandatory reporting requirements of the Center's rules. 

USA Gymnastics 

Over the months since the launch of the Center in March 2017, we have unfortunately 

continued to see new and concerning revelations about the Olympic community's failure to 

protect athletes, particularly with respect to USA Gymnastics, and in other sports as well. In 

June 2017, Deborah Daniels issued a report that examined USA Gymnastics' bylaws, policies, 

procedures, and practices related to handling sexual misconduct matters. After conducting more 

than 160 interviews, Ms. Daniels recommended a number of structural and policy changes within 

USA Gymnastics. The USA Gymnastics board voted unanimously to accept her 

recommendations. 

Most significantly, in January 2018, the entire Olympic community was shocked and 

horrified to hear the powerful statements from the victims of Larry Nassar. On January 24, 

2018, the Olympic Committee issued an open letter to all Olympic athletes announcing that it 

would launch an independent investigation into the detection and reporting of Nassar within both 

USA Gymnastics and the Olympic Committee. On January 25,2018, the Olympic Committee 

issued a letter to the board of USA Gymnastics outlining six specific steps that the Olympic 

Committee is requiring of USA Gymnastics. In the letter to USA Gymnastics, the Olympic 

Committee specifically indicated that completion of these actions was necessary for USA 

Gymnastics to retain its recognition as the national governing body for Olympic gymnastics. 

First, the Olympic Committee required all members of the USA Gymnastics board to 

resign. That process was completed on January 30,2018. Second, the Olympic Committee 

required USA Gymnastics to seat an interim board, consistent with its current bylaws, with all 

new membership (except that the athletes may reelect their representatives) by February 28, 

2018. That process was completed on February 27,2018. Third, USA Gymnastics must create a 

new permanent board within one year. We now expect that wilt be completed this summer. 

Fourth, for the next year, an Olympic Committee representative must participate in each board 

meeting of USA Gymnastics, the USA Gymnastics board must discuss and report on progress 

instituting reforms, and USA Gymnastics must cooperate with the independent investigation, 

among other requirements. Fifth, all USA Gymnastics staff and board members were required to 
22 


7 

complete SafeS port training within three months, which they have now completed. And, sixth, 

all USA Gymnastics staff and board members must complete ethics training within six months. 

The Olympic Committee took these unprecedented actions because it concluded that an 

entirely new leadership structure was needed to rebuild USA Gymnastics. The Olympic 

Committee offered to assist USA Gymnastics with its rebuilding effort. Indeed, officials of the 

Olympic Committee have been working closely with USA Gymnastics' new CEO, Kerry Perry, 

on supporting the selection and seating of new board members, the other reforms required by the 

Olympic Committee, and revisions to USA Gymnastics' bylaws to provide a more independent 

board. Again, the Olympic Committee explicitly stated that if USA Gymnastics fails to 

implement these reforms, the Olympic Committee will pursue termination of USA Gymnastics' 

designation as a national governing body. 

On February 2, 2018, a special committee of the board of the Olympic Committee 

announced that it had hired the law firm Ropes & Gray to conduct the independent investigation 

announced on January 24. The investigation is now examining the decades-long abuse by 

Nassar to determine when individuals affiliated with USA Gymnastics or the Olympic 

Committee first became aware of any evidence of Nassar's abuse of athletes, what that evidence 

was, and what they did with it. Joan McPhee and James Dowden, both former federal 

prosecutors, are leading the investigation. The investigators have full discretion to carry out the 

investigation and make findings as they deem appropriate. The Olympic Committee directed 

Ropes & Gray to prepare and issue a public written report at the conclusion of the investigation. 

The Olympic Committee pledged its full support to the investigation, including access to relevant 

documents and witnesses. USA Gymnastics has also confirmed its cooperation. 

* * 

Thank you for the opportunity to address these critically important issues. We owe it to 

the victims and survivors of abuse in sports to ensure that our efforts to improve the safety and 

security of Olympic athletes never cease. I would be happy to answer your questions. 
23 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Ms. Lyons. 

The Chair will now recognize Ms. Perry for 5 minutes for the 

purposes of your opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF KERRY PERRY 

Ms. PERRY. Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, members of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, thank you 

for inviting me to testify today at this very important hearing. 

For more than 50 years, USA Gymnastics has served as the national governing body for the sport in the United States. We have 

many responsibilities to the gymnastics community. None are more 

important than the safety and well-being of our athletes. 

Like all of you, I was appalled and sickened by the despicable 

crimes of Larry Nassar. We must do better. 

I came on board at USA Gymnastics in December from outside 

the sport and the Olympic movement. My singular goal and the 

reason I accepted this mission is to create a supportive and empowering culture that helps our athletes achieve their gymnastics 

dreams in an empowering culture. 

First, I want to apologize to all who were harmed by the horrific 

acts of Larry Nassar. I was in the courtroom to listen to the incredibly courageous women explain in vivid and painful detail the damage he did to their lives. Their voices will not be forgotten. 

I commit to you that I will keep their words and experiences at 

the core of every decision I make, every day, as the leader of this 

organization. Their stories have broken my heart, but they’ve also 

strengthened my resolve. 

Let there be no mistake, those days are over. USA Gymnastics 

is on a new path, with new leadership and a commitment to ensure 

this never happens again. 

Since December 2017, we have embarked on a mission to implement a culture that puts athletes first. To that end, we are working 

hard to regain the trust and confidence of our athletes, their families, and all who are a part of our gymnastics community. 

In the past 5 months, here are just a few of the bold decisions 

to put USA Gymnastics on a new course: 

We closed the National Training Center at the Karolyi Ranch. 

We made difficult personnel decisions to ensure that USA Gymnastics has a fresh start. 

We fully support the U.S. Olympic Committee and congressional 

investigations that we hope will shed light on how Nassar was able 

to commit these horrific crimes. 

We fully support Federal legislation, now a law, that will help 

safeguard amateur athletes. 

We expanded our SafeSport department to include five new positions, four of which will live in the regions that they cover throughout the United States, to better support, train, educate, and serve 

our members. 

We created an Athlete Task Force where our athletes will help 

shape our organization’s future and its strategic and operating decisions. 

We continue to implement the Deborah Daniels recommendations stemming from an independent evaluation of USA Gymnastics policies. 

24 

We are strongly enforcing the USA Gymnastics SafeSport Policy 

that requires mandatory reporting to find specific types of misconduct, set standards for grooming behavior, and establish greater 

accountability. 

We made reporting of abuse easier with a dedicated toll-free 

number and online reporting. 

We are amending our bylaws to support the cultural commitment 

to athlete safety and to help enforce SafeSport policies. 

We are educating and training our staff, our board, and our 

members on the new SafeSport Policy. I am pleased to report that 

our staff and our board are 100 percent SafeSport compliant. 

Beginning in 2018, all professional and club members must be 

SafeSport certified as a condition of membership. 

We are participating in mediation in order to resolve the athletes’ claims fairly and expeditiously. 

And we created an Athlete Assistance Fund, in cooperation with 

the National Gymnastics Foundation, to provide survivors of abuse 

with the needed financial resources for counseling and medical 

services. 

These necessary changes are not just amendments to our policies, they are part of a cultural shift that reflects our commitment 

to prioritize the safety of our athletes and members. We will hold 

our organization to the highest standards of care in order to become the standard bearer of change. 

I am testifying today on behalf of the new USA Gymnastics, because right now there’s a parent driving their child to gymnastics 

class. I want that parent to know that we are doing everything we 

can every day to protect your child. 

Athlete safety must be at the forefront of everything we do. We 

have taken decisive action to grow into a more athlete-centered organization, committed to helping our athletes fulfill their dreams 

in a safe and supportive environment. 

Out of respect for those who have stood on the podium under the 

United States flag, and out of devotion to the aspiring young athletes who set foot in gyms every day, we must and we will emerge 

stronger and safer. 

Thank you. And I’m happy to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Perry follows:] 

25 


Statement of Kerry Perry 

President and Chief Executive Officer, USA Gymnastics 

Hearing before the 

House Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations 

"Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes from Sexual Abuse" 

May 23,2018 

Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, members of the Oversight & 

Investigations Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today at this very 

important hearing. For more than fifty years, USA Gymnastics has served as the national 

governing body for the sport in the United States. We have many responsibilities to the 

gymnastics community-NONE more important than the safety and well-being of our 

athletes. Like all of you, I was appalled and sickened by the despicable crimes of LaJTy 

Nassar. We must do better. 

I came on board at USA Gymnastics in December from outside the sport and the 

Olympic movement. My singular goal-and the reason I accepted this mission-is to 

create a supportive and empowering culture that helps our athletes achieve their 

gymnastics dreams in a safe environment. 

First, I want to apologize to all who were harmed by the horrific acts of Larry 

Nassar. I was in the courtroom to listen to the incredibly courageous women explain in 

vivid and painful detail the damage he did to their lives. Their powerful voices will not 

be forgotten. I commit to you that I will keep their words and experiences at the core of 
26 


every decision I make, every day, as the leader of this organization. Their stories have 

broken my heart, but also strengthened my resolve. 

Let there be no mistake; those days are over. USA Gymnastics is on a new path, 

with new leadership, and a commitment to ensure this never happens again. 

Since December 2017, we have embarked on a mission to implement a culture 

that puts athletes first. To that end, we are working hard to regain the trust and 

confidence of our athletes, their families, and all who are a part of the gymnastics 

community. 

In the past five months, here are just a few of our decisive actions to put USA 

Gymnastics on a new course: 

We closed the National Team Training Center at the Karolyi Ranch. 

• We made difficult personnel decisions to ensure that USA Gymnastics has a 

fresh start. 

We fully support both the U.S. Olympic Committee and Congressional 

independent investigations that we hope will shed light on how Nassar was 

able to commit these horrific crimes. 

• We fully support federal legislation-now a law-that will help safeguard 

amateur athletes. 

• We expanded our Safe Sport department to include five new positions; four 

of which will live in the regions they cover throughout the United States to 

better support, train, educate and serve members. 

• We created an Athlete Task Force where our athletes will help shape our 

organization's future in its strategic and operating decisions. 

• We continue to implement the Deborah Daniels 

recommendations stemming from an independent evaluation of USA 

2 
27 


Gymnastics' policies. As of today, we have implemented eighty percent of the 

policies-and we intend to implement all of them. 

We are strongly enforcing the USA Gymnastics Safe Sport Policy that: 

o Requires mandatory reporting; 

o Defines specific types of misconduct; 

o Sets standards to prohibit grooming behavior and prevent 

inappropriate interaction; and 

o Establishes greater accountability. 

• We made reporting of abuse easier with a dedicated toll-free number (833-

844-SAFE), email address (safesport@usagym.org) and online reporting. 

We are amending the bylaws to support the cultural commitment to athlete 

safety and provide a basis for further developing our safe sport programs and 

governance, including by: 

o Mandating compliance with the policies and procedures of the U.S. 

Center for SafeS port; 

o Granting exclusive jurisdiction to the U.S. Center for SafeS port over 

all complaints of sexual misconduct; 

o Instituting interim measures to protect the community during 

ongoing investigations; and 

o The establishment of a standing Safe Sport Committee. 

We are continuing our Listening Forums and outreach to as many of our 

survivors, athletes and member clubs as possible to help guide USA 

Gymnastics policies and procedures. 

3 
28 


We are incorporating expert ideas and strategies to enhance our safe sport 

education and create a best-in-class curriculum customized to fit the varying 

member groups. 

We are educating and training our staff, Board, and members on the new 

Safe Sport Policy. I am pleased to report that our staff and Board are 100 

percent Safe Sport compliant. Beginning in 2018, all professional and club 

members must be Safe Sport certified as a condition of membership. 

• We reorganized the Board of Directors in order to have a smaller, more 

active group ofleaders aligned with USA Gymnastics' cultural transfonnation. 

We are participating in mediation in order to resolve the athletes' claims 

fairly and expeditiously. We hope to participate in further mediation in August 

and that the U.S. Olympic Committee will join us. 

• We created an Athlete Assistance Fund, in cooperation with the National 

Gymnastics Foundation, that provides the survivors of abuse with the needed 

financial resources for counseling and medical services. 

These necessary changes are not just amendments to our policies and procedures; 

they are part of a cultural shift that reflects our commitment to prioritize the safety of all 

our athletes and members. We will hold our organization to the highest standards of care, 

and I am committed to making bold decisions in order to become the standard-bearer for 

change. We are at a very important crossroads for our sport. We have the opportunity to 

further build an environment that empowers and supports our athletes as they develop the 

confidence, character and life skills that will allow them to succeed in this amazing sport. 

Our incredible athletes have always been, and will continue to be, a great source 

of national pride. USA Gymnastics is committed to our athletes and to investing in 

making gymnastics a sport where gymnasts of all abilities can train and compete without 

4 
29 


fear of abuse of any sort. Right now, there is a parent driving their child to a gymnastics 

class. 1 want that parent to know that we are doing everything we can to protect their 

child. We need our member clubs and their coaches, the athletes and their parents, and 

the entire gymnastics community to join with us. Athlete safety must be at the forefront 

of everything we do, every day. 

CONCLUSION 

I am testifying today, for the first time, on behalf of the new USA Gymnastics. 

We have taken decisive action to grow into a more athlete-centered organization, 

committed to helping our athletes fulfill their dreams. We will be there for them to help 

them realize their potential in a safe and supportive environment. Out of respect for those 

who have stood on the podium under the United States flag, and out of devotion to the 

aspiring young athletes who set foot in gyms every day, we must, and we will, emerge 

stronger and safer. 

Thank you, and I am happy to answer your questions. 

5 
30 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Ms. Perry. 

The Chair will now recognize Mr. Hinchey for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY HINCHEY III 

Mr. HINCHEY. Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, and 

the members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to testify today. 

In 2010, USA Swimming faced its own reality that children and 

swimmers were being sexually abused in sport. 

USA Swimming apologizes, acknowledges and deeply regrets the 

abuse suffered by children, athletes, and other participants in 

swimming programs. 

Participation in sport should offer physical, social, and emotional 

benefits, but for some it has resulted in abuse and trauma that will 

negatively impact the rest of their lives. That is inexcusable. And 

like those who sit before me today, I am deeply committed to providing a safe and healthy environment for children to grow, play, 

and compete. 

While recognizing that much work remains to be done, let me describe the steps USA Swimming has taken. 

In 2010, USA Swimming established a comprehensive abuse prevention and response program called SafeSport. 

USA Swimming hired an athlete protection officer, the first position of its kind in the Olympic movement, and established a national SafeSport Committee. 

Over the past 8 years, the SafeSport program has evolved. Over 

90 individuals have been banned from membership for sexual misconduct, and it is published on USA Swimming’s ban list. 

Criminal background checks have been enhanced. Currently, we 

conduct monthly recurring reports on our 50,000 nonathlete members, resulting in approximately 600,000 annual background checks 

of adults who have access to children. 

We have over 80 individuals dedicated to championing SafeSport 

athletes and efforts at the local, regional, and national level. 

Educational initiatives have also increased. Over 10,000 individuals have received SafeSport training in in-person workshops or 

conferences. 

Finally, a victims assistance fund called SwimAssist has been established. 

However, I regret we continue to receive reports of child sexual 

abuse in swimming. The organization can, should, and will do 

more, and I will lead that effort. 

I’m the father of six, three girls and three boys, ages 30 to 11, 

and I’m a swimmer. Upon assuming the role of president of USA 

Swimming in July of 2017, I recognized SafeSport’s significance to 

the organization. And the opportunity to work with the subcommittee in this investigation has only intensified my commitment to make protecting children and athletes USA Swimming’s 

absolute top priority. 

To that end, we have a number of new initiatives under way and 

we are vetting even more. The SafeSport-recognized club program 

will enhance athlete protection efforts at all levels, especially the 

local level. The ‘‘Training the Trainers’’ program will increase the 

31 

number of advocates spreading the SafeSport message throughout 

our organization. 

I have and will continue to meet with and engage with survivors 

of abuse to ensure that we hear their voices and we learn from 

their experiences. 

In addition to its own efforts, USA Swimming will continue to be 

a responsible leader, steward, and member of the Olympic sport 

community. 

USA Swimming embraces its obligations under the Protecting 

Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization 

Act and already has policies in place that require reporting, prohibit retaliation, and limit one-on-one interactions between adults 

and children. 

Further, USA Swimming supports the U.S. Center for SafeSport 

and is fully committed to its success. 

While we cannot change the past, we will learn from it and we 

will do better. Our commitment to preventing child sexual abuse 

and providing a safe and healthy environment for our athletes is 

constant and long-lasting. 

Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hinchey follows:] 

32 


Prepared Testimony of Timothy Hinchey III 

Before the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce 

Subcommittee on Oversight aud Investigations 

May 23,2018 

Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DcGette, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to testify today. 

In 2010, long before Larry Nassar's prolific sexual abuse of minor gymnasts became 

known, USA Swimming faced its own reality that children and swimmers were being sexually 

abused in sport. 

First and foremost, USA Swimming acknowledges and deeply regrets the abuse suffered 

by children, athletes, and other participants in swimming programs. Participation in sport should 

offer physical, social and emotional benefits, but for some, it has resulted in abuse and trauma 

that will negatively impact the rest of their lives. That is inexcusable, and like those of you who 

sit before me, I am deeply committed to providing a safe and healthy environment for children to 

grow, play and compete. 

While recognizing that much work remains to be done, as this Subcommittee examines 

the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes from Sexual Abuse, let me describe steps 

that USA Swimming has taken. 

Jn 2010, USA Swimming established a comprehensive abuse prevention and response 

program called Safe Sport. However, USA Swimming's Safe Sport is not a novel program. It is 

based on six well-established pillars of youth-serving abuse prevention programs, including: (i) 

Policies & Guidelines; (ii) Screening & Selection; (iii) Training & Education; (iv) Monitoring & 

Supervision; (v) Recognizing, Responding & Reporting; and (vi) Grassroots Engagement & 
33 


Feedback. USA Swimming partnered with the Child Welfare League of America and received 

guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Center for 

Missing and Exploited Children in its creation. 

In 2010, USA Swimming also hired an Athlete Protection Officer, the first position of its 

kind in the Olympic movement, and established a national Safe Sport Committee, charged with 

review of the organization's athlete protection policies, guidelines, educational programs, and 

reporting and adjudication procedures. 

Over the past eight years, the Safe Sport program has evolved: 

• USA Swimming's Code of Conduct has been updated numerous times to enhance athlete 

protection. 

• Reporting policies and procedures have been broadened. 

• Over ninety individuals have been banned from membership for sexual misconduct and 

published on USA Swimming's banned list. 

• Criminal background checks have been enhanced. Currently, we conduct monthly 

recurring reports on our 50,000 non-athlete members, resulting in approximately 600,000 

annual checks of the adults who have access to children. 

• USA Swimming's Safe Sport champions have grown to two full-time staff, four 

additional support staff, a twelve-member Safe Sport Committee, four national Zone Safe 

Sport Coordinators, 59 Local Swim Committee Safe Sport Coordinators, and twelve Safe 

Sport Athlete Fellows, in addition to the organization's Board of Directors. 

• Educational initiatives have increased. Athlete Protection Training is required for all 

non-athlete members and must be renewed every other year, free Safe Sport training is 

available to parents and athletes, and over 10,000 individuals have received Safe Sport 

training in in-person workshops or conferences. 

• Finally, a victim's assistance fund, SwimAssist, was established following the 2014 

assessment of USA Swimming's Safe Sport program by the Gundersen National Child 

Protection Training Center. 

2 
34 


However, child sexual abuse still occurs in swimming. The organization can, should and will 

do more, and I will lead that effort. I am a father of six; three girls and three boys; ages 30 to II, 

and I am a swimmer. I swam at the University of California - Irvine and I still participate in a 

Master's Swimming program. Upon assuming the role of President & CEO of USA Swimming 

in July 2017, I recognized Safe Sport's significance to the organization, and the opportunity to 

work with the Subcommittee in this investigation has only intensified my commitment to make 

protecting children and athletes USA Swimming's top priority. There will be no complacency 

on my watch. 

To that end, we have a number of new initiatives underway and are vetting even more. The 

Safe Sport recognized club program will enhance athlete protection efforts at the local level. The 

"Training the Trainers" program will increase the number of advocates spreading the Safe Sport 

message throughout the organization. And I have and will continue to meet and engage with 

survivors of abuse to ensure that we hear their voices and learn from their experiences. 

ln addition to its own efforts, USA Swimming will continue to be a responsible leader, 

steward and member of the Olympic sport community. USA Swimming embraces its obligations 

under the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act and 

already has policies in place which require reporting, prohibit retaliation, and limit one-on-one 

interactions between adults and children. Further, USA Swimming supports the U.S. Center for 

Safe Sport and is fully committed to its success. We will provide meaningful engagement and 

support to it in any way we can. 

While we cannot change the past, we will learn from it and do better. Our commitment to 

preventing child sexual abuse and providing a safe and healthy environment for our athletes is 

constant and long-lasting. 

3 
35 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Mr. Hinchey. 

The Chair now recognizes Mr. McNally for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHEN MCNALLY 

Mr. MCNALLY. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member DeGette, and 

members of the subcommittee, for just under 8 months I have 

served as executive director of USA Taekwondo. 

I thank the committee for the opportunity to express my personal 

commitment, and the commitment of USA Taekwondo under my 

leadership, to ensuring that athletes are protected from sexual misconduct within the U.S. Olympic community, as well as all those 

participating in sports outside the Olympic movement. 

For the purposes of background, USA Taekwondo was formed in 

2004 to assume responsibility as the national governing body for 

Taekwondo after the dissolution of the previous governing body, 

the United States Taekwondo Union. 

Very few records exist from the USTU era, and no continuity exists between USTU and USAT with regard to the organization’s 

board of directors, leadership, or senior staff. 

From the information and documents that I have accumulated 

since becoming executive director in September of last year, I have 

concluded that the organization’s response to complaints prior to 

2015 varied as administrations, boards, and ethics committees 

changed personnel. 

USA Taekwondo has always sought to balance its obligation to 

protect members from misconduct, while also abiding by the requirements to protecting the rights of the accused. 

In 2015, following allegations by an athlete of sexual assault at 

the hands of USAT coaches, USA Taekwondo immediately retained 

Denver attorney Donald Alperstein from a firm specializing in 

amateur sports law since 1985 to serve as an independent outside 

counsel. 

From this point forward, USA Taekwondo has relied on its outside counsel to investigate all of USAT history in an effort to uncover any previously unreported incidents of sexual assault and 

misconduct, and to pursue sanctions against defendants. 

Outside counsel operated without any limitation on its budget, 

with no control by USA Taekwondo as to whom he should or should 

not pursue, and with only rudimentary intermittent reporting requirements to USA Taekwondo. 

At the direction of outside counsel, in conjunction with the support of USA Taekwondo leadership, a number of measures were implemented immediately following its engagement to address pending allegations of misconduct, discover additional claims, and execute remedies to ensure the safety and security of USA Taekwondo 

athletes. 

The investigation was conducted by outside counsel hired at the 

direction it USA Taekwondo and succeeded in exposing evidence of 

misconduct within USA Taekwondo and USTU as early as 1994. 

However, as one might imagine, the pursuit of sanctions against 

defendants proved to be somewhat elusive, with many victims hesitant to reopen old wounds and reluctant to discuss matters about 

which their families, friends, or employers were unaware. Some 

36 

victims could not be located, and some were unavailable for a variety of other reasons, including incarceration. 

Several victims eventually disclosed information to outside counsel but only on the condition that they could do so confidentially 

and would not be compelled to testify without further discussion. 

And to this day, outside counsel has raised some concern over sharing information he received only through providing these promises. 

The committee has expressed an interest in Steven and Jean 

Lopez. To summarize, a lifetime ban has been imposed on Jean 

Lopez, and Steven Lopez is under a temporary suspension pending 

disposition of his case by SafeSport. 

I do want to emphasize USA Taekwondo submitted evidence 

gathered concerning these allegations to the FBI, the Sugarland, 

Texas, Police Department, the Fort Bend County, Texas, Sheriff’s 

Office, and the Colorado Springs Police Department. 

With the creation of SafeSport in March 2017, all cases still 

pending in outside counsel’s investigation were transferred. 

Personally, it is my strong commitment to be part of the solution. 

And under my leadership, USA Taekwondo has already taken additional efforts to become more proactive in the area of athlete protection. 

These include the immediate referral of any and all sexual abuse 

allegations to SafeSport, and the referral of any allegations involving a potential crime to relevant law enforcement agencies. 

We immediately suspend an individual upon receipt of a direct 

allegation if we believe there is a threat to athletes currently, or 

clear evidence of an allegation being true. 

We now ensure leadership on any official trip contains both genders. We require SafeSport training now for all referees. We’ve introduced mandatory background checks and SafeSport training for 

vendors even who are working at our events. 

And we have just engaged a group called Fighting Spirit, which 

provides education on sexual misconduct. All minor national teams 

athletes will be required to take this training in the future. 

Finally, next month USA Taekwondo will launch the 

#notinmysport education campaign, with the goal of informing participants throughout the sport as to what is acceptable behavior 

and what constitutes a violation, and also to empower our athletes 

to stand up and make their statement on social media channels. 

There is no doubt more work to be done. The entire Olympic family must ensure that funding and resources remain available to 

SafeSport. 

Thank you, and I’m ready to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McNally follows:] 

37 


USA Taekwondo- May 21, 2018 

SUMMARY 

USA Taekwondo is pleased to have the opportunity to appear before Congress to share its experience and 

plans in protecting the youth of sport from abuse at the hands of the very people in whom we entrust 

their care. In advance of this hearing, you asked us to address two specific areas. 

The first area, which has drawn national attention, is the management of complaints involving 

Steven Lopez and Jean Lopez. USA Taekwondo first received allegations against Jean Lopez in 2006, and 

USA Taekwondo's CEO and outside counsel were unable to find supporting evidence of the charges. They 

declined to proceed further, in part because of the complainant's settlement of the accusation in a 

manner that permitted her- at her request- to continue training with Jean Lopez. USA Taekwondo did 

not receive further complaints until another athlete revealed further claims through social media in 2015. 

Almost immediately, USA Taekwondo retained both a respected attorney and a private investigator and 

gave the attorney an unlimited budget and complete independence to discover any sexual abuse in USA 

Taekwondo's history, including anything that occurred involving the Lopezes, the settlement agreement 

notwithstanding. Ultimately, Mr. Alperstein developed substantial evidence that he turned over to the 

U.S. Center for Safe Sport in March 2017, and the Center was finally able to impose sanctions just recently. 

We learned during the investigation that there are numerous inherent challenges in pursuing 

claims against offenders that need to be addressed as our sports movements move forward. National 

Governing Bodies are not the police or criminal prosecutors, and we do not have the standing or 

protection of law enforcement to elicit testimony, nor can our sanctions extend beyond terminating 

membership in our organizations and posting lists of offending members. 
38 


What we can do, however, is something that the police cannot: we can insist that everyone who 

is associated with children on our behalf is trained to understand grooming behaviors, to recognize the 

subtle signs of abuse, and to ensure that abusers find no quarter in unregulated programs. 

We believe that national licensing is necessary to achieve these goals. We are also here to tell 

you that the creation of the U.S. Center for Safe Sport is a substantial step toward making sports safer. 

The Center promises the independence, expertise, and efficiency in concentrating educational resources 

that no individual NGB can promise. But we have learned painfully that the Center's resources are being 

taxed well beyond its capacity. If the Center cannot ensure that investigations are thorough and that 

adjudications are timely and fair, the Center will ultimately not be respected, and the Center's exclusive 

jurisdiction over sexual assaults will have effectively deprived Olympic sports of any meaningful 

mechanism to ensure that offenders are ousted forever. 

Everything we need to come into play to give youth sports freedom from the scourge of abuse is 

in our hands- a better environment for reporting, a stronger enforcement mechanism, and overwhelming 

attention that should lead to solutions. We look for Congress's guidance and support in this endeavor. 
39 


WRJTIEN TESTIMONY 

USA Taekwondo submits this testimony on the basis of the questions provided by 

Congress in letters dated January 26, 2018 and March 7, 2018. The topics that Congress indicated 

it was investigating included USA Taekwondo's handling of complaints involving Steven and Jean 

lopez, together with USA Taekwondo's historical and current approach to the management of 

sexual abuse complaints. Congressional staff recently indicated that two additional areas of 

inquiry might evolve during the hearing, but in the absence of specific inquiries, USA Taekwondo 

will defer presenting substantial information. 

I. Steven and Jean lopez 

Steven lopez and his brother (and coach) Jean lopez are the focus of Congress's first 

inquiry. USA Taekwondo will provide a summary of its actions involving the lopez brothers to the 

extent it has been able to assemble reliable information from its records. In this regard, we note 

that USA Taekwondo was formed in 2004 to assume responsibility as the NGB for Taekwondo 

after the collapse of the previous governing body, United States Taekwondo Union (USTU). Very 

few records exist from the USTU era concerning either the lopez brothers or disciplinary cases in 

general. Our responses in this testimony are based on what records are available for all periods. 

In 2006, USA Taekwondo received complaints concerning sexual abuse at the hands of 

Jean Lopez from an elite athlete. The allegations appear to have been investigated by then USA 

Taekwondo CEO David As kinas and Counsel John Collins, with the involvement of USOC Athlete 

Ombudsman John Ruger. After the investigation had been completed and USA Taekwondo had 
40 


found no credible claims against Jean Lopez, Mr. Askinas confirmed in a letter that the 

complainant had resolved matters with Mr. Lopez privately. His conclusions were also reported 

to have been discussed with and confirmed by Mr. Collins and then USA Taekwondo Board 

Chairman Harvey Berkey, who agreed that no further action was necessary. USA Taekwondo 

notes that a separate disciplinary matter was heard by a USA Taekwondo Hearing Panel, and the 

matter was resolved against the complainant by the Panel, whose chair was a sitting federal 

district court judge from California. The latter action is not particularly relevant to these 

proceedings and USA Taekwondo will not detail the issue but notes this proceeding to show the 

independence and quality of judicial resources to which complainants had access at that point. 

Congress has requested information concerning settlements with accompanying 

confidentiality agreements. USA Taekwondo and Mr. Lopez entered into an agreement with the 

complainant to allow her to continue training with Mr. lopez at her request in 2007, which 

agreement did not bind her to any confidentiality obligation. 

USA Taekwondo did not receive any further direct complaints about sexual misconduct 

by the lopez brothers until March 2015, at which point an athlete reported on social media that 

she knew several other athletes who had been victims of assaults by two USA Taekwondo 

coaches, one of whom was Jean lopez. USA Taekwondo initiated its own comprehensive 

investigation at this time, immediately engaging Denver attorney Donald Alperstein to assume 

responsibility for investigating all of USA Taekwondo's history in an effort to uncover any 

previously unreported incidents of sexual assault or other sexual misconduct, and to pursue 
41 


sanctions against any offenders. USA Taekwondo authorized Mr. Alperstein to retain an 

experienced private investigator, leah Wickes, to help in this endeavor, and USA Taekwondo did 

not restrict his mission in any manner. Mr. Alperstein's mandate was broad and he operated 

without any limitation on his budget, with no control by USA Taekwondo as to whom he should 

(or should not) pursue. That investigation reopened the inquiry into the 2006 allegations by the 

prior complainant, as she claimed she had been pressured into accepting the settlement so as to 

promote her athletic career. In light of her assertion, USA Taekwondo did not treat the 

settlement agreement as binding in 2015, but instead investigated the claims anew without any 

presumption that the 2006 investigation or the 2007 settlement agreement were dispositive. 

On April 23'd, 2015 USA Taekwondo posted the following notice on the front page of its website 

in order to solicit further information about any claims: 

"APRIL 23, 2015, 7:42P.M. (ET) 

USA Taekwondo maintains a Safe Sport policy that encourages the reporting of any alleged 

Safe Sport violations: "It is offimdamental importance to USA Taekwondo that individuals 

feel able to come forward and report abuse, or suspected abuse in a safe and, if requested. 

anonymous manner. All stakeholders in USA Taekwondo should be aware of how to report 

abuse and U£4 Taekwondo is committed to removing any and all barriers to the safe and 

effective reporting of abuse within USA Taekwondo." USA Taekwondo Safe Sport Strategy, 

Section 13. 
42 


The Safe Sport Strategy specifically directs individuals to report Safe Sport to the CEO or to 

their local leaders for transmission to the CEO, and both paths are still proper means of 

making reports. 

In addition, USA Taekwondo has appointed outside counsel and has retained an 

independent investigator to manage disputes involving USA Taekwondo members, coaches, 

officials, or employees. If you desire to report information concerning Safe Sport violations, 

you may do so either through the CEO, your local officials, or through USA Taekwondo's 

independent counsel, Donald Alperstein, who can be contacted as follows: 

Donald w. Aiperstein 

Aiperstein & Covell, P.C. 

1600 Broadway, Suite 900 

Denvt'l:, co 80202 

dwa@alpersteincovell.com 

Phone: 

303-894-8191 

Fax: 

303-861-0420 

Individuals contacting Mr. Alperstein may be put in touch with the independent 

investigator, Leah Wickes, who will assist Mr. Alperstein in investigations. Both of these 

individuals have authority to collect information concerning Safe Sport violations. 
43 


Athletes who are concerned about their rights with respect to such investigations can also 

contact the USOC Athlete Ombudsman's office (Kacie Wallace or Sara Clark) at 1-888-

ATHLETE." 

The responsibilities that Mr. Alperstein was assigned were subsequently assumed by the 

United States Center for Safe Sport in March 2017 as part of its exclusive jurisdiction, and USA 

Taekwondo therefore no longer investigates specific allegations of sexual misconduct, except to 

the extent necessary to determine whether an immediate suspension should be imposed 

pending Safe Sport's exercise of jurisdiction and determination of interim measures. During the 

period in which Mr. Alperstein was active, USA Taekwondo spent nearly $200,000forthe services 

provided by Mr. Alperstein and Ms. Wickes. 

Mr. Alperstein's investigation succeeded in bringing out evidence of misconduct within 

USA Taekwondo and USTU as early as 1994. However, pursuit of sanctions against offenders 

proved to be somewhat elusive. Several victims did not approach Mr. Alperstein or Ms. Wickes 

directly, but instead had been identified by other athletes and had to be approached by Mr. 

Alperstein or Ms. Wickes first. Some victims did not wish to open old wounds, some were 

reluctant to discuss matters about which their families, friends or employers were unaware, 

some could not be located, and some were unavailable for a variety of other reasons, including 

incarceration. With respect to those who were initially unwilling to talk, Mr. Alperstein and Ms. 

Wickes were able to persuade them to disclose information only on the condition that they could 
44 


do so confidentially and would not be compelled to testify without further discussion. Mr. 

Alperstein reports that to this day he retains some concern over sharing information he received 

only through providing these promises. 

Two of the people whom Mr. Alperstein and Ms. Wickes were investigating were Steven 

and Jean lopez. Mr. Alperstein filed a detailed ethics complaint against Steven Lopez in 2015 

and was in the process of preparing a similarly detailed complaint against Jean lopez when it 

became apparent in 2016 that Safe Sport would be taking cases in the near future. 

One question that has appeared frequently is why the Lopez brothers were not 

suspended prior to the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio. The limitations noted above help explain USA 

Taekwondo's position. Mr. Alperstein had filed a substantial ethics complaint against Steven 

lopez the previous year and was well on his way toward filing against Jean lopez around the time 

of the Olympics. Unfortunately, one of the key witnesses who was actually willing to testify at 

that point was unavailable, and many of the other witnesses were unprepared to testify at that 

point. As a consequence, Mr. Alperstein was concerned that he could not present compelling 

cases against the lopez brothers at the point at which a decision had to be made. 

This decision, it must be emphasized, was not as simple as suspending the brothers or 

not. Under the Ted Steven Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, as implemented through Section 9 

of the United States Olympic Committee Bylaws, an athlete who is denied an opportunity to 

compete in the Olympics or any other sanctioned event has the right to challenge the denial on 
45 


as little as 48 hours' notice, and the appeal is heard by an independent Arbitrator. In light of 

witness reluctance and unavailability, Mr. Alperstein was concerned that a hastily-compiled 

hearing would expose the complainants in circumstances in which the most compelling case had 

yet to be prepared. That raised the very strong possibility that any discipline would be 

unenforceable, and even worse, that an unsuccessful result after exposing the victims to a 

rigorous hearing would chase them away from the process forever and effectively preclude USA 

Taekwondo from pursuing charges. 

At this point, incidentally, it is worth noting that law enforcement agencies- who should 

be the primary source for enforcing laws against sexual abuse - routinely decline to provide 

information to USA Taekwondo or other NGBs, and sometimes specifically tell USA Taekwondo 

that they do not want to encourage inquiries by civil authorities such as USA Taekwondo when 

the mere act of inquiring could jeopardize their investigations. Indeed, on some occasions they 

explain that they do not even want the target of an investigation to know he is being investigated. 

As between police officials pursuing criminal charges and a National Governing Body 

contemplating suspending a member, the extent to which an NGB should have been acting on its 

own was quite difficult a balance to pursue. USA Taekwondo is hopeful that the SafeSport 

Center's emergence as the independent agency that has exclusive jurisdiction over these 

reprehensible assaults will allow establishment of closer ties with law enforcement agencies so 

as to permit simultaneous investigations. 
46 


Returning to the Lopez matters, by Autumn of 2016 the Center for SafeS port's operations 

had begun taking final form and the opening of the Center was imminent. At this point, Alperstein 

began preparing the evidence for transfer to the Center's jurisdiction, as these were cases that 

were obviously suited for the Center's immediate expertise. In March 2017, all cases still pending 

in Mr. Alperstein's investigation were transferred to the U.S. Center for SafeSport. 

Alperstein remains in contact with the SafeSport Center and is assisting them with their 

own investigations, not yet concluded in the case of either Lopez brother. 

It should also be pointed out that evidence gathered on both Lopez brothers was 

submitted to four law enforcement agencies - namely the FBI, which we believe still has an open 

case file, the Sugarland Texas police department, the Fort Bend County Texas Sheriff's office and 

the Colorado Springs Police Department. So far as USA Taekwondo has been apprised, none of 

those agencies has yet brought a case against either Steven or Jean Lopez. 

On a final note with respect to the Lopezes, Congress is certainly aware that a recent 

action filed in federal court in Denver alleges that USA Taekwondo intentionally disregarded 

evidence that the lopezes engaged in sexual misconduct. USA Taekwondo categorically denies 

those allegations, and as noted above, USA Taekwondo was active in soliciting information 

concerning the Lopezes even in the absence of direct complaints to USA Taekwondo by victims 

or contemporaneous reports to the police concerning the underlying misconduct. 
47 


Indeed, the narrative that many media have been quick to propagate is the sensational 

allegation that USA Taekwondo has subordinated the safety of its athletes to broader goals of 

success in international competition. The facts simply do not support that narrative. Indeed, USA 

Taekwondo has endeavored to impose sanctions against Jean lopez on a number of occasions 

for rules violations that did not include sexual assault and achieved only minor success in those 

efforts in light of adverse arbitration decisions or outside advice concerning the unenforceability 

of sanctions. USA Taekwondo's efforts actually led Steven lopez to complain bitterly to USOC 

Chief Executive Officer Scott Blackmun, on June 8, 2017: 

"It is with great disappointment, and after careful consideration, that I write to 

inform you of the systemic and increasing attempts of USAT to allocate time, 

energy, and resources, to undermine the foundations of my success. 

To those who know me, or to anyone that's followed my career, it has always been 

apparent that I accept the inherent challenges that come with competitive sports 

and have overcome them time and time again through my performance. However, 

I now face unprecedented attacks off the mat, and not from foreign competitors, 

but from the one body whose sole purpose is to provide me with the environment 

and means to petform at the highest level of our sport. The attempts have become 

so frequent and so unfounded that they have metastasized into a form of 

institutionalized witch hunts. 
48 


The method of attock has been quite simple; use any and of/ means necessary to 

undermine my preparation and competitive processes so as to create the best 

possible conditions for my failure. 

The strategy began being implemented immediately following the 2012 London 

Olympic Games with the attempt to impose a life-long ban on my coach and most 

decorated coach in the history af our sport, Jean Lopez. The attempt to ban Coach 

Lopez from coaching me or any of his athletes repeated itself numerous times 

throughout the quadrennium; with some of the heights being the day of my 

competition at the 2015 US National Team Trials, the 2015 World Championships, 

the 2015 Pan Am Games, at the Grand Prix series, and these upcoming 2017 World 

Championships ... 

In the same email, Steven Lopez continues: 

"However, that was not enough. After jailing to win even one arbitration versus 

Coach Lopez, USA T decided to try a different approach. In addition to attacking my 

coach, they began focusing their efforts at me directly. The objective; find or 

create, some infringement that could facilitate my removal from the national 

team. When these attempts didn't keep me off the team, they went so jar as to 

tamper with my training process at the Olympic Games, removing one of my 
49 


USOC/USA T approved Olympic training partners from my staff just twa weeks prior 

to my competition dote. 

With all of the above failing to produce the intended result of impeding my 

performance, USA T hos evolved its strategy one more time adding a new 

component to the equation; keep Coach Lopez off the team entirely and interfere 

with my training process." 

The "method of attack" to which Steven Lopez referred included the following: 

• In 2013, USA Taekwondo suspended Jean Lopez for two years, after originally 

proposing a lifelong ban, on the basis that he had impermissibly coached foreign 

athletes. That suspension was overturned out of apparent concerns about the 

legality of the sanctions. 

• In 2015 USA Taekwondo suspended Jean Lopez for three months for crass 

behavior at a taekwondo tournament, which suspension would have barred him 

from international competitions referred to in the Steven Lopez letter. On Jean 

Lopez's appeal, an independent Arbitrator agreed that Mr. Lopez had engaged in 

misconduct but reduced the sanction to probation. In addition, the decision 

barred USA Taekwondo from using this misbehavior in considering Jean Lopez for 

participation in international competitions. 
50 


At the arbitration hearing noted above, Steven Lopez tried to assert his own 

interests in having Jean remain as his coach. USA Taekwondo fought against 

Steven Lopez's permission, and the Arbitrator, while reducing Jean Lopez's 

suspension to probation, sided with USA Taekwondo in part by ruling that Steven 

Lopez's interests as a competitor were irrelevant. 

• Later in 2015, USA Taekwondo attempted to ban Mr. Lopez from coaching at the 

Pan American Games in light of his having received a "yellow card" for misconduct 

during a match at which he was coaching his brother Mark Lopez. Mr. Lopez 

appealed the decision to an independent Arbitrator, who vacated the punishment 

on the basis that the "yellow card" had not properly been issued. 

It is true that none of these attempts to ban Jean Lopez were for sexual misconduct, but 

there were no pending complaints against Jean for sexual misconduct during that period and 

USA Taekwondo's actions wholly undercut the outrageous suggestion that USA Taekwondo 

knowingly looked the other way so as to avoid pursuit of any actions that might interfere with 

Steven or Jean Lopez's ability to participate in international competitions. 

Also note that the period during which Steven Lopez complains of interference by USA 

Taekwondo (2012-2017) covers the time in charge of successive CEOs Eric Parthen, Bruce Harris, 

Keith Ferguson and interim CEO John Long. (David Askinas left USA Taekwondo in 2011}. Steven 
51 


lopez claims that each of those individuals participated in this 'witch hunt' against the brothers. 

This would mean that every USA Taekwondo CEO following Askinas (who himself had publicly 

dismissed the only official complaint as 'not credible') overtly interfered with the lopez Brothers. 

As this should make clear, the purported "protective treatment' the Lopez brothers received 

which creates understandable outrage in the public's eye, is absolutely and unequivocally false. 

USA Taekwondo's interest in the fair and thorough investigation and pursuit of claims 

against the Lopezes did not end when the Center for Safe Sport opened. Because the 

investigation against the Lopez brothers was well underway in early 2017, USA Taekwondo 

assumed that the Center would continue the prosecution of any claims. If USA Taekwondo had 

been intent on protecting the lopezes, of course, it would not have hired independent counsel 

to pursue charges. As important, USA Taekwondo actively sought to have the cases transferred 

to the Center for Safe Sport precisely because the Center would be in a better position to pursue 

claims in an environment that was more conducive to protecting the reluctant complainants. 

Thus, in a letter to SafeSport COO Malia Arrington, dated March 2, 2017 USA 

Taekwondo's outside counsel wrote: 

"It is USA Taekwondo's belief that only the U.S. Center for Safe Sport can 

complete an investigation of these matters and adjudicate them in a manner in 

which both the process and the results will be accorded respect. " 
52 


The letter continued: "If an internal USA Taekwondo panel imposes discipline, 

there will be a certain demand for arbitration by Steven or Jean Lopez (or both, as 

the case may be). USA Taekwondo has adjudicated prior cases involving Jean Lopez 

and another Lopez (unrelated, but a friend of the family}, and there is no chance 

that an internal USA Taekwondo hearing will be more than a dress rehearsal for 

binding arbitration. In most cases, USA Taekwondo is unconcerned about the fact 

that disciplinary disputes can reach arbitration, and in fact has arbitrated several 

disputes (including disputes with Jean Lopez) that began with internal USA 

Taekwondo proceedings. In this case, however, the promise of multiple levels of 

adjudication endangers the prospects of ultimate success for the reasons set out 

in the following paragraph. 

As reflected in Mr. Alperstein's report, witness cooperation has been extremely 

difficult to come by. These allegations are painful for many of the victims to 

discuss, some have done so only under promises of anonymity (at least initially), 

and Mr. Alperstein has substantial concerns that the proliferation of different 

adjudications will effectively chase witnesses away. This concern is especially 

heightened because the complainants did not initially come to USA Taekwondo -

rather, they were identified only in response (and often with substantial 

reluctance) to direct inquiries from Mr. Alperstein and our private investigator. 

Indeed, with the reporting of some of the incidents to local law enforcement 

agencies in different jurisdictions, as well as the FBI, USA Taekwondo has already 
53 


begun the laborious process of working with victims to ensure that their stories are 

heard now that they have come forward. 

USA Taekwondo faces a unique procedural challenge with respect to adjudication 

of the Lopez cases. The Lopezes have been active and successful in international 

competitions for two decades. Every person who has been involved in Taekwondo 

at the elite level has some connection with the Lopez's, direct or indirect, and it has 

become nearly impossible mission to seat Taekwondo athletes on ethics panels 

who are not conflicted for one reason or another. The Chair of USA Taekwondo's 

Ethics Committee has considered nearly three dozen individuals, all of whom 

turned out to be objectionable for one reason or another. The Safe Sport 

adjudication will nat face this issue. 1 

At the end of the day, the Center for Safe Sport was built largely on the promise of 

being able to handle high-profile cases effectively and with some measure of 

expertise. The Center for Safe Sport brings with it a measure of respect and 

authority that USA Taekwondo's administrative processes cannot assure on the 

face of these extremely high-profile cases. And as noted above, it also avoids the 

inherent procedural problems that will attend any USA Taekwondo adjudication. 

1

This section refers to the requirement of Section 220504(b)(2)B) of the Ted Steven Olympic and 

Amateur Sports Act that at least twenty percent of members of certain bodies (including 

disciplinary panels) be made up of elite athletes. The Center for Safe Sport is not bound by this 

mandate. 
54 


In short, if the Center for Safe Sport declines to adjudicate the cases assembled by 

USA Taekwondo, it will not really be avoiding an ultimate adjudication of the 

charges. Rather, it will merely be postponing and delaying some portion of the 

adjudication (any portion that the USOC declines to pursue) in circumstances in 

which any missteps will have potentially tragic ripple effects, and the naysayers 

who believe that the Lopezes are untouchable by Olympic authorities will have 

demonstrated their case. 

For all these reasons, USA Taekwondo believes that the Center for Safe Sport 

should accept exclusive jurisdiction over these cases immediately. I am happy to 

answer any questions you may have, and of course USA Taekwondo will turn over 

its investigative files to the Center upon acceptance of jurisdiction." 

In Apri12018, the Center issued a permanent ban on Jean Lopez (which we understand he 

has appealed) that prohibits him from participating in any sanctioned Taekwondo activities. In 

late April2018 USA Taekwondo became aware of direct allegations against Steven Lopez of which 

it had not previously been apprised. In light of those allegations, USA Taekwondo communicated 

to the Center for Safe Sport its intention to impose an immediate suspension of Mr. Steven Lopez 

from all activities, pending SafeSport acceptance of jurisdiction over these new complaints. 

SafeSport informed us that it had been apprised of these allegations as well and intended to 
55 


exercise jurisdiction immediately. As the Center for SafeSport site reflects, the Center imposed 

an immediate suspension, which USA Taekwondo is enforcing. 

11. Safe Sport History and Practices 

In addition to inquiries about the Lopez brothers, the letters from Congress requested 

information about USA Taekwondo's present and historical disciplinary policies. 

A. The Data 

Since 2005 USA Taekwondo has revised its policies and bylaws numerous times, most 

significantly in 2013 when the U.S. Olympic Committee implemented the SafeSport initiative, and 

again in 2017 with the incorporation of the U.S. Center for SafeSport and the transfer of exclusive 

jurisdiction over sexual misconduct cases. USA Taekwondo has provided all of its prior policies to 

Committee staff. Prior to 2013 and the advent of SafeSport, USA Taekwondo was one a small 

handful of NGBs that began publishing its suspension list, which currently contains 27 names. The 

additions to the list breakdown as follows: 

2010: llifetime ban 

2011: llifetime ban 

2012: 2 lifetime bans 

2013: 3 lifetime bans 

2014: 2 lifetime bans 

2015: 5 lifetime bans 
56 


2016: 2 lifetime bans & 1 five-year suspension 

2017: 11ifetime ban, 12-year suspension 

2018: 6 lifetime bans, 2 currently temporary suspensions 

The majority of these suspensions {but not all) relate to sexual misconduct. As you can 

see, since the implementation of SafeS port by the USOC the number of sanctions has increased 

significantly, with a dramatic increase following the incorporation of the U.S. Centerfor SafeSport 

in 2017, with 8 of 27 suspensions issued between 2010 and 2018 coming under the Center's 

watch. The list is updated immediately that a sanction is in place, whether that be a USA 

Taekwondo imposed suspension, or notification from the SafeSport Center of a decision they 

have handed down. USA Taekwondo attributes the increase in suspensions in large part to the 

groundswell of reporting that has been occasioned by public attention on sexual misconduct in 

all segments of society, and USA Taekwondo believes that this new environment will contribute 

greatly to the punishment of sexual misconduct and help foster stronger protection for athletes. 

In addition to those names published on the suspension list, USA Taekwondo has also 

deemed 3S individuals ineligible for membership since 2013 due to issues that were flagged on 

their mandatory background check report {required for all staff, board members, coaches, 

referees and now vendor/sponsor staff who require access to the competition areas for technical 

reasons). Due to the federal statutory restrictions on publicly disclosing information acquired 

through a voluntary background check, these names cannot be included on the suspension list. 
57 


B. USA Taekwondo Efforts 

USA Taekwondo is very proactive in the area of athlete protection, a move that started 

with the appointment of Mr. Alperstein as independent counsel in 2015 and the publication of a 

national request for information to root out sexual abuse coinciding with the beginning of his 

work. 

• Next month, USA Taekwondo will launch the "#notinmysport" education campaign, with 

the goal of informing participants throughout the sport as to what is acceptable behavior 

and what constitutes a violation, and also to empower athletes to stand up and 'make 

their statement' on social media channels. 

• Any and all sexual abuse allegations are immediately forwarded to the Center now, with 

no investigatory efforts by USA Taekwondo staff in light of the Center's exclusive 

jurisdiction. 

• Any allegations involving a potential crime are also forwarded to the relevant law 

enforcement agencies. Of course, we hope the new enforcement mechanisms will 

encourage victims to report offenders directly to law enforcement officials in the first 

instance. We also send any online reports of possible misconduct to the Center so that 

they may investigate, even if they are not submitted to us as formal complaints. 

• USA Taekwondo immediately an individual upon receipt of a direct allegation if we 

believe there is a threat to athletes currently, or clear evidence of an allegation being 

true (for example an admission of guilt to police or in a recorded conversation). 
58 


• We ensure leadership on any official trip contains both genders- our two senior highperformance staff are both female also. 

• We extended mandatory SafeS port training to referees. 

• We introduced mandatory background checks and SafeS port training for any vendors 

working at one of our events. 

• We have just engaged a group called Fighting Spirit, which educates on sexual 

misconduct, bullying etc. and all minor National Team athletes will take this training 

seminar, along with provision at all of our training/talent ID camps. 

These steps, along with SafeSport's increasing education efforts, followed up by effective 

response and resolution, means that significant strides are now being made in all of these 

important areas. In addition, USA Taekwondo is strongly in favor of national amateur athletic 

coach licensing, as discussed below, in light of USA Taekwondo's inherent limitations with respect 

to rooting out sexual abuse and punishing it. 

C. The Center for Safe Sport 

USA Taekwondo welcomed the opening of the Center for Safe Sport and is strongly behind 

the Center's mission, as evidenced by USA Taekwondo's having entrusted its most important 

cases to the care of the Center's investigative and adjudicatory mechanisms. That is why the 

independence of the U.S. Center for SafeSport, and the changes in the federal laws have been so 

important - the Center has the knowledge and expertise needed to carry out a detailed and 

thorough investigation into allegations that very often have no physical evidence, while being 

unimpeachable in terms of independence, making it much more difficult if not impossible for the 
59 


accused to credibly claim they didn't get a fair hearing. While this hasn't been tested significantly 

in arbitrations to this date, we believe that their rulings have a much greater chance of being 

upheld than any sanction handed down by an NGB ever could. 

USA Taekwondo is enthused and encouraged by the progress made since March 2017 and 

has hopes that the solution to these problems is largely already in place for the Olympic NGBs in 

regard to resolution and response, and now we just need to refine the process through learning 

and experience. 

Nonetheless, it is quite clear to USA Taekwondo that the recent legislation and the 

continuing development of Safe Sport are excellent developments, but there is work to be done. 

From our own experience with the Center, we know that victims are coming forward in numbers 

nobody anticipated, and we are all holding our breath hoping that appropriate funding and 

support for the Center comes though before it is crushed by its own success in being left without 

the resources it needs to fulfill its mission, which could have the adverse effect of suppressing 

future complaints out of a feeling of futility. 

In addition, Congress is presently and quite properly focusing its attention on the USOC 

and its National Governing Bodies. At the same time, there are millions of youths who participate 

in sports outside the Olympic movement, either because their sports are not Olympic sports, or 

because their constituents are not members of National Governing Bodies. USA Taekwondo 
60 


supports measures to ensure that all of these participants are governed equally by SafeSport 

rules. 

As but one example of the present limitations inherent in the system, we must report that 

offenders who are the subject of complaints and subsequent sanctions have passed (and would 

still pass) background checks. Similarly, the Lopez brothers have both been suspended by the 

Center for Safe Sport and USA Taekwondo, nonetheless, they would both pass background 

checks today, and nothing stops them from opening a Taekwondo school anywhere they wish, 

so long as the school is not affiliated with USA Taekwondo. Outside its ability to terminate 

membership in USA Taekwondo and to publish lists of banned former members, USA Taekwondo 

is powerless to effect change. Taekwondo is an extreme example of this lack of influence, as 

Olympic Taekwondo is not the form of Taekwondo in which the vast majority of practitioners 

engage (and thus USA Taekwondo membership is only a modest fraction of all Taekwondo 

athletes, coaches, referees, etc.) but it is clear that none of our NGBs has full coverage over their 

sports within the United States. 

For that reason, among others, USA Taekwondo would like to see and take part in 

discussions on a National Amateur Athletic Coach License and believes that this would be an 

important step forward. This would remove the problem of abuse tourism, where the predator 

simply moves to a school, gym, club or organization outside the sphere of influence, perhaps 

even in a different sport, undetected, and continues to operate and commit new offenses. This 

would provide an effective deterrent and sanction, as the abuser who loses his or her license 
61 


would also lose his or her livelihood completely, not just in their current sport, but in any other 

sport too. 

USA Taekwondo appreciates and welcomes your Committee's dedication to this difficult 

and vital endeavor. 
62 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Mr. McNally. 

The Chair will now recognize Mr. Davis for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JAMIE DAVIS 

Mr. DAVIS. Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, members of the subcommittee, I want to thank you for affording me an 

opportunity to speak with you today and to share with you USA 

Volleyball’s commitment to the safety our athletes. 

I joined USA Volleyball as its CEO in January of 2017, and in 

that timeframe I have been proud to lead an organization that respects all of our participants and places the highest value on personal safety before medal counts. 

USA Volleyball actively encourages our members to report any 

and all incidents regarding sexual misconduct or abuse, and we 

provide them a safe environment to express their concerns. We report and investigate any allegation brought forward, and we have 

the obligation to take appropriate action, if necessary. This is the 

core of our values. 

USA Volleyball has long championed a culture of protection of all 

participants. We were one of the first NGBs to implement a robust 

background screening policy. Beginning in the 2004–2005 volleyball 

season, USA Volleyball starting working with nationally respected 

background screening company SSCI and implemented a policy requiring individuals who participate with junior volleyball clubs to 

submit to a background screening. 

Recognizing a need to do more to protect athletes of all ages, 

USA Volleyball formed a commission in 2010 to address participant 

safety, named the Special Commission on Athlete Safeguards. This 

commission set out to review the current trends and best practices 

in athlete safety and produce recommendations for USA Volleyball 

to implement. 

The recommendations of the commission were extensive, but included: one, developing a procedure for reporting sexual harassment or abuse allegations;two, formulating written policies that define inappropriate behavior; and three, providing continual education on these kinds of topics to USA Volleyball participants and 

parents. 

The commission’s work paved the way for USA Volleyball to establish early SafeSport policies and procedures before it was even 

called SafeSport. We are proud to have been a very early endorser 

of a SafeSport program and supporter of the U.S. Center for 

SafeSport. 

As I hope is evident, USA Volleyball has long considered the 

safety of our athletes to be a top priority. This priority was not suddenly created in response to recent headlines or as a result of 

mounting public scrutiny, but done so because many years ago we 

recognized protecting our athletes and members as the right thing 

to do. 

I would like to address the case of Mr. Rick Butler, who has 

made headlines in the volleyball world. Mr. Butler is a well-known 

private volleyball club owner and coach in the Chicagoland suburb 

of Aurora, Illinois. 

His club, Sports Performance Volleyball, is not owned or operated 

by USA Volleyball; however, its athletes and coaches are required 

63 

to be members of USA Volleyball if they wish to participate in USA 

Volleyball-sanctioned events. 

In 1995, allegations of sexual misconduct were brought forth by 

three women that took place while they were members and played 

at his privately owned club. The women claimed that Mr. Butler 

had a sexual relationship with them in the 1980s while he was 

their coach and while they were under the age of 18. 

As a result of those allegations, in 1995 USA Volleyball found 

that Mr. Butler had violated our rules, and as a result, they voted 

to ban him for life. 

After 5 years passed and upon Mr. Butler’s request for reinstatement, USA Volleyball voted to conditionally reinstate Mr. Butler’s 

membership in the year 2000 under the limitation of Mr. Butler’s 

inability to ever coach junior girls in USA Volleyball-sanctioned 

events. 

To be clear, regardless of all the headlines surrounding this matter, and since the year 1995, Mr. Butler has been banned from 

coaching junior girls under USA Volleyball, a condition of his lifetime ban that never changed. 

Furthermore, these allegations are a result of Mr. Butler’s activities as a club director and coach for his privately owned club and 

not a part of USA Volleyball national team programs. 

In late 2016, several brave women came forward to USA 

Volleyball to provide new allegations against Mr. Butler for sexual 

misconduct dating back to the 1980s. Based on these women’s 

claims, USA Volleyball filed new charges against Mr. Butler. And 

in January of 2018, USA Volleyball’s Ethics and Eligibility Committee held a hearing regarding these allegations. 

Mr. Butler was once again found to have violated our rules, and 

as a result, Mr. Butler was banned from total participation in USA 

Volleyball for life without the possibility of reinstatement. 

Our efforts were recently applauded by the CEO of Champion 

Women, Ms. Nancy Hogshead-Makar, one of the Nation’s most 

vocal advocates for women’s rights in sports. In her letter addressed to me on April 2, 2018, Ms. Hogshead-Makar wrote in part, 

quote: 

‘‘We are reaching out today to thank you for banning Rick Butler 

from volleyball for his sexual predation of young girls. It took a lot 

to be the first organization to ban him, and we are grateful for your 

strong commitment to the victims and safety of all athletes. We are 

optimistic that these efforts will make a difference the next time 

any sports organization has to make a call to investigate, hold a 

hearing, or ban a member, if necessary,’’ end quote. 

I do not pretend that we have been perfect, nor do I ignore the 

fact that there have been some offenders in our midst. I encourage 

anyone listening to me today that if you have information of any 

misconduct within our organization, past or present, please contact 

our offices or the U.S. Center for SafeSport. We will listen, and we 

will act. 

We want to create the most safest, most enjoyable atmosphere 

for volleyball players of all ages and look forward to a day when 

there is no sexual abuse or misconduct in volleyball. We will do everything we can to make this a reality, and we look forward to 

working with others to do so. 

64 

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Davis follows:] 

65 


May 21, 2018 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Energy and Commerce Committee 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation 

Dear Members of the Subcommittee: 

On behalf of USA Volleyball, I want to thank this Committee for affording me an opportunity to speak 

with you today and to share with you our organization's commitment to the safety of our athletes. I joined USA 

Volleyball as its CEO in January 2017 and in that timeframe, I have been proud to lead an organization that 

respects all of our participants and places the highest value on the personal safety before medal counts. 

Even prior to my arrival, USA Volleyball has long championed a protective culture for its participants. In fact, 

USA Volleyball was at the forefront of athlete safety as one of the first NGBs to implement a robust background 

screening policy. Beginning in the 2004/2005 volleyball season, USA Volleyball started working with the 

nationally respected background screening company Southeastern Security Consultants, Inc. or SSCI to conduct 

background screens at a national level and across our regions. At that time, any individual who served in the 

roles of club director, club administrator, team rep, coach, chaperone, and trainer, and/or who intended to 

register, affiliate and/or participate with a junior volleyball dub or team was required to submit to a background 

screen. 

Not unlike the background screen policy used today, the policy of 2004 worked on a series of automatic 

disqualifiers. Anyone submitting to the background screen policy who was found to have convictions based on 

being found guilty, pled guilty or pled nolo contendere for sexual abuse, molestation, physical abuse, aggravated 

assault or assault of a minor, murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, and corruption of the morals of a minor were 

automatically disqualified for participation. In addition to the automatic disqualifiers, anyone found to have 

Proud Member 
66 


falsified information on any membership application or the consent/release form, would be subject to 

membership revocation or denial of membership, This background screening policy was strict, well-defined, and 

broad, covering more than what was expected by any other organization, or what was required from any 

insurance carrier. 

Since that time, we have maintained our relationship with SSCI and evolved our background screening 

policy to be even more robust, By reviewing best practices and processes used by other organizations, and 

through constant evaluation and consultation with SSCI and insurance representatives, USA Volleyball has 

strived to stay on the leading edge of background screening policies. Today's background screening policy 

includes an array of automatic disqualifiers. Anyone will be automatically disqualified if found guilty, entering a 

plea of guilty, or a plea of nolo contendere (no contest) regardless of adjudication or received court directed 

programs and/or other sentencing directives in lieu of a finding of gullt, for the following criminal offenses; AU 

Sex offenses, Murder, and Homicide regardless of time limit; Felony Violence and Felony Drug offenses in the 

past 10 years; any misdemeanor violence offenses in the past 7 years; any multiple misdemeanor drug and 

alcohol offenses within the past 7 years; or any other crimes (not listed) against children in the past 7 years (the 

time frames associated with the categories of crime listed above are calculated based on the date of the 

offense). Also included is the disqualifier that any individuals found to have pending court cases for any of the 

disqualifying offenses will be disqualified. If the disposition of the pending case does not meet the criteria for 

disqualification as listed above, the individual will be cleared and reinstated. As with previous iterations of the 

policy, falsification of information on any membership application or the consent/release form is grounds for 

membership revocation or restriction of membership. 
67 


While our background screening policy is robust and has been in place for a long time, there was a 

recognition that even more needed to be done to protect athletes of all ages, both on and off the court. In 2010, 

USA Volleyball formed a commission to address participant safety, named the Special Commission on Athlete 

Safeguards. This commission of athletic directors, insurance representatives, coaches, coaching educators, 

sports professionals and USA Volleyball Board members and employees, set out to review the current trends 

and best practices in athlete safety and produce further recommendations for USA Volleyball to implement. 

The commissions' research and recommendations were provided by way of a report dated September 2010. The 

commission weighed in on topics such as: preventing sexual abuse, providing education to coaches and players 

on sexual abuse, and early recognition of behaviors leading to perceived positions of power, influence, and 

dependence-what we would call"grooming" today. The recommendations of the commission were extensive 

and included: developing a procedure for reporting sexual harassment or abuse allegations, formulating written 

policies that define inappropriate behavior, and providing continual education on these kinds of topics to USA 

Volleyball participants and parents. 

In October 2010, the USA Volleyball Board fully supported the recommendations and findings of the 

special commission and recognized that with these recommendations, we were looking to set high standards 

and practices beyond the minimum requirements for athlete safety. This commission's work paved the way for 

USA Volleyball to establish early SafeS port policies and procedures before it was ever called "SafeSport." 

Being at the forefront of athlete safety lead USA Volleyball to working internally and with the USOC towards 

creation and implementation of a SafeSport program. USA Volleyball fully embraced the SafeSport program and 

its creators from its earliest inception. In 2011, the USA Volleyball Board reviewed and discussed the latest 

developments with the SafeSport program at virtually every Board meeting. It was and remains to be very 
68 


important to USA Volleyball that we show our commitment to SafeSport from the very top levels of the 

organization down to the contributions of the seasonal intern. What follows is a brief summary of past Board 

action related to SafeSport. 

October 2011: The USOC/USA Volleyball {"USAV") Safe Athlete Initiative begins to develop. Discussion 

ensued regarding the programs coming out of such initiative and how that information will be 

disseminated to vol!eyba!l clubs. 

January 2012; Now called the Safe Sport Initiative, the Board is assured that the SafeSport Initiative, or 

SS!, is a slgnificantfocus of the USOC and USAV. The USOC is developing a document called the Safe 

Sport Handbook for the NGBs to use as a resource. The Board learns for the first time about the idea of 

an independent agency or "center," much like USADA. That agency would handle complaints and 

reports of abusive behavior of unsafe sport environment, etc. 

May 2012: The USOC launched a new SafeS port website where information was available. The website 

contained toolkits for many audiences, including players, parents, coaches, and dubs to use for 

education. 

October 2012: The Board is advised regarding training under the SafeS port Initiative and that the course 

would be free on the Safe Sport website. 
69 


January 2013: The SafeS port Initiative and the program is planned for full implementation by September 

1, 2013. The Board moved to approve the concept of the implementation of the SafeSport Initiative as 

presented by the USOC 

May 2013: USAV is putting SafeSport programs and processes in place, and USAV is creating a SafeSport 

handbook and website. USAV is discussing the different levels of staff and communication contact points 

within each region who would be committed to implementing the SafeSport program. The Board moved 

to endorse the SafeSport Mission Statement and establishment of a National Safe Sport Program. The 

Board also directed that adequate budget support be provided to the SafeS port program. The Board 

moved on a time line for implementation of various levels of the SafeS port program including the 

designation of a SafeS port Officer for each Regional Volleyball Association by September 1, 2013. 

October 2013: The Board notes that the SafeSport program is now required to be implemented by all 

NGBs according to the USOC. The discussion continued regarding an independent agency to receive 

reports but at this time, the agency is still in the development stage. In fully committing to the SafeSport 

program, the Board believes that changes should be made to USAV's mission statement reflecting our 

commitment to this program. 

May 2014: USAV hired its first National SafeSport Coordinator who will be responsible for heading up 

USAV implementation of the SafeS port program. 
70 


October 2014: The Board recognizes that the new, independent agency for SafeSport was expected to 

be in place by the end of the 2014 calendar year, but no later than the second quarter of 2015. A 

funding request was made of NGB's based on the size of their annual budget and USAV was going to be 

asked to contribute $55,000 per year to support the establishment of the agency. USAV was supportive 

of providing such funding for this important initiative. Also discussed by the Board was the continued 

topic of implementation timelines. USAV's commitment was for by December 31,2014 to have all staff, 

the Board members and other major leadership entities to complete the SafeSport training course. 

January 2015: USAV had over 7,000 USAV people take the SafeSport training course. The USOC is 

working on creating the US Center for SafeSport with a targeted opening of within 6-9 months. USAV 

budgeted $55,000 as its contribution towards the U.S. Center for SafeSport in 2015. 

May 2015: The Board was formally introduced to Malia Arrington, the Senior Director, Ethics and 

Safe Sport with the USOC. 

January 2016: SafeS port training requirements were reviewed in depth, and also discussed were the 

number of people already certified. In addition, the Board continued to review implementation 

time lines. USAV staff are directed for the 2016-17 season to encourage all regions to require all adults 

associated with the junior programs to be Safe Sport certified under the USOC program. Effective with 

the 2017-18 season all registered adults associated with junior programming {who are required to have 

a background screening) are required to be SafeSport certified. 
71 


January 2017: She !lie Pfohl and Malia Arrington from the U.S. Center for SafeSport attended the USAV 

Board of Directors meeting and the Board confirmed that USAV is 100 percent behind the SafeSport 

program and the U.S. Center for SafeS port. The Board learned of the vision and focus of the Center 

which had an expected opening date of the first quarter of 2017, The Center suggested adding language 

to USAV's Bylaws recognizing the Center. 

March 2017: The Board discussed at length the changes that should be made to the USAV Bylaws 

adopting proposed changes to policies and procedures that reflected USA Volleyball's commitment to 

the SafeSport program. In addition, the Board discussed the process for submitting matters to SafeS port. 

April2017: The Board voted to officially adopt the following changes to its Bylaws: Add Article IV. 

SAFESPORT. As a member National Governing Body of the United States Olympic Committee, USA 

Volleyball is required to adhere to the safe sport rules and regulations of the USOC. Additionally, USOC 

Bylaw Section S.7(1) provides that, as a condition of membership in the USOC, each NGB shaH comply 

with the policies and procedures of the independent safe sport organization designated by the USOC to 

investigate and resolve safe sport violations. The USOC has designated the U.S. Center for Safe Sport as 

that organization. The current safe sport rules are available at the offices of USA Volleyball or on-line at 

the following website: https://safesport.org. 
72 


As a condition of membership in USA Volleyball and a condition for participation in any competition or 

event sanction by USA Volleyball or its Regions, each NGB member and each athlete, coach, trainer, 

agent, athlete support personnel, medical or para-medica! personnel, team staff, official and other 

person who participants in USA Volleyball or USA Volleyball events (whether or not a USA Volleyball 

member), agrees to comply with and be bound by the safe sport rules of the U.S. Center for Safe Sport 

and to submit, without reservation or condition, to the jurisdiction and rules of the U.S. Center for Safe 

Sport for the resolution of any alleged violations of those rules, as such rules may be amended from 

time to time. To the extent any USA Volleyball rule is inconsistent with the rules of the U.S. Center for 

Safe Sport, such rule is hereby superseded. 

This brief summary of the SafeS port program evolution at the USA Volleyball Board level reflects the 

priority that our organization has placed on athlete safety for years. This priority was not suddenly created in 

response to recent headlines or as a result of mounting public scrutiny. USA Volleyball has valued the safety and 

well-being of a!! USA Volleyball participants for years and will continue to do so diligently. 

As is evident, the implementation of SafeSport is an ever-continuing process. We will never stop striving 

for ways to do more to protect participants. For example, for many years we have utilized an electronic, internal 

system that precluded anyone banned or suspended for some period of time from being able to obtain 

membership with USA Volleyball or participate in USA Volleyball sanctioned events. The information was never 

secret, and anyone could make an inquiry to USA Volleyball regarding any current or prior participant. 

Furthermore, the system was kept up~to-date in real time insuring that it contained the latest Information. 

Following the USA Gymnastics Dr. Larry Nassar situation, however, and in keeping with current best practices, 
73 


USA Volleyball began posting a public list of suspended members on our website. I believe this adds value to the 

process and is important for all our participants and the public to see. 

There is no doubt that the events of recent headlines have shaken the Olympic movement. USA 

Volleyball garnered its own media headlines a few months ago. A hearing panel of our Ethics and Eligibility 

Committee found that volleyball club owner, Rick Butler, violated USA Volleyball's code of conduct and rules by 

committing acts of sexual misconduct with minors in the past. The panel voted unanimously to ban Mr. Butler 

from USA Volleyball for life. 

There are many reasons the Butler matter received a lot of media attention. Mr. Butler is a well-known 

private volleyball dub owner and coach in the Chicagoland suburb of Aurora, IL. This club, Sports Performance 

Volleyball Club, is not owned or operated by USA Volleyball however it's athletes and coaches are required to be 

members of USA Volleyball if they wish to participate in USA Volleyball sanctioned events. In 1995, allegations of 

sexual misconduct were brought forth by three women that took place while they were members and players at 

his privately~owned dub. The women claimed that Mr. Butler had a sexual relationship with them in the 1980's 

while he was their coach and while they were under the age of 18. As a result of those allegations, USA 

Volleyball's Ethics and Eligibility Committee (the "Committee") held a hearing and found that Mr. Butler had 

violated our rules and the Committee voted to ban him for life. There was a provision in such ban allowing him 

to apply for reinstatement after five years, provided he could never coach junior girls as part of USA Volleyball. 

After the five years passed, and upon Mr. Butler's request for reinstatement, USA Volleyball voted to 

conditionally reinstate Mr. Butler's membership in the year 2000 under the limitation of Mr. Butler's inability to 

ever coach junior girls in USA Volleyball sanctioned events. To be clear, regardless of all the headlines 

surrounding this matter, since the year 1995, Mr. Butler has been banned from coaching junior girls under USA 
74 


Volleyball, a condition of his lifetime ban that has never changed. Furthermore, these allegations are a result of 

Mr. Butler's activities as a dub director and coach for his privately~owned club and not a part of the USA 

Volleyball national team programs. 

As I was not with the organization at the time, I cannot speak to the decisions of the past and as to why 

Mr. Butler was allowed to be conditionally reinstated in 2000. However, l can say with all certainty that today, 

this would never have been allowed. 

The story of Rick Butler did not end there. In late 2016, several brave women came forward to USA 

Volleyball to provide new allegations against Mr. Butler for sexual misconduct dating back to the 1980's. Based 

on these brave women's claims, USA Volleyball filed new charges against Mr. Butler in December 2016. Mr. 

Butler, through legal counsel, fought vehemently to derail the adjudication process. 

In January 2018, USA Volleyball's Ethics and Eligibility Committee held a hearing regarding these 

allegations and based on the new information, Mr. Butler was once again found to have violated our rules. As a 

result, Mr. Butler was banned from total participation in USA Volleyball for life without the possibility of 

reinstatement. 

While Mr. Butler had been banned for life from membership with USA Volleyball, he continued to 

receive membership and support from the Junior Volleyball Association ("JVA") and the American Athletics 

Union {" AAU")- organizations that do not fall under the jurisdiction of USA Volleyball. Following the 2018 ban, ! 

felt an obligation to send communications on behalf of USA Volleyball to both the JVA and AAU denouncing their 

continued affiliation with Rick Butler. Since sending those communications, lam happy to say that both the AAU 

has permanently suspended Mr. Butler from membership and the JVA has done so indefinitely. 

10 
75 


Mr. Butler's history with USA Volleyball has been highlighted here for several reasons. First, the eventual 

outcome of his lifetime ban emphasizes USA Volleyball's commitment to protect all of our participants. Although 

the process was not easy, the outcome was rlght and our efforts were recently applauded by the CEO of 

Champion Women, Ms. Nancy Hogshead-Makar, one of the nation's most vocal advocates for women's rights in 

the Olympic movement. In a letter to addressed to me on April 2, 2018, Ms. Hogshead-Makarwrote In part, "we 

are reaching out to you today to thank you banning Rick Butler from volleyball for his sexual predation of young 

girls. It took a lot to be the first organization to ban him, and we are grateful for your strong commitment to the 

victims and the safety of all athletes ... We are optimistic that these efforts will make a difference the next time 

a sports organization has to make the cal! to investigate, hold a hearing and ban a member if necessary." A copy 

of this letter in its entirety has been provided to you for your reference. 

The second reason I highlighted this history is because during this process, we !earned a lot of important 

things that I believe are important to share: 

1. The women who came forward are incredibly brave. They endured terrible things and it must 

be very difficult for them to have to relive their past. Yet USA Volleyball fosters a culture that 

encourages any victim to come forward and know that they will have a voice, they will be heard, it will 

be a safe environment and that USA Volleyball will act if necessary. 

2. Based on my observations, for the women who came forward, the process served as a sense of 

healing for them. By testifying and seeing that the resulting lifetime ban, they know that they have 

made a difference. We need to continue strongly encourage other victims to share their instances so 

11 
76 


that we can continue to eradicate our organization of any predators. USA Volleyball prominently 

displays messaging on our website and our digital platforms to report and stop abuse (see attached 

messaging on www.USAVolleybal!.org). These links take members directly to a site where they can: 

a) File a report of sexual misconduct or abuse, 

b) Easily obtain Safesport resources 

c) View the current list of suspended members from USA Volleyball 

d) Unk directly to the home page for the U.S, Center for SafeSport 

In addition, SafeSport messaging is displayed at all of our major events. 

3. Abuse of athletes, and especially minor athletes, is a critical problem, and we must work 

together to stop this. No one organization can do this alone, and the NGBs themselves face limits. For 

example, USA Volleyball does not control all volleyball in the U.S., rather, we only control those activities 

that are organized or sanctioned by USA VolleybalL So, unfortunately, if we ban someone for life, that 

person can join another organization and continue to coach, officiate, or whatever other activity he or 

she was involved in previously. We need to work together to stop perpetrators throughout all sports at 

all levels. 

4. USA Volleyball fully supports the U.S. Center for Safe Sport. The Center officially opened about a 

year ago, and we feel that having a professional, independent organization dedicated to SafeS port is a 

huge step forward. We at USA Volleyball are prepared to help the Center any way we can. 

12 
77 


5. We are grateful to our law enforcement professionals, who work tirelessly to protect us. USA 

Volleyball has fully embraced the mandatory reporting rules for any claim of sexual misconduct and 

hope that we can continue to support law enforcement in their quest for timely investigations and 

rulings. Our priority it to make volleyball safe for aU of our members. 

We at USA Volleyball take our obligations to protect our participants very seriously. We feel that the 

policies that we began instigating in our program years ago put us in a prominent position to take decisive action 

and convey our culture of safety, care, trust and transparency. At USA Volleyball, we want to create the safest 

and most enjoyable atmosphere for volleyball players of aU ages and I look forward to a day when there is no 

sexual abuse or other misconduct in sport. I will do everything I can to make this a reality, and I look forward to 

working with others to bring this goal closer. 

Sincerely, 

Jamie Davis 

CEO 

13 
78 


Special Commission on 

Athlete Safeguards 

Recommendations 

USA Volleyball 

USA Volleyball 

September, 2010 

1 
79 


Special Commission Members 

Chair, Dr. Cecile Reynaud- former women's collegiate coach, former USA Volleyball 

Board of Directors and Executive Committee Member, CAP clinician, Past President of 

Refuge House (local domestic and sexual violence center), Sport Management faculty 

member at Florida State University, 850-644-4298 (office) 850-212-4646 (cell) 

reynaud@fsu.edu 

Judy Sweet- former NCAA President, former Director of Athletics at UC San Diego, 

consultant for Alden & Associates, Inc., jmssd@san.rr.com 

Kim Oden- former club player, former high school coach, former collegiate athlete, 

former USA National Team player, kioden@sfhs.com 

Jon Lee- USAV Board member, former regional commissioner, attorney, 509-326-1800, 

Jlee@leeisserlis.com 

Mike Price- ESIX insurance broker for USA Volleyball, 678-324-3333, 

mprice@esixglobal.com 

Jennifer Waller- ESIX, 678-324-3333, jwaller@esixqlobal.com, 

Randy Rodebaugh- SSCI background screening for USA Volleyball, 866-996-7412, 

rrodebaugh@ssci2000.com 

Dr. Kristen Dieffenbach- Assistant Professor in Athletic Coaching Education, West 

Virginia University, 304-293-0847, Kristen.dieffenbach@mail.wvu.edu, 

Dr. Larry Lauer- The Institute for the Study of Youth Sport Michigan State University, 

lauerl@msu.edu 

Marge Mara- Senior Director, USA Volleyball, 719-228-6800, Margie.mara@usav.org 

Susan Barkley- Manager, National Database Development, 719-228-6800, 

susan.barkley@usav.org 

2 
80 


USA Volleyball Vision 

USA Volleyball (USAV) is the National Governing Body (NGB) for the sport of volleyball in the 

United States and is recognized as such by the Federation International de Volleyball (FIVB) and 

the United States Olympic Committee (USOC). The vision of USA Volleyball is to be 

acknowledged as the world leader in volleyball. In order to accomplish this mission, the 

following goals are to be achieved: 

Competitive Success: To win gold medals in every international competition; 

Sport Growth: To achieve full participation in volleyball at all levels and in all 

geographical areas; 

Sport Enhancement: To improve support services necessary for the quality and conduct 

of programs to ensure recognition as the authority and expert for volleyball; 

International Representation: To have influential positions on all international boards 

and commissions; 

Recognition: To receive consistent recognition of volleyball coaches and athletes as top 

world performers; 

Administration: To develop and maintain a structure which will effectively and 

efficiently assist in achieving the vision and mission of the Corporation; and 

Finances: To develop, implement and maintain a financial plan to achieve the vision and 

mission of the Corporation. 

USA Volleyball is committed to and works toward opportunity for all to participate. It is an 

advocate for all Americans-endeavoring to assure universal access to opportunities at all levels 

of the game. 

Thus USA Volleyball will diligently: 

Work toward provision of ample opportunity, quality opportunity and equality of access 

for every resident of this diverse nation. 

Act to expand opportunity for under-represented groups and aggressively recruit 

participation from those groups. 

Make its daily decisions concerning resources, players, coaches, officials, administrators, 

and employees on the basis of individual merit and excellence of performance 

regardless of age, class, ancestry, color, national origin, race, religious creed, disability or 

handicap, gender, or sexual orientation. 

Exercise its corporate will to encourage constituent organizations to act in accordance 

with the foregoing principles. 

USA Volleyball believes that volleyball has so many positive things to offer those who 

participate. First, and most importantly, whether one is a gifted athlete or a recreational player, 

volleyball is FUN! It is a lifetime sport enjoyed by players from 8 to 80. Participation in volleyball 

is not only good exercise, but also involves team cooperation and spirit. We are committed to 

introducing our sport to all of America. 

3 
81 


PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS 

Over 10 years ago USA Volleyball recognized the importance of instituting safe conduct 

practices for its sanctioned events, activities and most importantly its youth membership. 

USAV embarked on a mission to develop a background screening process that would be 

mandatory for All members that have contact with junior participants. This program is now 

recognized as one of the top background screening programs for amateur sports 

organizations. In a continuing effort to set the standard for the protection of its members 

and athletes, USAV has established a new commission for athlete safeguards. 

This commission was established to provide recommendations to USA Volleyball on Athlete 

Safeguards. These recommendations are intended to give USA Volleyball as well as the 

Regions, Clubs & leadership additional tools which should help to protect their athletes and 

coaches. The Commission recommends USA Volleyball consider adding a statement in their 

vision and goals to reflect their commitment to the safety of their members. The 

recommendations include a responsible hiring process for coaches, continual age appropriate 

education for athletes as well as coaches dealing with a variety of issues which impact 

participants, reporting of unacceptable behavior by those involved with USAV sponsored 

activities as well as encouraging everyone to be vigilant about protecting USAV members. 

Information should be posted on the USA Volleyball, Region and Club websites. Additional 

links can be provided for more information and additional resources (i.e., hiring a new coach, 

educational material for athletes, stepping up to help others, etc.) This educational effort 

should be an ongoing process by USA Volleyball through various forms of communication 

with the membership. 

1. SCREENING & ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES 

a. Conduct responsible hiring procedures 

i. Define/write positions descriptions including functions & qualification 

(provide template as an example if needed) 

ii. Obtain written application with signature of completion which includes a 

request for employment history and 3 reference sources 

iii. Conduct face-to-face interviews where applicable for potential employees 

and volunteers working with junior members (see Screening Volunteers to 

Prevent Child Abuse publication for questions -link below p. 11 I 6) 

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/preventingchildsexualabuse.pdf 

b. Review USAV sexual abuse and sexual harassment policy by the club director with 

potential applicant in the pre-employment interview. 

4 
82 


c. Conduct periodic background screenings (including criminal & sex offender registry) 

as required by the USAV background screening policy or as mandated by each state 

for anyone associated with a junior team. 

d. Require IMPACT certification prior to beginning the season or as early as possible 

(online course & exam) 

e. All staff and volunteers associated with USA Volleyball should sign a statement 

agreeing not to engage in any physical, psychological or sexual abuse or harassment 

AND to accept responsibility to report any suspicion of violations of other personnel 

(Include this statement in the USA Volleyball membership application form, 

employee handbook & coaches code of conduct.) 

2. EDUCATION & AWARENESS 

a. Continually provide educational materials (via USA publications, electronic 

newsletters & websites) for administrators, coaches, staff, athletes and parents 

regarding inappropriate behavior, alcohol and drug abuse, proper athlete conduct 

including dating/relationship rules, hazing, bullying and other topics of importance 

in protecting the youth in our organization. (See STEP UP! Program link in 

resources.) 

b. Provide administrators, coaches, athletes and other personnel with continuing 

education about how power, dependence, "love" and sexual attraction can influence 

coach-athlete relationships. 

c. Provide a educational toolkit for administrators, staff, coaches and volunteers on 

how to respond when an athlete discloses abuse as well as the correct procedure for 

filing a complaint. 

d. Distribute & discuss age appropriate educational material for all athletes and their 

parents at the beginning of the season. 

i. Public service video (use high profile individuals such as current/past 

national team members or coaches) 

ii. Power Point presentations on USA Volleyball/Region/Club web sites 

iii. Written material, brochures, etc. 

iv. Include touching policy guidelines (p. 48, Risk Management Guide) 

v. How to say "no" comfortably (p. 49, Risk Management Guide) 

e. Develop and distribute clear rules to coaches, officials and athletes that prohibit 

coach-athlete dating and/or sexual relationships. 

f. Review resources provided and educate coaches and parents on emotional 

development of young females and how coach's actions and behaviors can affect 

young women both positively & negatively. 

5 
83 


3. INAPPROPIATE BEHAVIOR 

a. Formulate a written policy that details inappropriate behavior. 

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/preventingchildsexualabuse.pdf (p. 15/10} 

i. The policy should clearly define sexual abuse and harassment and explain 

the sanctions for sexual harassment including reporting procedures. 

ii. The policy should include rules that prohibit coach-athlete dating and/or 

sexual relationships. Specify the length of time that should pass after the 

cessation of a coach-athlete relationship. 

iii. Require "two deep" adult involvement in all activities with athletes. This 

calls for at least two screened adults to be present with athletes and 

discourage individual contact with athletes such as rides home from practice 

or competition, practices, meetings held in private rooms, etc. Private 

lessons may be conducted if a parent is present or another screened adult. 

This is meant to protect the coach or administrator as well as the athlete. 

iv. Include disciplinary action and consequences associated with inappropriate 

behavior. 

4. REPORT OF COMPLAINTS 

a. Develop a procedure for reporting sexual harassment or abuse allegations. 

i. Offer athletes, parents, coaches and other personnel multiple avenues to 

report cases 

ii. Designate point person(s} for reporting (neutral person outside the team 

setting}, club directors, regional commissioners, or USA Volleyball National 

Office. Be aware of Child Protective Services mandates in your specific 

state. 

iii. Confirm confidentiality & privacy protection of all parties including 

complainant, witnesses, or those confirming evidence. 

iv. Explain how informal/formal complaint procedures work 

1. Consider resolution or alternatives to formal hearings and 

investigations 

v. Suggest personal counseling (not a substitute for complaint process} 

vi. Establish time frames for reporting and for complaint procedure 

1. Take immediate action 

2. Timely notifications, advisement, investigation, resolution 

vii. Assign investigators (outside consultants or law enforcement officials} & 

provide training with guidelines to ensure proper procedures for a fair and 

effective investigation. 

viii. Confirm protection against retaliation 

6 
84 


ix. Refer to legal counsel as necessary (if a claim is made with the insurance 

company is established, an attorney may be assigned) 

1. Involved local authorizes when obligated 

5. PRIVACY PROTECTION AND LEGAL RIGHTS 

a. Ensure that procedures for reporting sexual harassment or abuse protect the 

privacy of all parties involved as much as possible until litigation or 

administrative hearings have been completed. 

Informal procedures may involve initial discussion of alleged incidents with 

athletes, clarification of circumstances and perceptions, counseling and 

resolution accepted by the harassed person without formal hearings and 

investigations. (This point strengthens the position to have a written 

reporting procedure which reports directly to the national office and to train 

ONE individual on how to handle reports with may include law enforcement 

intervention. Another alternative would be to hire an independent 

counseling firm to handle reported claims & ESIX would favor this approach) 

ii. Procedures must protect against retaliation before, during and after a 

hearing or appeals process. (USAV's policy requires a coach to be made 

"inactive" until the allegation has been reconciled. ESIX would not suggest 

the inclusion of an appeal committee, but rather follow the current 

USAV /SSCI appeal process.) 

b. Coaches or athletes cannot be denied their right to pursue legal redress in a court of 

law. There are federal and state statutes of limitations involving these rights that 

might apply. 

c. Keep all information confidential, secure and unbiased. 

d. Refer to legal counsel when necessary 

7 
85 


References 

• The Season of Hope- A Risk Management Guide for Youth-Serving Non profits (2004). 

Patterson, John B. & Oliver, Barbara B.; Nonprofit Risk Management Center, 

Washington, D.C. 

• Preventing Sexual Abuse Within Youth-Serving Organizations: Getting Started on Policies 

and Procedures http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/preventingchildsexualabuse.pdf 

• Staff Screening Tool Kit: Building a Strong Foundation Through Careful Staffing 

http://nationalserviceresources.org/files/legacy/filemanager/download/ProgramMgmt/ 

Staff Screen tool. pdf 

• little league Baseball Child Protection Program 

http://www.littleleague.org/learn/programs/childprotection.htm 

Educational Links 

• STEP UP! http://www.stepupprogram.org/ 

• Respect in Sport http://www.respectinsport.com 

• Safe2Tell http://www.safe2tell.org 

• Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) http://www.rainn.org 

• Mom'sTeam 

http://www.momsteam.com/team-of-experts/parents-can-protect-their-childrenagainst-sexual-abuse-in-sports 

• Women's Sports Foundation 

http://www.womenssportsfoundation.org/Content/Articles/lssues/Coaching/S/SexuaiHarassment--Sexuai-Harassment-and-Sexuai-Relationships-Between-Coaches-OtherAthletic-Personn.aspx 

• WomenSport International 

http:Uwww.sportsbiz.bz/womensportinternational/taskforces/harassment brochure.htm 

8 
86 


Mr. Jamie Davis 

CEO USA Volleyball 

4065 Sinton Road, Suite 200 

Colorado Springs, CO 80907 

Re: 11wnk You for Banning Rick Butler from USAV 

Dear Mr. Davis, 

You may recall hearing fi·om us at Champion Women last year regarding Rick Butler. Champion 

Women has now 'vritten 135 letters with supporting materials to as many relevant members of the 

v;)J!c;. ball community we could muster, to ensure the safety of c!uh, high school, and college athletes. 

We arc reaching out to you today to thank you f()r banning Rick Butler from voHcyba!l for his 

sexual predation of young girls. It took a lot to be the first organization to ban him, and we are grateful for 

your strong cornmitnumt to the vktims and the safety of all athletes. Thanks to :your actions. he is no 

longer a member of the AAU or the JVA. (Yay!) 

We especially appreciate how you disassociated with the AAU and JV A, when their reasons for 

banning him Rick Butler, and their status conferred upon him, did not signifY their serious commitment to 

the safety of athletes. 

We are optimistic that these efforts will make a difference the next time a sport<.; organization has 

to make the call to investigate, hold a hearing and ban a member if necessary. 

If you need any help with taking further action, please do not hesitate to reach out to us. 

Sincerely, 

Nancy Hogshead-Makar, J.D. 

CEO, Champion Women 

ChamoionWomen • 3116 St. Johns Avenue • Jacksonville. Florida 32205 
87 

88 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Mr. Davis. 

The Chair will now recognize Ms. Pfohl, the president and CEO 

of the U.S. Center for SafeSport. 

STATEMENT OF SHELLIE PFOHL 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you, Chairman Harper, Ranking Member 

DeGette, and members of the committee. 

It is my privilege to serve as president and CEO of the United 

States Center for SafeSport, an independent, nonprofit organization in Denver, Colorado. 

The Center is dedicated to making athlete well-being a centerpiece of our Nation’s sports culture. Let me say that again. Our 

Center is dedicated to making athlete well-being the centerpiece of 

our Nation’s sports culture through abuse prevention, education, 

and accountability. 

Far too many of our Nation’s athletes have suffered abuse at the 

hands of perpetrators who take advantage of a sports environment 

where athletes form bonds with their coaches, trusted adults, and 

teammates. As you said, Mr. Chairman, if one athlete is abused, 

it’s one too many. 

I know from experience that sport at its core builds character, 

promotes healthy lifestyles, and develops self-confidence. We are 

here today because we never want to lose sight of those values. 

Our March 3, 2017, we opened our doors as an independent entity and started taking reports on day one. Today our operations include a 9-member board and 14 full-time employees. 

Thanks to the support from Congress and the leadership of Representative Brooks, we were recognized in the Protecting Young 

Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act, 

which became law in February. 

Among the many safeguards it put in place, the law requires 

that anyone working in amateur sports must immediately report 

the suspected abuse of minors to law enforcement and prohibits retaliation against those who choose to come forward. 

Adults who have regular contact with minors in Olympic and 

Paralympic sports must now complete mandatory SafeSport training, adhere to best practices, policies, and procedures, like the 

SafeSport code. 

The code specifically outlines and prohibits forms of abuse and 

misconduct and defines the processes surrounding reporting. Reports can be made through the Center’s Web site or by calling our 

office. 

I want to stress that anyone who is listening, reports can be 

made anonymously and there is no statute of limitation. 

The safety and well-being of those we serve is our priority. Our 

qualified investigators are trained to handle each report with care 

through the industry best practice of trauma-informed response. 

Before I go into the numbers, I want to underscore that we never 

lose sight of the fact that behind these numbers are people, men, 

women, boys, and girls, dealing with the lingering effects of abuse. 

In our first year, we responded to more than 500 reports and inquiries. This year, we expect that number to more than double. 

89 

Let me put it into perspective for you. This time last year, we 

were getting 20 to 30 reports per month. Now we’re getting 20 to 

30 reports per week. 

So far, we have issued 169 sanctions, including sanctioning 142 

individuals with permanent ineligibility. That’s no small detail, 142 

individuals are permanently unable to coach or participate in 

Olympic and Paralympic sports. These adults are listed in our online searchable database, which is available to anyone who wants 

to use it. 

The volume of reports speaks to the critical need of the Center. 

We know how hard it is for victims to come forward. Our goal is 

to continue building trust while establishing a culture where everyone feels safe, supported, and empowered to report, with the ultimate objective to end all forms of abuse. 

In addition to investigating reports, we also provide outreach, 

education, and training, not only for athletes and coaches, but for 

parents and youth sport organizations at all levels. In our first 

year, almost 400,000 people completed our online training and hundreds more have expressed interest in accessing it. 

This past year was a step in the right direction, and I know we 

have a lot more work to do. 

In closing, sport has the power to be an incredibly positive influence on participants, communities, and our Nation. I thank you for 

helping us to prioritize our important mission to champion respect 

and end abuse. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Pfohl follows:] 

90 


Written Statement of Shellie Pfohl 

Before the House Committee on Energy & Commerce: Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations 

Wednesday, May 23, 2018 

I. The State of Play 

Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DcGette, and other members of this Committee: 

Thank you for shedding light on this important topic and for recognizing the U.S. Center for 

SafeS port's role in protecting athletes from all fonns of abuse. 

It is my privilege to serve as the President and CEO of the U.S. Center for Safe Sport ("the 

Center"), an independent non-profit in Denver, Colorado dedicated to making athlete well-being 

the centerpiece of our nation's sports culture through abuse prevention, education and 

accountability. 

Far too many of our nation's athletes have suffered abuse at the hands of perpetrators who take 

advantage of a sports environment where athletes fonn an important bond with their coaches, 

trusting that they have their best interest at heart. Most of the time those relationships prove to 

be hugely beneficial, as sport at its core builds character, promotes healthy lifestyles and pushes 

participants in ways that help them develop self-confidence. 

We arc here today to discuss when sport, and those entrusted to uphold all that's good about 

participating in organized athletics, betrays its values and causes harm to its participants by 

exploiting the power imbalances that exist, especially as it pertains to elite sports such as national 

and international competition. Imagine a scenario where an athlete's dream was to represent 

Team USA. Thousands of hours of training, blood, sweat and tears invested in his or her sport, 

only to run across an abusive coach or person in authority who has the power to turn that dream 

into a nightmare. 

That is why the U.S. Center for SafcSport's work is so critical. We believe athletes of all levels 

deserve to participate in sports that are free from bullying, hazing, sexual misconduct or any 

fonn of emotional or physical abuse. Anything less is unacceptable. 

Last year, the Center was established as an entity independent from the United States Olympic 

Committee (USOC) to address these issues with a full solution that includes education, training 

and professional response and resolution. 

W c execute our work through a two-pronged approach: 

I) By providing training and educational services on abuse prevention and policies to sport 

entities and participants (Education & Outreach Office), and, 
91 


2) By serving as the designated organization for individuals to report sexual abuse within the 

U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movements and its 49 National Governing Bodies (NGBs) 

(Response & Resolution Office). 

II. Where we started 

On March 3, 2017, we opened our doors as an independent entity, complete with a ninemember board and four full-time employees. The Center started receiving cases on day one. 

The SafeSport Code establishes the rules that govern conduct and recognizes the Center's 

exclusive authority to investigate and resolve allegations of sexual abuse and misconduct within 

the Olympic and Paralympic Movements, including its 49 national governing bodies. The Center 

also has discretionary authority over prohibited c.onduct such as forms of emotional abuse. 

The Code specifically outlines and prohibits forms of abuse and misconduct, including sexual, 

emotional, physical, bullying, harassment and hazing and defines the processes surrounding who 

must report, how to report and the procedures for investigating and resolving allegations of 

sexual misconduct under the Response and Resolution Office. Reports can be made through the 

Center's downloadable app, our website or by calling our hotlinc. There is no statute of 

limitations and reports can be made anonymously. 

The Center is empowered to issue sanctions for policy violations ranging from a warning to 

permanent ineligibility i.e. a lifetime ban. Sanctions issued against adults are posted in a publicly 

searchable database, allowing anyone to find out if a coach, athlete, trainer or other adult within 

the Movements is sanctioned. 

When the Office receives a report that falls within our exclusive authority, or accepts a matter 

within its discretionary authority, the investigation process is as follows: 

Our response and resolution team undertakes a preliminary inquiry to determine ifthere is (a) 

reason to believe (b) a Covered Individual (c) violated the Code. 

If, after a preliminary inquiry, the Office concludes there is reason to believe a Covered 

Individual has violated the Code, an investigation is initiated. 

III. One Year Update 

Congress recently passed the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport 

Authorization Act of2017. The law, signed in February, expands the list of people who are 

required to report abuse of a minor to law enforcement and adds tougher penalties for not 

reporting. The Center was fully supportive of the law and grateful for the bipartisan recognition 

of our work and the importance of our mission. 

Specifically, the section of the bill that amended the Amateur Sports Act of 1978, designates the 

Center to serve as the independent national safe sport organization, with the responsibility to 

2 
92 


develop policies and procedures to prevent the emotional, physical and sexual abuse of amateur 

athletes. It outlines that the policies and procedures we develop must include: 

• A requirement that (a) all adult members of a national governing body or a facility under 

the jurisdiction of a national governing body or at any event sanctioned by a national 

governing body, and (b) all adults authorized by such members to interact with an 

amateur athlete, immediately report an allegation of child abuse of an amateur athlete 

who is a minor to: (i) the Center, and (ii) to law enforcement 

• A mechanism that allows a complainant to easily report child abuse 

• Reasonable procedures to limit one-on-one interactions between a minor and an adult 

• Procedures to prohibit retaliation 

• Oversight procedures, including: 

o Audits, to ensure the policies and procedures are followed correctly 

o Consistent training is offered 

• A mechanism for national governing bodies to share reports of suspected child abuse 

Today, we are rapidly expanding our team to accommodate for the growing demand and use of 

our services. 

We increased our team from four to 14 full-time employees which includes nine full-time staff 

supporting response and resolution, including five staff investigators. We plan on bringing on an 

additional 4-5 investigators this year to accommodate for the increase in reports. 

Cascloads vary depending on the complexity and scope of the matter, but on average our staff 

investigators currently handle around 18 cases each. 

We also utilize contract investigators, with approximately 19% of our work outsourced to seven 

contractors. 

This year we brought on a Director of Education and Outreach, who is leading our efforts to 

provide consultation and educational services on abuse-prevention strategies and policies to our 

country's sport entities and participants. 

We integrate trauma-informed communication into all aspects of our work. This is one of the 

reasons why we try not to take on previously adjudicated or open matters from the USOC or 

NGBs, as preventing there-traumatization of victims is vitally important. The safety and wellbeing of victims and athletes arc our priorities. 

Just last month we issued data from our first year that outlines some of the Center's 

organizational benchmarks. 

These metrics from our Response and Resolution Office are critical to establishing a gold 

standard, monitoring progress, spotting trends, and ensuring our ability to refine best practices 

and strengthen our prevention efforts. 

3 
93 


Know that we never lose sight of the fact that behind these statistics are people- hundreds of 

men, women, boys and girls dealing with the lingering impacts of abuse. 

In our first year, we responded to more than 500 reports and inquiries spanning 38 of the 49 

national governing bodies, 70% of which fell into our exclusive authority. As oflast week, our 

total number of reports since March 3, 2017 exceeded 840. 

To date, we have issued more than 169 sanctions, including 142 "lifetime bans." 

These numbers indicate the importance of our mission and highlight the need for a trusted place 

to report sexual misconduct within the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movements. 

We know we still have a long way to go. Our data shows that the third most common 

reason cases arc closed is because victims arc reluctant to come forward. 

It is vitally important to continue building a national sports culture where victims feel safe, 

supported and empowered to report. Our work will not be done until we prevent misconduct 

from happening in the first place. 

Education and Awareness 

One way we can create such a culture is through education and training, which are at the 

heart of the Center's abuse-prevention efforts. 

In our first year, more than 367,000 people completed our online training, with more coaches, 

officials and administrators projected to finish it in 2018. Recently, we made our training 

available to individuals and organizations outside the Olympic and Paralympic Movements. 

More than 250 sport organizations have expressed interest in accessing this training for their 

constituents and we heard directly from parents requesting resources and support on how to 

prevent and respond to abuse. 

Part of our comprehensive prevention efforts is to make sure parents and children have the tools 

they need to identify appropriate and inappropriate behavior from their coaches and trainers. 

Parents should be empowered to ask 3 simple questions of sport organizations: 

• Do you provide quality training for your coaches, managers, trainers and volunteers to 

protect the well-being of athletes? 

• What policies and best practices do you employ to protect my child and how do you 

enforce them? 

• If there is a concern, where do I report an issue? 

Coaches and organizations must be able to answer these questions. If not, the Center can help by 

offering consultation services. To address this need, we developed a parent toolkit and training to 

4 
94 


equip parents with resources. And, in July, the Center will publish sample policies to begin 

helping sport organizations implement policies and procedures to address topics like: limiting 

one-on-one interactions, electronic communications, travel, locker room safety and other 

important, organization-level prevention strategies to safeguard athletes. 

We are also proud to announce our Champions Program, which will seck out advocates and 

ambassadors for our organization. Our "champions" will have the opportunity to become 

engaged with sports communities by sharing their story, volunteering their time or getting 

involved in other ways. This will create a network of those in the community whether they are 

a current or former athlete or coach, trainer or public figure committed to ending abuse in sports. 

The more people we involve in creating a culture of transparency, safety and awareness, the 

closer we are to our goal. 

IV. In summary 

Promoting the safety and well-being of athletes is at the core of everything we do. And for the 

Center's work to be effective, it is imperative that moving forward we keep talking about 

accountability, education and prevention. 

Sports have the power to be an incredibly positive influence on the lives of participants. Our job 

is to ensure that athletes can enjoy the many benefits of sport, free from all forms of abuse, 

including sexual misconduct -- it is important work. 

I look forward to continuing the discussion on how we can work together to strengthen abuseprevention efforts through education, training and awareness. 

5 
95 

1The information has been retained in committee files and also is available at https:// 

docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=108356. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Ms. Pfohl. 

The Chair will now begin the questioning by the Members. And 

we are going to ask unanimous consent that the contents of the 

document binder be introduced into the record and to authorize 

staff to make any appropriate redactions. 

Without objection, the documents will be entered into the record 

with any redactions that staff determines are appropriate.1

Mr. HARPER. Ms. Lyons, if I may ask you some questions. 

Does the USOC see itself as responsible for overseeing and enforcing policies that keep athletes safe? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, I think that we do view ourselves as responsible. 

And I think if we have had a failing, it is that we have not adequately exercised our authority in that manner. 

Mr. HARPER. My question was, is that your responsibility? And 

you’ve answered yes. 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, I believe it is. 

Mr. HARPER. Is it a top priority for the USOC? 

Ms. LYONS. It is a top priority. 

Mr. HARPER. And I’m glad you said that and view it that way, 

but we’re all worried that it hasn’t always been the case. 

If you could look at the document binder that’s before you there 

and turn to Tab 1. 

In Tab 1 you’re going to see a Washington Post article dated February the 23rd of 2018. Do you see that? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, I do. 

Mr. HARPER. The article references a deposition in a 2016 lawsuit in which a Taekwondo athlete alleged that she was raped by 

her coach at the USOC’s Olympic Training Center. 

USOC’s lawyer, Gary Johansen, was asked whether protecting 

athletes from abuse was a top priority for the USOC. His response: 

‘‘The USOC does not have athletes.’’ 

Does the USOC believe that it has the authority to require NGBs 

to implement policies and procedures? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, I believe the act does grant us that authority. 

And I think a change we need to make is for us to exercise that 

authority more thoroughly. 

Mr. HARPER. The USOC provides NGBs with governance support, and in some instances the USOC has required changes to an 

NGB’s bylaws related to the act or the USOC’s bylaws. Is that correct? 

Ms. LYONS. That’s correct. 

Mr. HARPER. However, each NGB has their own governance 

structure and applicable bylaws and policies. Is that true? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, that is true. 

Mr. HARPER. As I mentioned in my opening statement, you can 

have all of the policies and procedures in the world, but if they’re 

not properly implemented, followed, or enforced, they’re not doing 

much good. 

The USOC engaged Baker Tilly to conduct audits of the USOC 

in all of the NGBs and high performance management organizations to assess their compliance with SafeSport policies and proceVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:07 Jan 16, 2019 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\115THCONGRESS\115X134USOC-NGB\115X134USOC-NGBWORKING WAYNE
96 

dures. The audit reports for each organization were issued last 

year in October 2017. Some of the organizations were found to be 

in compliance with the SafeSport policies and procedures and 

didn’t have any observations, but many were found to have deficiencies. 

Do you know how many audits found deficiencies? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes. In fact at that time the majority had deficiencies. However, I am pleased to say that virtually all are now 

in compliance. 

Mr. HARPER. Would it be fair to say that 43 NGBs had deficiencies? 

Ms. LYONS. That’s correct. 

Mr. HARPER. The audit of the USOC itself also found a number 

of deficiencies for USOC. If you could turn to Tab 2 in your notebook there. 

In Tab 2, you’ll see that audit. And these included a lack of guidance and specific requirements on anonymous or confidential reporting by survivors, training, and background checks, to name a 

few. 

Unlike the NGBs with deficiencies, however, there doesn’t appear 

to have been a follow-up audit of the USOC. Do you plan to conduct a follow-up audit? 

Ms. LYONS. Let me just have a moment to review this. 

Mr. HARPER. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. LYONS. Yes. Having looked at this, I think to any extent 

where we have deficiencies it is required that we should do exactly 

the same thing that we expect of the NGBs, we should have a follow-up audit and ensure that we are, ourselves, in compliance. 

Mr. HARPER. What ability does the USOC have to enforce policies 

and procedures? 

Ms. LYONS. I think the act grants us a great deal of authority. 

I think one of the areas that we most need to look at—and this 

is why we have introduced a governance review—is that we have 

two main levers, we can take away funding or we can decertify. 

Our main activity is to decide if an NGB is certified. 

Mr. HARPER. So you can decertify, you can put them on probation 

or you can withhold funds. 

Ms. LYONS. Correct. 

Mr. HARPER. Is that correct? 

Ms. LYONS. That is correct. 

Mr. HARPER. So you have a number of tools at your disposal. 

What circumstances would it take to warrant that the USOC 

take such action? What do you have to see? What would you have 

to see in behavior by an NGB to decertify or to withhold funds? 

What are you looking for? 

Ms. LYONS. We look for a number of things. They include the 

ability to manage effectively; and administratively we look for them 

to have appropriate financial controls. 

And in the recent years we have also added a very incredibly important requirement that they meet all of the SafeSport standards, 

that they have just implemented all the new language that is in 

the new legislation. 

97 

So we have increasingly added to our list of compliance that they 

must have these SafeSport protections, and we audit against that 

on a regular basis now. 

Mr. HARPER. My time has expired. 

The Chair will now recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee, Ms. DeGette, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I would like 

to follow up on your questioning. 

Ms. Lyons, I think that you testified there’s roughly 49 of these 

NGBs. And as we heard today, just from a representative sample, 

every group has their own governing principles. Is that correct? 

Ms. LYONS. That is correct. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And that’s probably why it is really important 

that we have an organization like the Center for SafeSport so they 

can have an overriding protocol for complaints of this nature. Isn’t 

that correct? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, I totally agree. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And that’s, in fact, one reason why the Center for 

SafeSport was founded in March of 2017, just a little over a year 

ago. Is that right? 

Ms. LYONS. That’s correct. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Now, I want to turn to you, Ms. Pfohl, because 

you testified that last year the Center for SafeSport had about 20 

to 30 complaints per month. This year it is 20 to 30 per week. And 

you have got about 800 reports pending right now. Is that right? 

Ms. PFOHL. No, ma’am. Thank you for the question. We have had 

over 800 total reports—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. I see. 

Ms. PFOHL [continuing]. To come in since we opened our doors. 

Ms. DEGETTE. In the roughly 14 months, you have had 800 reports. 

Ms. PFOHL. Correct, correct. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Now, in a May 17 submission to this committee 

SafeSport reported that the U.S. Olympic Committee provided $2.7 

million in 2017 and is going to provide roughly $3.1 million for 

2018 and $3.1 million for 2019, the same amount for 2019. Is that 

right? 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Now, getting back to your testimony, I think you 

had said, ever since the #MeToo movement—you told me this yesterday—ever since the #MeToo movement, the Center for SafeSport 

has seen the number of complaints skyrocket. Is that right? 

Ms. PFOHL. Definitely, between the #MeToo movement and the 

Nassar trial. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And the Nassar trial. 

Ms. PFOHL. We really saw an uptick. 

Ms. DEGETTE. It has really gone up this year. Is that right? 

Ms. PFOHL. Uh-huh. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And that’s probably a good thing, because people 

realize they can report and what you’re doing. Is that right? 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. DEGETTE. So you get money from the U.S. Olympic Committee for your funding. You also get money from the different 

98 

NGBs according to a schedule for how much they’re giving. Is that 

right? 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes. Each national governing body gives us an annual fee based on their size. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Now, what is your budget right now? 

Ms. PFOHL. Right now it is a little over $4.6 million. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And how many investigators do you have on staff. 

Ms. PFOHL. Internally we have five full-time investigators plus 

three additional support staff. We have seven external contracted 

investigators, as well. 

Ms. DEGETTE. So you have roughly 13. 

Ms. PFOHL. Twelve or 13. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Twelve or 13 people. Do you believe that’s sufficient with the increase in complaints to thoroughly investigate 

every complaint? 

Ms. PFOHL. No. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Mr. Hinchey, I want to talk to you for a minute, 

because I also spoke with you yesterday. Do you believe the Center 

for SafeSport has sufficient funding to be able to investigate all of 

these complaints that they’re getting? 

Mr. HINCHEY. I’m not familiar with their entire budget, but I 

think based on our experience right now they can certainly use 

more resources. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Now, over at your organization you give $50,000 

a year to Center for SafeSport, is that right, as part of your—— 

Mr. HINCHEY. Just under that, about 43,000. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And you would be willing to give more. Is that correct? 

Mr. HINCHEY. Absolutely. I think as one of the larger NGBs, and 

based on who we are, if we can provide more resources we absolutely will. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Now, Ms. Lyons, the U.S. Olympic Committee, according to the most recent tax filing, the organization’s revenues 

are in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Is that correct, Ms. 

Lyons? 

Ms. LYONS. That’s correct. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And so I want to ask you, are you committed to 

giving the full funding that SafeSport needs to be able to conduct 

thoroughly all the investigations of the many complaints they’re receiving? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes. And our board has said if they express additional need, we will certainly revisit that. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And, Ms. Pfohl, are you engaging outside evaluators to determine what kind of a budget that you really need to 

do a thorough investigation? 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes, we are. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And when do you expect that information? 

Ms. PFOHL. I would hope that we would, in the next 6 weeks, we 

would be able to come back and provide an estimate based on what 

we’re seeing now. 

Ms. DEGETTE. OK. Let me just say this committee is fully supportive of what your organization was established to do, and it appears that the entire community, athletic community is. 

99 

And so whatever money you need to actually do your work, 

please let us know and we will work with you and the USOC and 

all of the different organizations to make sure you get that. Because that’s really going to be critical to resolving all of the issues 

relating to these victims, and that’s what we want to do. 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HARPER. The Chair now recognizes Chairman Walden, the 

chair of the full Committee on Energy and Commerce, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Lyons, there appears to be a history of the USOC knowing 

about allegations of sexual abuse and doing nothing. 

Over the years, the USOC has taken a number of positions on 

how much authority it has to protect athletes. USOC officials have 

said they, quote, ‘‘don’t have athletes,’’ close quote, that the Ted 

Stevens Act doesn’t you the authority to mandate that the NGBs 

take action on this issue. 

As recently as 2016, USOC officials said in a deposition that they 

don’t have the authority to, quote, ‘‘do anything,’’ close quote, if the 

USOC was concerned about the safety of athletes. 

So I want to ask you a simple question: What precisely is the authority of the USOC when it comes to protecting athletes? 

Ms. LYONS. I think the act gives us a much broader authority 

than we have exercised in the past. 

Mr. WALDEN. So one of the concerns that the committee has 

heard repeatedly from survivors is that the USOC is more concerned about its own reputation, about medals and money, than it 

is about athlete safety. 

If you would please turn to Tab 3 in the binder, the exhibit binder. As you’re finding that, I’ll just mention this is a USOC policy 

document on athlete safety issued just last month. Tab 3. 

If you’ll turn to page 7 of Tab 3, there is a list of six items that 

a review panel of USOC officials will consider, quote/unquote, in 

deciding a complaint and imposing a sanction. 

Can you explain why one of the factors to consider is, and I 

quote, ‘‘the effect on the USOC’s reputation’’? 

Ms. LYONS. I have to admit to not having seen that before. And 

I have to say it does not belong on that list. 

Mr. WALDEN. OK. I appreciate that candor. 

This was not the only document produced to the committee that 

referenced the effect on the USOC’s reputation. There’s also similar 

language in the USOC SafeSport policy from June of 2017—that 

would be on Tab 4—and in the USOC’s training access protocol 

from 2011—Tab 5—when the USOC and NGBs would have still 

been responsible for handling complaints of sexual abuse. 

So I would encourage you to review those and act appropriately. 

Ms. LYONS. Thank you. We will. 

Mr. WALDEN. Ms. Pfohl, I’m heartened by the progress that’s 

been made since the creation of SafeSport last year, but I want to 

make sure that the reputation of the USOC or an NGB does not 

play a role in SafeSport decisions. 

According to SafeSport policies a factor, quote/unquote, relevant 

to determining an appropriate sanction is the, and I quote, ‘‘real or 

100 

perceived impact of the incident on the reporting party, NGBs, or 

USOC.’’ Tab 30, page 9. 

Again, why is the impact on the NGB or the USOC a factor in 

considering whether a SafeSport violation has occurred and whether to issue a sanction? That would be Tab 30 on page 9. 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you, sir. Thank you for the question. 

I believe what this is referencing is that if conduct is such that 

it reflects poorly on the sport and those that support the sport, 

then that can be used in terms of making an appropriate sanction. 

Meaning that conduct, poor conduct—— 

Mr. WALDEN. I understand. 

Ms. PFOHL [continuing]. And its poor reflection on the sport matters. 

Mr. WALDEN. I would just say that, you know, we do a lot of legislating around here, and words matter. And what you think they 

are and what I think they are, 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 years from now 

somebody may go, ‘‘Oh, well, if we do that, that might reflect poorly 

on the organization if word gets out.’’ 

And I would just caution all of you that, I understand what you 

may think it is, but you better be darn well clear that the patient’s 

safety comes first. And I think that’s where you’re headed. I respect that. But it clearly was not where we were in the past. 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes, absolutely. We will absolutely look at that verbiage. And make no mistake, we work for athletes. That’s who we 

work for. 

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I’ll yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentlewoman from Florida, Ms. 

Castor, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. CASTOR. Thank you, Chairman Harper. 

I want to focus on whether the culture of winning above all else 

increases the risk of athlete abuse. But first let me say, it is horrendous that it has taken a scandal of such epic proportions where 

hundreds of girls in U.S. Gymnastics were abused by a doctor to 

get to this point. 

Ms. Lyons, according to The Washington Post, a U.S. Olympic 

Committee attorney was deposed in 2016. When asked about the 

Olympic Committee’s priorities, he stated, ‘‘The USOC has a lot of 

priorities. Chief among them is sending athletes to the Olympic, 

Pan American, and Paralympic Games, and doing well at those 

games.’’ 

When asked whether protecting athletes was also a priority, this 

lawyer reportedly said, ‘‘The USOC doesn’t have athletes,’’ implying that the Olympic Committee is not responsible for athlete welfare. 

You’re familiar with these remarks, correct? 

Ms. LYONS. I am familiar with them. 

Ms. CASTOR. So I firmly believe, as many do, that the Olympic 

Committee has a responsibility to protect the health and welfare of 

athletes. 

In February you released a statement outlining seven steps you 

intend to take to ensure a safe sports environment, including an 

effort to, quote, ‘‘implement a culture change at USA Gymnastics.’’ 

101 

What do you mean by this culture change? You have given us 

some specifics, but tell us really what you see, what does the future 

hold. 

Ms. LYONS. Well, first I would like to say that, you know, in 

terms of performance, we believe that performance and safety go 

hand-in-hand. We don’t believe that athletes can perform at their 

best unless they are in a safe, respectful, and supportive training 

environment and competitive environment. 

In terms of what we need to change in the culture—and I think 

it is across the entire movement, not just within gymnastics, and 

Ms. Perry is doing a lot of work within her own organization—we 

have to, first of all, put that safety much more front and center. 

Ms. CASTOR. Because it seems like in the past it has been a culture of protect the coach and not protect the athlete. For example, 

why hasn’t it been the policy and will it be the policy of actually 

referring these cases and complaints to local law enforcement when 

they happen? 

Ms. LYONS. Well, it is now the law that those types of cases must 

be remanded to local law enforcement, and anyone who does not do 

so is violating Federal law. It is critically important that—— 

Ms. CASTOR. How have you communicated that to all of the organizations? 

Ms. LYONS. All of the organizations have received that. They 

have all made the changes within their own bylaws and other materials. They now are all required to be under the jurisdiction of 

the Center and also to report to law enforcement. 

Ms. CASTOR. Ms. Pfohl, this culture change is a key part of 

SafeSport’s mission. You outlined specific steps that SafeSport is 

taking to make this happen. It is clearly needed. 

Much of what we’re hearing today sounds good, but I’m worried 

that we do not have a way to know whether things will actually 

get better. 

One of the concerns is whether or not SafeSport is actually independent. What can you tell us to assure us that you’re acting independently and moving away from the culture of protect the coach, 

protect the organization, to a protect the athlete. 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you for the question, Representative. 

We have an independent, nine-person board of directors that 

need meet a high standard of independence. They have subject 

matter expertise. They come from an ethics compliance world, some 

of them, and the like. So they hold us to a high standard. 

I can tell you that our investigators are the same. When we take 

on a case in a report we do that in an independent, confidential, 

and professional manner, and we act accordingly. 

Ms. CASTOR. So one of the issues in the workplace, but I’m sure 

it applies here, is retaliation, that you’ll have an athlete that will 

come forward with a complaint but the organization or the coach 

then may hear about it some way or there might be rumors and 

then they don’t get to compete. 

What is being done to address retaliation and make sure that the 

athletes are protected from it? 

Ms. PFOHL. Again, thank you for the question. 

Retaliation is a violation of the SafeSport code and is subject to 

sanction. And the new law, the Protecting Young Victims and Safe 

102 

Sport Authorization Act, puts some teeth into that and provides 

further protections for those coming forward, both reporting parties 

or the victims themselves, the survivors, as well as witnesses. 

Ms. CASTOR. And then what do you say about referrals to local 

law enforcement? What are you saying when a parent or an athlete 

comes forward with a very serious complaint? Are you referring 

those to local law enforcement immediately? 

Ms. PFOHL. Absolutely. We are mandatory reporters, so we immediately call law enforcement if they haven’t already been called. 

We are double checking to make sure that they are called. 

And of course, we let the law enforcement process play out. We 

work collaboratively at all levels, if you will, with law enforcement, 

from the FBI to local law enforcement. And then we look at whether a breach of the SafeSport code took place. 

Ms. CASTOR. Thank you very much. 

You all set the standard for youth sports and development across 

the country, and we have high expectations for you to implement 

this culture change. And we’re going to get back to you and keep 

an eye, as well. 

And I yield back. Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Texas, the 

chairman emeritus, Mr. Barton, 5 minutes. 

Mr. BARTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to thank each of you for participating voluntarily in this 

hearing. We have lots of hearings, but not many are as sensitive 

and important as this one. 

Normally I just ask questions extemporaneously, but because of 

the gravity of the situation I’m actually going to basically read 

from some prepared questions because it is so important. And I’m 

going to basically ask the same question toe three of you. 

The first question is to Susanne Lyons. The committee has asked 

all 48 NGBs to provide, and I quote, ‘‘detailed data to demonstrate 

the number of reports, complaints, or allegations of sexual abuse 

made to the NGB and the handling of that information,’’ end quote. 

Almost every NGB has responded in some fashion that they have 

not always tracked such information, the report, complaint, or allegations. 

Ms. Lyons, does it concern you that the NGBs apparently have 

not always tracked such information about complaints of sexual 

abuse? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, that’s a concern. And I will point out that there 

was no rule and is no rule at the moment that they have to report 

it to us, as well. They do have to report it to the Center, and we 

are now getting reports from the Center. 

Mr. BARTON. Why does not or did not the USOC require such information, each NGB to track and monitor this type of information? 

Ms. LYONS. I think the way we operated with the NGBs in the 

past was different. There was much more autonomy, and we did 

not exercise the authority that I think the act gives us. I think 

that’s one of the reasons we’re putting together a governance review that I am sure will result in us having a much better feedback 

loop and us following up on those things. 

103 

Mr. BARTON. Are you now requiring that such information be 

tracked? 

Ms. LYONS. We will be. We are not yet, but we will be. 

Mr. BARTON. When is your timetable to do that? 

Ms. LYONS. Our governance review is in the process of getting 

rolling, and I am absolutely certain that’s one of the very first 

things that will occur. 

Mr. BARTON. Next question is to Kerry Perry—which, by the 

way, that’s a nice name, Kerry Perry. 

I understand that you are still trying to compile data so you can 

provide the committee with the aggregate number of reports, complaints, or allegations made to USA Gymnastics. 

Can you please explain why it is taking so long to provide the 

committee with the aggregate number of complaints that USA 

Gymnastics has received regarding sexual misconduct? 

Ms. PERRY. Yes, sir. 

So since I started in December one of the first things I looked 

at—and to your point, it is very concerning—what type of reports 

have been made, looking at a history. And, unfortunately, what I 

have discovered was that there wasn’t a lot of great data. 

I can’t answer to that. But what I can tell you is, since the last 

several months, we have embarked on a journey to really find a 

really good database for tracking and really keeping internally 

records of everything that is either investigated by the Center, sent 

to the Center, or going through the process at USA Gymnastics. 

What I can tell you is that, as of January of this year through 

April, USA Gymnastics had approximately 275 cases. Of that 275, 

about 78 went to the Center for sexual abuse. 

I can also tell you that we have recently signed a contract with 

a vendor, in fact, the same that the Center is using, because for 

me it was needed information, and I wanted to make sure that we 

took care of that immediately. 

Mr. BARTON. When do you think your new system is going to be 

fully implemented? 

Ms. PERRY. We are in the implementation phase right now, and 

so we believe in the next 2 months. But in the meantime we are 

tracking all of the allegations that are coming through in a database that has been created internally. 

Mr. BARTON. My last question is for Mr. McNally. 

In your response letter your organization has admitted it has 

failed to fully comply with track information about allegations of 

sexual abuse, including oral reports. What type of complaints, if 

any, did Taekwondo track? 

Mr. MCNALLY. So the reports that I found are the ones that generally went through the hearing process. There’s very little information of anything that didn’t proceed to that stage. 

Mr. BARTON. So what’s Taekwondo’s effort right now to compile 

this information, to track it, and to follow up on it? 

Mr. MCNALLY. So since I took over we’re keeping our own internal database. But we also were proactively reached out to the 

USOC to see if they were interested in working with us to develop 

a more centralized case tracking. We spoke to that chief information officer, and one of their analysts is working on—— 

Mr. BARTON. So it is an active item? 

104 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes, very much so, yes. We really need more historical information, but we also need to make sure that nothing 

ever slips through the cracks again. 

Mr. BARTON. Thank you for your discretion, Mr. Chairman. I 

yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The Chair will now recognize the ranking member 

of the full committee, Mr. Pallone, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

All my questions are of Ms. Pfohl, and I’m going to try to get 

through them quickly, if I can. 

I understand that since 2017 the U.S. Center for SafeSport has 

been responsible for investigating all complaints involving sexual 

misconduct. So, Ms. Pfohl, I’m glad that you’re here today so we 

can learn exactly how SafeSport operates. 

My first question is, if you would briefly walk me through what 

happens when SafeSport receives a complaint from an athlete. I 

know this probably varies based on the type of complaint. But generally speaking, what takes place? 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you for the question, Representative Pallone. 

So when a call or if a report comes in through our Web site, however it comes in, it can be an email, it can be anonymously, it could 

be a third party, we are immediately triaging those reports. Obviously what we look for is, do we need to call law enforcement? So 

is sexual abuse of a minor part of that report? We immediately call 

law enforcement if that’s the case. 

At the same time we are also looking at, is someone in harm’s 

way? And if we feel like that’s the case, then we will immediately 

impose an interim measure or an interim suspension. 

From there, the investigation continues with a qualified investigator that is versed in trauma-informed investigations. And we are 

of course talking to the reporting party as well as the responding 

party or the alleged individual for which the report is on. 

From there, again, collecting information from them, collecting 

information from witnesses. Sometimes there are a lot of witnesses. 

Sometimes not. So that impacts the length of the investigation. 

Mr. PALLONE. How long does it take for you to complete an investigation typically? 

Ms. PFOHL. It depends. It depends on all of those factors. How 

many investigations? Are there more than one reporting party? 

How far back does it go? All of those things weigh in. 

We’re averaging 63 days right now from start to finishing, average. Some are much longer, some are shorter. 

Mr. PALLONE. Now, who has the final say on how case is resolved? 

Ms. PFOHL. We have a director or of investigations and decisions, 

that once our investigators do their work—and by the way, we deal 

in facts, so we have a fair process whereby the facts are gathered. 

Those facts go in the form of a report to the director of investigations. He is determining whether a breach of the SafeSport code 

took place. 

If a breach took place, then a sanction is administered. And that 

sanction could be anything from a warning to a permanent ineligibility. And there are options for hearings and arbitration both at 

the interim measure as well as the sanctioning stage. 

105 

Mr. PALLONE. I don’t know if I’m going to get through all this, 

but you mentioned referral to law enforcement. For example, Mr. 

McNally’s written testimony describes challenges that U.S. 

Taekwondo faced when it reported cases to law enforcement, such 

as being told that law enforcement does not even want a target to 

know that he or she is being investigated. 

So let me ask you, what steps can SafeSport take to protect athletes while law enforcement is investigating a case? And does 

SafeSport take steps to keep athletes informed of the status of an 

investigation when law enforcement is involved? 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you. That’s an important question. 

Absolutely. So we would work with law enforcement. And it is 

true, depending on the case, the law enforcement agent or agency 

may want us to not work on the investigation formally. 

However, we have the obligation to protect athletes, so we would 

work with them, let them know that, look, we need to put in an 

interim measure so that athletes are protected. And athlete safety 

comes first. 

Mr. PALLONE. All right. Let me just skip over, because I wanted 

to ask one more thing, and probably all I have time for. 

I understand the type of complaints that SafeSport manages requires a complete investigative process, but the concern is that 

some people might not understand how this process works and that 

this lack of understanding may keep some individuals from coming 

forward. 

So what steps has SafeSport taken to explain to athletes how 

this process works? And do you believe that all the sports governing bodies and athletes have a complete understanding of your 

authority and how your investigative process works so that they 

would actually not hesitate to come forward? 

Ms. PFOHL. Right. I think we’re still in the stage of getting the 

word out and building trust among really the 13 million individuals 

that are part of the Olympic and Paralympic movements, absolutely. 

But we’re doing that through our prevention work as well, the 

online training, our education. I’ll say the USOC has helped us 

with a couple of PSAs that are now being shown on national television and at events. 

So we’re looking to continue these sorts of partnerships with all 

of the national governing bodies and the USOC because they have 

direct access to all of their members. So we’re working on information that’s on their Web site. We have got to make that consistent 

across all of the NGBs. And that’s being worked out right now. 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair would like to welcome to the dais Congressman Doug 

Lamborn, who is from Colorado Springs, Colorado. 

Glad to have you. 

And the Chair will recognize the vice chairman—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. His district includes the U.S. Olympic Committee. 

Mr. HARPER. In Colorado Springs, absolutely. 

And so the Chair will recognize the vice chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Griffith, for 5 minutes. 

106 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Lyons, if you’ll turn to Tab 7, you will see the recommendations from the United States Olympic Committee’s 2010 Working 

Group for Safe Training Environments. 

What specific events led to the creation of the working group in 

2010? 

Ms. LYONS. The working group really was created in the aftermath of many of the swimming allegations that came out in 2010. 

And while that NGB began to work on their own issues, we developed a working group to look more broadly across the whole system. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you. 

And in response to the 2010 working group’s recommendations, 

the USOC launched SafeSport in 2012. Then in 2013 the USOC established a SafeSport Working Group, and the 2013 working group 

recommended that case management for sexual misconduct cases 

should be consolidated under a new independent entity with an 

independent board of directors. 

As you will see in Tab 8, the USOC approved the creation of the 

U.S. Center for SafeSport in 2014. The Center, however, was not 

launched until March 3, 2017. 

Tell me why it took 7 years since the working group was created 

and nearly 3 years from the USOC approving the U.S. Center for 

SafeSport until that Center was launched. 

Ms. LYONS. First, let me say it did take too long. There are some 

reasons why it took a while, funding being one, insurance issues 

being another, very complicated, and trying to get all of the national governing bodies to do the earlier steps that preceded the 

Center, which was to put in some mandatory requirements and to 

get them in compliance. 

But, frankly, it took too long, and we regret that it did not open 

sooner. It may have saved some of the tragedy that occurred. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Given that it took so long to get the Center started, did the USOC handle any cases of sexual misconduct for the 

national governing bodies or assist those NGBs prior to the Center’s launch in March of 2017? 

Ms. LYONS. There is a sort of an escalation process, and at times 

if an issue could not be resolved within a national governing body 

it can then come be escalated up to the USOC. And there were a 

number of cases that we would become involved in during that 

time, as well. It is far superior for it to go to an independent body 

as it does today. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. All right. So let me ask you this. Would those 

cases, if something happened and somebody was banned or there 

was disciplinary action, show up on the Center’s Web site where 

you can go check to see if somebody has been disciplined? 

Ms. LYONS. I think that our banned lists are very incomplete 

today. And I’m very glad you brought it up, because it is one of the 

first things we need to do. We have to have consistency against the 

NGBs collecting that information. To the extent that we have 

cases, we have to collect it. It all needs to be ultimately put together in one database where everyone will have transparency to 

it. That does not exist today. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. All right. 

107 

Keeping with that, Mr. Hinchey, the work that you all did, you 

all actually started in 2010 and worked with SafeSport before the 

Center was opened up. Are your cases in a database where people 

can go search? If so, they can see who has been banned? Or have 

you given that information to the Center and you can search it 

there? 

Mr. HINCHEY. We have a banned list that is published on our 

Web site. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. OK. I appreciate that. 

Back to you, Ms. Lyons. I just wanted to get that one in. Is the 

U.S. Center for SafeSport now functional as a completely independent entity or does the U.S. Center for SafeSport rely on the 

USOC and/or the NGBs for any investigational purposes? 

Ms. LYONS. The Center is not relying on us for investigational 

purposes. We are assisting with the funding, as you know, but they 

are indeed an independent body. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. So your role at this point is just funding? 

Ms. LYONS. Funding, and also help and advise on broader issues. 

They are in their growth stage, just as when we started 

USADA—— 

Mr. GRIFFITH. But not investigative? 

Ms. LYONS. Not investigating. We have no role in that. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Hinchey, I’m going to shift to you. You indicated in your oral statement that 90-plus individuals have been 

banned from USA Swimming for sexual misconduct-related violations since the inception of your SafeSport program in the fall of 

2010. Is that accurate? Did I understand that correctly? 

Mr. HINCHEY. Yes, that’s correct. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. All right. And how have USA Swimming’s policies 

and procedures changed regarding how you handle sexual misconduct claims since the U.S. Center for SafeSport was launched 

in 2017? 

Mr. HINCHEY. Over the course of that transition, which started 

July 1 of last year, there have been 75 complaints that have gone 

straight to the U.S. Center for SafeSport from our governing body. 

But they now handle the adjudication, they handle the initial complaints, but we’re here to support it in any way we can. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. All right. You have heard concerns from Ms. Lyons 

in how long it took since you all were involved at USA Swimming 

in the creation of the U.S. Center for SafeSport and started your 

own program in 2010. Were you all concerned about the amount of 

time it took to launch the U.S. Center for SafeSport? 

Mr. HINCHEY. Clearly it should have been started earlier. Having 

said that, we also take responsibility for our own problems. And, 

you know, regardless of whatever time it took it to get the independent group going, which we do think is great and we want to 

support it, these are still our problems, and we need to step up and 

take responsibility. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. I appreciate that. Both you and I are swimmers 

and we love the sport, and there’s a lot of positives we’re not going 

over today. And I wish I could tell countless stories of people who 

have benefited from these programs, but we have got to take care 

of the problems, too. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

108 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize Mr. Tonko for 5 minutes. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

And thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. 

Routine audits are essential to promote athlete safety and to ensure that athlete safety policies are implemented correctly. 

Last year the Olympic Committee retained consulting firm Baker 

Tilly to conduct an audit of the U.S. Olympic Committee and all 

national governing bodies to assess their implementation of the 

new SafeSport requirements. Rick Adams, the committee’s chief of 

Paralympic sports and national governing body organizational development, told the Senate judiciary committee last year that they 

were unique one-time audits. 

Ms. Lyons, the October 2017 audit recommended that the Olympic Committee address 10 areas in need of improvement. I believe 

they’re referenced in exhibit 2. Very briefly, what did you learn 

from having those audits conducted and implementing these recommendations? Was it a useful process? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, it’s a very useful process, and I think audits will 

be a bigger part of what we do going forward. 

What we learned—and part of this was as we were putting in 

new processes and procedures—is that it is—all NGBs are different. Some have better capabilities to very quickly adopt change, 

others require more help. 

I am glad to say that all of the NGBs that had deficiencies 

through that audit process have now come up to standard. And we 

will be repeating that audit process on a rotating basis to ensure 

that we continue compliance. 

Mr. TONKO. OK. And as part of this audit work they found that 

two of our witnesses today, USA Volleyball and USA Taekwondo, 

had areas where they needed to enhance the design of their systems and make recommendations on how they could do so. So the 

value of these audits is clear. 

Going forward, I believe it is important to regularly assess 

SafeSport policies and their implementation to ensure that they are 

effective in their protecting of the athletes. 

So I want to ask you, Ms. Pfohl, if her organization plans to undertake regular performance audits to ensure it is meeting the 

needs of the massive sporting organizing it is now charged with 

protecting. 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you for the question. 

The new legislation, the Protecting Young Victims and Safe 

Sport Authorization Act, calls on the Center to perform regular and 

random audits of the NGBs. And so, yes, we intend to do that, resources permitting. 

Mr. TONKO. And, Ms. Pfohl, again, what is the Center for 

SafeSport doing to assess how effective SafeSport policies are in reducing the likelihood of abuse? 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you for that question, as well. 

We actually have now an outside consultant, a firm coming in actually to go through the cases that we have already closed to determine if there’s something that we missed, is there something that 

we could have done better. 

109 

So already in our—just over our first year we’re already doing a 

look back and saying, ‘‘OK, how did we do?’’ 

So we’ll continue to do that. We’ll continue to look at policies. We 

are always looking for best practices, and when we see best practices and new policies that need to be put into place we will do so. 

Mr. TONKO. And do you plan to have regular performance audits 

of SafeSport’s performance? 

Ms. PFOHL. Absolutely. 

Mr. TONKO. OK. And do you believe that you have sufficient resources to periodically audit how well the SafeSport system is performing? 

Ms. PFOHL. I would say that our resources are limited in that 

area in terms of self-audits, if you will. But our goal, and I know 

it is a high priority for our board, we will find the resources to be 

able to do it. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. 

And finally, do you plan to have regular audits done of the sports 

governing bodies to ensure that they are implementing their 

SafeSport policies going forward? 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes, sir. As I mentioned, that is called for in the Safe 

Sport Authorization Act. 

Mr. TONKO. And then to any of the panel, beyond audits, what 

can be done to protect the athlete? 

Mr. HINCHEY. I think from my perspective, Congressman, that 

we need to empower the athletes. We need to hear their voices. We 

need to get them involved in the process. And that’s something we 

hadn’t done at the start of our process, but something we’ve 

learned over the last 8 years, and we intend to do that coming forward. 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Hinchey, that’s a good point, and thank you. 

And how would we do that? What’s the structure by which to empower their voices? 

Mr. HINCHEY. We need to invite them to be part of the process. 

And right now, as an example, for us, we started a working group 

that’s a combination of some athletes, Olympic athletes, local 

coaches, board members, six women and five men, to start to really 

vet where we have been and where we need to go. 

Mr. TONKO. Does anyone else want to add to that statement? 

Ms. LYONS. I would like to add that I think we’re focusing a lot 

on the aftermath of abuse. I think one of the most important things 

we can do is education that prevents abuse. 

And much of the Centers’ charge going forward is that education, 

which goes beyond the NGBs and their members. It goes down to 

every gym and every dojo in America where a 6-year-old is training. 

We need to enlist the Boys and Girls Clubs and all the other organizations and get parents educated so that people know earlier 

how to spot these signs of grooming and signs that may lead to 

abuse so that we can stop these cases before they occur. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you so much. 

And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize Dr. Burgess for 5 minutes. 

110 

Mr. BURGESS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Chairman, let 

me just say I have been on this subcommittee for a long time, along 

with a couple of other members, and this has been one of the most 

difficult hearings to research and prepare for. And I appreciate so 

much everyone participating today, because it’s so important that 

we get it right. 

Mr. Griffith referenced the positive aspects that, unfortunately, 

we’re not really able to spotlight today because of the nature of the 

hearing. I have a university in my district, Texas Woman’s University, my staff handed me a newspaper article from last month, 

April 16: Texas Woman’s University secured the program’s 11th 

USA Gymnastics Collegiate national title on Saturday and registered the highest score ever seen in the championship. 

Clearly, you all are in this for the athletes, and that’s for the 

right reason, because the benefits returned from these programs 

are significant for the athletes themselves, their families, clearly 

their colleges, their universities, and the communities where they 

reside. So I don’t want to lose sight of that fact even though what 

we’re looking into is just astonishing in how difficult it is. 

So as someone with a medical background one of the things that 

has just been very difficult for me is how a medical professional 

has caused all of this damage. And this individual was licensed in 

the State of Michigan, but not in the State of Texas. And under our 

current laws, States are responsible for licensing the people who 

provide medical care within their borders. 

So, Ms. Lyons and Ms. Perry, I guess my question is to you. And 

I’ll ask you, Ms. Pfohl, the same thing. 

This individual, not licensed in Texas, was providing services, 

care, whatever he did, at the Karolyi Ranch in Texas, not licensed 

by the State of Texas. So how do you go about ensuring that physicians that are taking care of your athletes are compliant with licensing obligations? 

And, Ms. Lyons, I guess we’ll start with you and then we’ll go 

to Ms. Perry. 

Ms. LYONS. Well, I think that’s one reason we want to embark 

upon our— why we have our independent investigation from Ropes 

& Gray underway, to find out actually how some of these gaps in 

the systems occurred. 

There are supposed to be background checks. There’s supposed to 

be medical certification checks. I may have to defer to my colleague. The national governing bodies are responsible for the licensing of their own physicians, but those checks are meant to happen. And I think the investigation will help us understand if they 

did or did not and why. 

Mr. BURGESS. And we see what a serious breach this was when 

this didn’t happen in this case. 

And, Ms. Perry, I guess that when an individual signs on to a 

training program at a ranch like this, I mean, presumably there’s 

some type of consent that is entered into. Is that not correct? 

Ms. PERRY. First, I want to say it is horrific. And, you know, 

every day that I wake up I think about how do we make sure as 

an entity that we are doing everything we can to protect our athletes. That’s why I took this position in December. 

111 

And so one of the things that we are looking at, as Ms. Lyons 

talked about, was finding out the facts that could have led up to 

such a horrible situation. 

And so having the Ropes & Gray independent investigation is 

very important to us, and it is very important to me, to learn, so 

that we can make sure that we go down the right path. 

One of the things that I looked at immediately was that I did not 

want our athletes to ever return to a place where they had abuse. 

So as you all know, we closed the ranch. 

Mr. BURGESS. Thank you. 

Ms. PERRY. That was very important. 

But on a go-forward, I think it really does make a big difference 

that as a national governing body we look at everything—we look 

at our structure, we look at our policies, we look at our systems, 

we look at our medical—and we hold ourselves to the highest 

standard. Because, ultimately, we represent and we advocate our 

athletes, and I am committed to that every day. 

Mr. BURGESS. So, I mean, just to point out the obvious here, 

though, you had an unlicensed physician taking care of people. I 

don’t know if the parents of these children were apprised of the 

fact: Here’s a physician who is not licensed in the State of Texas 

who is going to be participating in the training program. It is 

wrong on so many levels, and, unfortunately, now we see the consequences of that. 

And I guess I just have to ask, I mean, who paid for this doctor? 

Was it something the parents had to pay for? Did the ranch pay 

for it? Who was responsible for paying for this? 

Ms. PERRY. From my understanding, he was a volunteer, but he 

was paid expenses. I believe everybody knows he was an employee 

of Michigan State, but he was a volunteer for USA Gymnastics. 

Mr. BURGESS. OK. All right. 

Well, Mr. Chairman, I have got so many more questions, and I 

will submit them for the record. 

Mr. Davis, I really thank you for your testimony today. It underscores the point of how important it is that we get this right. We 

can think we have got it right, and then it turns out we didn’t get 

it right, and then years later you have to continue to deal with the 

problems from not getting it right. It is important that we be right 

on this. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll yield back. 

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentlewoman from Illinois, Ms. 

Schakowsky, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you. 

I just want to begin with a statement about your testimony, Mr. 

Davis. I’m from the Chicago area. And I think it is just shocking 

that Rick Butler, after being banned for abusing underage girls, appealed that lifetime ban and was reinstated. It is just incredible. 

And that it wasn’t until January of 2018, this year, that there is 

a lifetime ban. This really underscores the problem that has occurred over so many years. 

Anyone in this room, I think, certainly the women know, if someone has abused underage girls, reinstating him is so unacceptable. 

112 

He should have been in jail. And now, in today’s, world I think he 

would have. I hope he would have. 

Let me just turn to—I would like to recognize Arlene Limas in 

the audience. 

If you would stand, Arlene, if she is still here. 

Arlene is an Olympic athlete and taekwondo coach, and we met 

about 2 months ago and she shared with me chilling stories about 

sexual abuse at training camps and competitions. 

Mr. McNally, last year three of your athletes were awarded $60 

million in damages—a total of—after a judge found that a coach 

sexually abused them. You’re familiar with that, correct? 

Could you say into the mike? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes, I am. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you. 

Taekwondo also allegedly permitted an athlete and a coach to 

participate in the 2016 Olympics even though there were unresolved sexual misconduct allegations against them. SafeSport finally recommended an interim ban against those individuals just 

this year. 

Are you familiar with this matter, as well? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes, I am. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. In the case of John Lopez, you mentioned multiple investigations and attempts to ban Mr. Lopez in 2013 and 

2015. But my understanding is that these efforts were unrelated to 

sexual abuse. Is that true? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes. That’s correct. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. And the topic of this hearing, by the way, is 

about sexual abuse. And isn’t it also true that it wasn’t until 2018 

that Mr. Lopez was sanctioned for sexual misconduct? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes. That’s correct. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. OK. I think that identifies a problem here. 

Your March 21, 2018, letter to this committee indicated that 

there are roughly two dozen individuals facing suspensions or lifetime bans from your sport. Were any of these reported to law enforcement? 

Mr. MCNALLY. I believe yes. Some of them actually came from 

law enforcement through cases where they were charged. As soon 

as they were charged they were suspended. Some of them went to 

prison and were added through there. 

I don’t know about every case historically, but since I took over, 

and even earlier than that, since the incorporation of the SafeSport 

Center, every case has been—with a criminal element—has been 

turned over to law enforcement. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I would like to know how many of the roughly 

two dozen have been referred to law enforcement? 

Mr. MCNALLY. So that’s something—— 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. You’ll get that to me, right? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes, I will. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. OK. 

Mr. McKinley, how is it that U.S. Taekwondo addressing—how 

is Taekwondo addressing the assistant coaches and team managers 

that may have had a role in covering up sexual abuse in your 

sport? 

113 

Mr. MCNALLY. Every report that we get, every report that is submitted to us, is immediately submitted to the U.S. Center for 

SafeSports. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I’m asking a different question. If there are individuals within the sport that are silent, that are covering up, 

that don’t tell you. Because I think probably for every one of these 

cases of sexual abuse someone knew about it and didn’t say anything. 

So what is the process there? 

Mr. MCNALLY. So we are looking to, as Mr. Hinchey said, to empower the athletes. We’re launching our #notinmysport campaign 

to encourage athletes to come forward. We are much more open, I 

believe, at regaining the trust of the athlete community. They 

know that I will deal with this if it comes to me. And I would encourage anybody with one of those stories who has been silent up 

until now—— 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. What about the coach community, too? There’s 

assistant coaches, there’s all kind of staff. 

Mr. MCNALLY. Anybody who has knowledge of anything, however 

small, however serious, I encourage them to bring it to me. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I’m still asking a different question. What if 

you know that there have been people that have been silent that 

knew of these abuses, is there any sanction at all? 

Mr. MCNALLY. We deal with every report that comes to us. That 

is why in 2015 USA Taekwondo preceded the independent body of 

the SafeSport Center by appointing our—— 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I guess I’ll have to ask the question more precisely in writing, because my time is up. But it seems to me that 

whether it’s reported or not, that you ought to do inquiries to find 

out who has stood by and watched sexual abuse occur. 

And I have to yield back. Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentlewoman from Indiana, 

Mrs. Brooks, who is also the chair of the Ethics Committee in the 

House. 

Mrs. Brooks. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Pfohl, I’d like to focus a number of my questions on you. 

If you would turn to Tab 9, it talks about the Center receiving 

488 written and oral reports, complaints, and allegations regarding 

sexual abuse since the Center launched until April 13, 2018. 

Now, this is a significant number of cases. I’m also a former U.S. 

Attorney, Federal prosecutor involved in child exploitation cases 

and so forth. 

Given the significant number of cases that your Center has received, how is the Center prioritizing cases in any way, if you are? 

And I have a number of questions, and so if we could be brief, 

and we may ask for more answers in written form. 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you, Congresswoman. 

We triage the cases as they come in.Again, if they need to go to 

law enforcement, that happens. We’re inputting interim measures. 

If individuals are active, if it involves a minor, those are 

prioritized. 

114 

Mrs. BROOKS. And can you please share with us in Tab 9 that, 

as we have already heard, the allegations come from 35 of the 48 

NGBs, and how are you working with the NGBs to make sure— 

and athletes, as we have talked about, the priority in athletes—to 

make sure that they are familiar that SafeSport—that the Center 

exists and the policies and procedures? I know the NGBs do, but 

how do we make sure that athletes know you exist? 

Ms. PFOHL. Great question. Thank you again. 

By the way, I think we’re up to 38 of the sports now, the NGBs 

sports. 

So how we do that—— 

Mrs. BROOKS. Thirty-eight of the 48 have allegations? 

Ms. PFOHL. Thirty-eight, correct, have at least one report that we 

have received, at least one report. 

So, again, we work with the NGBs. We have now a full-time 

NGB resources manager, and her job, every day, all day, is to communicate back and forth with the NGBs to give them consistent information. 

To listen to them also, for them to tell us what they need. For 

example, we heard they needed parent toolkits. We have a parent 

toolkit now on our Web site that anyone can access. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Are any of the NGBs not cooperating with you? 

Ms. PFOHL. No, ma’am. 

Mrs. BROOKS. And I understand NGBs are various sizes and 

have various—— 

Ms. PFOHL. Resources, yes. 

Mrs. BROOKS. And various resources. But it is fair to say that all 

NGBs today are cooperating with you? 

Ms. PFOHL. To the best of my knowledge, every NGB is cooperating. 

Mrs. BROOKS. In the 2018 omnibus Congress established a grant 

program to help keep our young athletes safe. Have the Attorney 

General and the Justice Department, to your knowledge, set up the 

grant program yet and established the timing and content of the 

application of that grant? 

Ms. PFOHL. Ma’am, we have not seen the RFP come out, the 

guidance come out yet regarding that grant program, but we look 

forward to it. 

Mrs. BROOKS. And it was a $2.5 million grant program, is my understanding? 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes. Yes, ma’am. 

Mrs. BROOKS. If the Center for SafeSport were to apply for this 

grant, and we will be making inquiries as to what is taking time 

to establish this grant program authorized by Congress and passed 

in the omnibus, how would those grant funds be used if Center for 

SafeSport were to receive those funds? 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you for the question. 

Absolutely. To expand our response, meaning our response and 

resolution. To be able to add more investigators. Also remember, 

the bill did call for us to do regular and random audits of the 

NGBs, again, so that we can further work and get the word out 

through them to the athletes, directly to athletes. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Have the audits begun yet? 

Ms. PFOHL. No. 

115 

Mrs. BROOKS. And why is that? 

Ms. PFOHL. We don’t have the resources to do the audits yet. 

Mrs. BROOKS. And have you made any requests yet of the USOC 

or of the NGBs for more resources? 

Ms. PFOHL. Not—no, ma’am, not since the doubling of the support from the USOC. We are, of course, now looking to 2019 and 

looking at the contributions from all of the national governing bodies. 

And thanks, Tim, for stepping up and saying you could do more. 

Mrs. BROOKS. There is no statute of limitations. I want to get 

that out, as well. 

Ms. PFOHL. Correct, correct. 

Mrs. BROOKS. You mentioned there are no statute of limitations 

with regard to the reporting. 

Ms. PFOHL. Correct. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Or with regard to your investigations. 

Ms. PFOHL. Correct. 

Mrs. BROOKS. And there has been some criticism with respect to 

the independence. I would like for you to tell us what is the Center 

doing to ensure athletes can trust the Center’s independence and 

reporting of these allegations. 

Ms. PFOHL. Absolutely. So thank you again. 

I don’t answer to anyone at the USOC or any of the national governing bodies, nor does anyone on my team. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Do you expect the funding to always come from the 

USOC? 

Ms. PFOHL. Our goal, ma’am, is to diversify that funding. We are 

looking at foundation funds, and some of that is starting to come 

in now. Certainly if the Federal—if we are able to receive some 

Federal dollars that will help diversify, as well. 

I can’t imagine a time where the USOC and the NGBs would not 

be investing in this space. I think they should be and will continue 

to be. But I also think that we can diversify that, especially in the 

area of prevention. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Thank you. 

And for the record, I’ll be submitting a record for all of the panelists and commending USA Gymnastics for beginning the Athlete 

Task Force and will be asking—my time is up—as to whether or 

not each of the NGBs are creating an Athlete Task Force, which 

will shape your organization’s future in their decisions and their 

operating decisions. 

With that, I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize Ms. Clarke for 5 minutes. 

Ms. CLARKE. I thank you, Chairman Harper and Ranking Member DeGette, for holding this hearing today on this important topic 

of how we must protect our Nation’s most elite club of athletes. 

Being an Olympian is a coveted title not easily given, and is not 

limited by age, with the youngest at only 13 years old. This protected class of youth, who display exceptional ability, should not 

have to worry if they will be violated by a trusted coach or any 

adult in the room. 

Given what we have learned through the sentencing of Dr. Larry 

Nassar, it is Congress’ responsibility and obligation to ensure that 

116 

strong and appropriate measures are put in place so that trusted 

personnel are held accountable to the highest standard of conduct. 

Having said that, Ms. Lyons, earlier this year the U.S. Olympic 

Committee threatened USA Gymnastics with decertification. The 

U.S. Olympic Committee demanded that all members of the USA 

Gymnastics board resign, which they did. Is that correct? 

Ms. LYONS. That’s correct. 

Ms. CLARKE. So the U.S. Olympic Committee can use its authority to require sports governing bodies to adopt certain standards. 

It can demand changes, as it did with USA Gymnastics. 

Documents provided to the committee show that sports governing 

bodies have different policies on key safety issues. For example, 

some sports’ governing bodies make lists of banned coaches and 

other members make it publicly available, others do not. 

Ms. Lyons, why do some governing bodies post public lists while 

others do not? 

Ms. LYONS. I think that consistency is an incredibly important 

part of what we need to achieve going forward. 

To date, as you mentioned, they’re very different. Keeping 

banned lists is a complicated issue. 

At the same time, we need to figure it out and we need to ensure 

that centralized information is provided by every single NGB and 

that it’s accessible to the public. 

It has not happened to date, and I regret that we did not exercise 

more of our authority to enforce that as a standard for the NGBs 

prior to this. 

Ms. CLARKE. So will you be doing that? Is that something that 

you will enforce? 

Ms. LYONS. That has been added to my to-do list this very week. 

Ms. CLARKE. Absolutely. 

Ms. Lyons, your May 16, 2018, letter to us states that the U.S. 

Olympic Committee recognizes the need for greater transparency 

and uniformity with respect to sexual assault. 

Shouldn’t there be uniformity regarding public lists? You stated 

that that’s on your to-do list. And in this area, where the Olympic 

Committee could demand that governing bodies make these 

changes, what is your timetable? 

Ms. LYONS. We do need to confer with all of our NGB partners 

because, as you know, they are very different in size and they are 

very different in their technological capabilities. I’m guessing that 

we may need to help provide a technology tool that can be used by 

those that don’t have their own tool. 

So I couldn’t yet speculate on the timeframe, but we will put that 

on an urgent path because I can’t see how that’s not an important 

part of our—— 

Ms. CLARKE. Yes. And where there’s need for support, I think, 

you know, this is a valuable use of resource. It’s important that we 

standardize this. 

And I understand that sports governing bodies are now required 

to report all new cases to the Center for SafeSport. But nationally, 

governing bodies are not required to submit pre-March 2017 cases 

to the Center for SafeSport. 

A recent headline in USA Today on March 16, 2018, reads:‘‘USA 

Gymnastics makes puzzling decision to keep sexual abuse case.’’ 

117 

Ms. Lyons, how do we know that cases predating SafeSport’s 

opening are being addressed appropriately? 

Ms. LYONS. The Center has the option to take some of the preexisting cases if it chooses. There is a sensitivity that if a victim 

has already been through a good part of the investigatory process, 

that perhaps it may not be beneficial to them to go through it 

again. So in some of those cases, the NGBs have opted to keep a 

case that’s already in progress. But the Center can choose to take 

that if it wishes to. 

Ms. CLARKE. Who is examining that to make sure that there’s 

transparency and that there’s a coherence to a standard and that 

there’s no short shrifting in terms of determining what rises to the 

occasion of a crime and what doesn’t? 

Ms. LYONS. I would have to say when I read the article I had 

the same question. And I’m not certain of the answer. But I will 

be looking into that. But clearly, we should make sure that the 

Center is aware of all these cases and has the option to take them 

if they feel it’s appropriate. I’m not sure that it is currently the 

standard. 

Ms. CLARKE. Well, I hope you will give scrutiny to that. 

And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. 

Walberg, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thanks to the panel for being here today. 

Coming from Michigan, this issue hits especially close to home, 

sadly. What happened at USAG and MSU under Larry Nassar is 

terrible, unacceptable, unexplainable. 

Thankfully, hundreds of brave young women came forward to tell 

their stories, helped put the predatory, Dr.Nassar—I guess I would 

change that—put the predator, Nassar, behind bars and close the 

chapter on just one of many incidents that we have heard about. 

As an aside, Ms. Pfohl, thank you for stating the U.S. Center for 

SafeSport’s mission statement and restating it as well. It is good 

to hear. 

The mission statement for the U.S. Olympic Committee states it 

this way: Its mission is to support U.S. Olympic and Paralympic 

competitive excellence while demonstrating the values of the Olympic movement, thereby inspiring all Americans. 

Ms. Lyons, did this incident even remotely follow the mission of 

the USOC? 

Ms. LYONS. First, I would say that I think the athletes do continue to inspire all Americans. And I think, sadly, the institutions 

that support those athletes have not inspired confidence, trust, or 

have lived up to our mission and values, and we deeply regret that 

that has occurred. 

And that is one reason why we are embarking upon all of the action plans that we’ve discussed, because the athletes deserve to 

have everyone believe that the work that they do and what the 

Olympics stands for should be held in highest esteem, and we have 

let them down. 

Mr. WALBERG. I appreciate you stating that, knowing you weren’t 

there in this position at the time all of this went down. But I think 

118 

it is important that the commitment to that mission statement is 

affirmed and affirmed and affirmed still further. 

And so, Ms. Perry, I would also ask similarly, did what happened 

in Michigan with the predator, Mr. Nassar, and USA Gymnastics 

even remotely resemble the mission statement I just read? 

Ms. PERRY. I was there at the hearings. And I want to say, first, 

that every moment that I think about what our athletes went 

through it energizes me and gives me a sense of resolve every single day to make sure that we’re focusing every part of our organization on athlete safety. 

And as an organization, one of the first things that I did in December was to look at the mission statement of USA Gymnastics, 

and we changed that mission statement. And our mission statement now focuses on empowering our athletes and focusing on athlete safety and making sure that we educate our members to that 

extent. 

And I will tell you that it’s something every single day I think 

about. And so we want to do whatever we have to do as an organization to make sure that we prevent. As you all mentioned, one 

case of sexual abuse is one too many. 

Mr. WALBERG. I appreciate that. Then let’s continue to look back 

a bit. 

Public reports indicate that USAG officials knew about Nassar in 

the summer of 2015, and USAG officials notified USOC officials 

shortly thereafter, in July 2015. 

In addition to notifying the FBI, did USAG implement any formal and public interim measures on Dr.Nassar while the FBI conducted its investigation to ensure that athletes did not continue to 

be at risk while the investigation was under way? 

Ms. PERRY. I don’t have firsthand knowledge, but it is my understanding that Mr. Nassar was asked to step away. 

There is a really important investigation going on right now, as 

you mentioned, the Ropes & Gray, which I think is critically important for all of us so that we can shed light on what happened. 

Mr. WALBERG. But did he step away? 

Ms. PERRY. I would—did he step away at that point? 

Mr. WALBERG. At that point. 

Ms. PERRY. It is my understanding that he did, but I would need 

to see all the facts around that. 

Mr. WALBERG. I encourage you to check those facts out. 

Ms. PERRY. Yes. 

Mr. WALBERG. Because it appears that there was still involvement that went on. And at the very least there was a coverup. 

Things weren’t transparent or clear. And I think that added to the 

frustration of athletes and parents, and the general public as well. 

So I would encourage you to continue looking for those questions—— 

Ms. PERRY. I understand. 

Mr. WALBERG [continuing]. To make sure it never happens again. 

Ms. PERRY. I understand. And I will be relentless in my efforts 

every day. And I believe that the Ropes & Gray investigation is 

going to really provide a lot of information that I think I and many 

others would like to see. 

Mr. WALBERG. Thanks. And I wish you well. 

119 

Ms. PERRY. Thank you. 

Mr. WALBERG. I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentlewoman from California, 

Mrs. Walters, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. WALTERS.. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, I would like to start off by saying that as a mother 

of four whose kids played local organized sports growing up, this 

is a difficult hearing topic. 

It is really upsetting to think that my kids and their teammates 

could have been coached by someone who had a history of misconduct, and even more disturbing to think that I and the rest of 

the parents would not have known if that was the case because, 

as we’ve recently learned, in most cases lists containing the names 

of banned or suspended coaches isn’t public information. 

NGBs have different policies regarding whether they maintain a 

list of banned coaches, and if they do, whether they publicize the 

list. 

The committee asked all 48 NGBs and the USOC whether or not 

they maintained a list of individuals banned or suspended from 

participation with the NGB, and if so, whether the list was publicly 

available. 

Only 18 NGBs have a banned or suspended list that is available 

to the general public. Other NGBs reported to the committee that 

they shared banned or suspended lists with their members but do 

not publicly post those lists, have banned lists but only share it 

with certain officials, maintain a searchable database of members 

in good standing, or have not been banned or suspended any individuals but would make a list public if they were to do so. 

As you can see, there’s a wide variation in whether and how the 

NGBs and USOC make their banned or suspended list publicly 

available. There are clear benefits to having a publicly available 

list. 

Ms. Lyons, why hasn’t it the USOC mandated that all NGBs 

maintain a list, and, further, that they make this list publicly 

available? 

Ms. LYONS. We will be working with our NGB partners. I think 

that we will probably all be in agreement that we need to find a 

good way to do this so that that information is available, transparent, and all in one centralized place where people can find it. 

It doesn’t exist today, but we will make that a priority for us all 

to make that happen. 

Mrs. WALTERS.. So then you will consider mandating that all 

NGBs publish a public list of all banned or suspended individuals? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, I think there’s a number of things that will end 

up getting on the new compliance list that have not been there before as we exercise some more authority in this area. 

Mrs. WALTERS.. OK. And this question is for you also. 

If an NGB puts an individual on a banned or suspended list, 

would the USOC grant that person access to an Olympic center or 

event? 

Ms. LYONS. That should not occur. If that information is visible 

to us, then we have processes and procedures that would ensure 

that a person could not get on to an Olympic training site or an 

120 

Olympic training center, that they would not be certified to go to 

games that we were supervising. 

So to your point earlier, the availability of that information is 

critical. I think the right procedures are in place to keep them from 

entering a location, but you have to know that they’re banned. 

Mrs. WALTERS.. OK. Because the production that the USOC 

made to the committee last week included an email from 2016 regarding someone who had been recently suspended by USA 

Taekwondo for 5 years due to serious SafeSport violations. 

According to the email, notwithstanding the suspension, this individual was issued a day pass for the High Performance Center 

in Rio by the USOC. It states, and I quote: ‘‘This pass was not officially requested by USA Taekwondo and this individual is not 

someone we would grant access to.’’ And it continues: ‘‘It appears 

one of our coaches went directly to USOC staff with the request 

without our approval and somehow obtained the pass directly.’’ 

And that’s an end quote. 

Another coach complained about this person being around female 

athletes. USA Taekwondo’s banned or suspended list is public. 

USA Taekwondo banned this individual for 5 years and the USOC 

granted him access to an official center at the Rio Olympics. 

How do you explain this? 

Ms. LYONS. It certainly should not have happened. And it does 

point to one of the reasons we’re putting together an athlete safety 

commission to look at where these gaps in the system are. 

It shouldn’t occur. That type of information needs to be available 

so that people in those venues would immediately know to check 

that list. It should have happened in any case. It did not. 

Mrs. WALTERS.. Well, I want to highlight what the email also 

said, because it went on to say: ‘‘Please help me understand how 

this could have happened, as these things have happened consistently in the past, so this is not an isolated incident. Neither is it 

something we can just ignore given the seriousness of the adjudicated complaints.’’ 

So my point is that this is something that consistently had happened. And how did that possibly consistently happen? 

Ms. LYONS. Clearly, there was not an appropriate policy or check 

in place, a check and balance there was a policy to ensure it was 

being followed. So we have to do better, and we have to find out 

why that happen and make sure it does not happen in the future. 

Mrs. WALTERS.. OK. I’m out of time. I yield back. 

Mr. GRIFFITH [presiding]. I now recognize the gentleman from 

Georgia for 5 minutes, Mr. Carter. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Perry, I’ll start with you. 

Ms. Perry, I have the honor and privilege of representing the 

First Congressional District of Georgia, which includes Effingham 

County, Georgia, Rincon, Georgia. You ever heard of it? 

Ms. PERRY. Yes. 

Mr. CARTER. You have? 

Ms. PERRY. Of Effingham—— 

Mr. CARTER. Rincon, Georgia. Effingham County, Georgia. 

Ms. PERRY. I have. 

Mr. CARTER. Yes, I’m sure you have. 

121 

You’re aware of a lawsuit, Jane Does v. USA Gymnastics? 

Ms. PERRY. I am. 

Mr. CARTER. You are. And that lawsuit was settled just last 

month, I believe. 

Ms. PERRY. Recently. 

Mr. CARTER. Recently. Beginning of April it was. That is correct. 

Let me ask you something. Just to give you an idea of what happened here, there was a gentleman, a gymnast, who opened up a 

gym in 2002 in Effingham County. He opened up a gym. And in 

a newspaper story, it stated that McCabe—his name is Bill 

McCabe, by the way—he’s in prison for 30 years, right? 

Ms. PERRY. Yes. 

Mr. CARTER. But in 2002 he opened up a gym. A newspaper article said, ‘‘McCabe and a new partner/girlfriend opened Savannah 

Metro Gymnastics in Rincon, Georgia. ... Both are USA Gymnastics 

Professional members and USA Gymnastics safety-certified. Bill is 

also a USA Gymnastics Skill Evaluator. Bill has been teaching 

since 1991.’’ 

Of course, what happened is that the mother of an 8-year-old enrolled her daughter there. And then what happened was that for 

3 years, until the middle of 2005, that daughter was in classes 

there with this sexual predator, is essentially what he was. 

And then what happened was that she went out to her car one 

day and she found an envelope on her car, and it had all these details about what previous problems that Bill McCabe had had. 

She took and she called USA Gymnastics. And this is what she 

said: ‘‘I spoke to a woman there, and I told her that I had this 

packet of complaints against Bill McCabe. And I asked whether she 

had any complaints against him. And she said no.’’ She said no. 

Yet, if you look back on his record, you’ll find that in October of 

1996, he was fired from Gymnastics World in Fort Myers, Florida, 

because he was bragging to a colleague about his efforts to coerce 

a 15-year-old cheerleader to have sex with him. 

And then, in July of 1997, he was fired from Five Star Gymnastics in Erlanger, Kentucky, following an incident in which gymnasts he had taken to a camp in Pennsylvania. Parents had also 

complained that McCabe exposed his genitals to some gymnasts. 

And then it goes on and on to tell about all these things before 

2002 that this gentleman had done. And in fact, he had been fired 

also from another area. And they actually sent a packet to USA 

Gymnastics detailing all of these situations that he had been involved in. And yet, no response whatsoever. 

Do you ever do background checks on any of your coaches like 

this? 

Ms. PERRY. First of all, let me state that—— 

Mr. CARTER. Do you ever do background checks on any of your 

coaches like this? 

Ms. PERRY. So—— 

Mr. CARTER. It’s a yes-or-no question. 

Ms. PERRY. There are background checks that are being done 

currently. 

Mr. CARTER. Did you do background checks on him, this sexual 

predator who is in jail, in prison for 30 years? Did you do background checks on him? 

122 

Ms. PERRY. I was not there. I can’t answer that question. 

Mr. CARTER. Well, find out who was there, because I need an answer to it. 

Ms. PERRY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CARTER. OK? 

Ms. PERRY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CARTER. Now, you know, it gets better, if there’s such a 

thing, because after he was sentenced to jail, after he was in prison, a civil lawsuit was filed. And for 5 years—until it was just recently settled out of court last month—for 5 years you argued that 

you had no responsibility to protect these children training under 

your organization? 

Ms. PERRY. I did not argue that. That’s unacceptable. I did not 

argue that. 

Mr. CARTER. Who argued it then? 

Ms. PERRY. I started in December of 2017. 

But let me say this—— 

Mr. CARTER. Now, you know, let me say this: This is ridiculous. 

Ms. PERRY. I agree. 

Mr. CARTER. And how you can work for an organization like this 

that let this happen. 

You know, I’ve sat here throughout this whole hearing, and 

there’s one thing I haven’t heard from any of you—from any of 

you—and that is, ‘‘I’m sorry.’’ I haven’t heard from any one of you 

say to the parents, to the children, to the grandparents, ‘‘I’m sorry.’’ 

And that’s despicable. 

Ms. PERRY. Let me answer if I can, please. 

Mr. CARTER. Answer what? 

Ms. PERRY. I’ve said I’m sorry. 

Mr. CARTER. If you don’t want to say you’re sorry, I don’t want 

to talk to you. 

And I’m reclaiming my time, ma’am, and I’m going to tell you, 

this cannot be tolerated. 

Ms. PERRY. Right. 

Mr. CARTER. Ms. Lyons, it’s my understanding that you wrote in 

an email about a former USA Taekwondo athlete who sent information—who filed an ethics complaint—you wrote an email that 

‘‘this sounds like the same old BS.’’ Did you write that in an email? 

Ms. LYONS. I did. 

Mr. CARTER. You did? And are you currently the Acting Director, 

the acting CEO of the USOC? 

Ms. LYONS. I am. 

Mr. CARTER. You should resign your position now. That insensitivity tells me that you are not fit to serve in that position. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Oh, my God. 

Mr. HARPER [presiding]. The gentleman’s time has expired. Let 

the record—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I’d like to take a moment of personal privilege. 

Mr. HARPER. Just let me say something first. 

Let the record reflect that during opening statements the U.S. 

Olympic Committee and the NGBs represented here all acknowledged responsibility for previous actions. 

123 

With that, I’ll recognize Mr. DeGette for a point of personal privilege. 

Mr. DEGETTE. Not only that, Mr. Chairman, they all apologized 

to the victims, to their parents. 

And furthermore, Ms. Perry, who was just relentlessly badgered 

by Mr. Carter, was brought in in December to fix this. 

Now, I hope she does fix it. But to badger her is inappropriate, 

Mr. Carter. 

Mr. CARTER. Ma’am, she was on the board of directors when this 

happened. She was on the board when this happened. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman is no longer recognized. And we’re 

going to proceed with our questioning. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HARPER. So at this time—yes. 

Mrs. BROOKS. I believe it is important for us to clarify. 

I do not believe that Ms. Perry was on the board of directors, Mr. 

Carter. I have met with Ms. Perry after she began——— 

Mr. CARTER. Not Ms. Perry. Ms. Lyons is who I’m talking before. 

Mrs. BROOKS. OK. But for the record, Ms. Perry, who is now 

leading USA Gymnastics, was not on the board of directors, was 

new to the organization. 

Mr. HARPER. Let’s stay on—thank you for that clarification. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. Let’s stay on track. This is an important hearing 

and the process of what we’re trying to do. And we’re going to stay 

on message here. 

The Chair will now recognize Mr. Costello for 5 minutes. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

If we could have everyone turn to Tab 20. I have a question for 

Ms. Lyons and then a question for Ms. Perry. 

The memo referenced, 2012 memo in Tab 20, discuses a requests 

that NGBs provide feedback to the USOC on the community’s reaction should the USOC insist on criminal background checks. Ten 

NGBs apparently never responded. Thirty-five of the 37 did respond, but required some—that some form of background check at 

the time was required. 

The two most recently cited obstacles to requiring criminal background checks: one, costs; two, resistance from the NGB constituency. 

Ms. Lyons, how much resistance did the USOC receive from the 

NGB community on requiring background checks? 

Ms. LYONS. Well, I was not part of this program. I don’t know 

precisely. 

There was some resistance, and I think for the reasons put there, 

people were not, perhaps, putting this at the highest part of their 

priority list. And there was some pushback. 

Mr. COSTELLO. And so the fact that the USOC did not begin requiring NGBs to conduct background checks until 2014, 2 years 

after this memo, why was there a delay? Would your answer be 

that they didn’t place a priority on it? 

Ms. LYONS. I think the reality would be that putting in the actual practical applications of doing the background checks did take 

some time. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Any other reasons why it took 2 years? 

124 

Ms. LYONS. It takes a long time to get 49 organizations to all 

consistently adhere to a new change. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Ms. Perry, USA Gymnastics practice in 2005 was 

to allow professional members to self-certify as to their criminal 

background. When did USAG begin to require an actual background check instead of the self-certification. 

Ms. PERRY. I don’t—I’m not clear on that date. But I will tell you 

right now, for the last several years USA Gymnastics has required 

background checks for hiring of professionals, and in addition to 

that has other kinds of requirements as club owners and others are 

looking to hire individuals. And one of those is to make sure that 

they consult with our public-facing ineligible list and our suspended list online. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Would you kindly provide an answer in writing 

as to when that did——— 

Ms. PERRY. Yes. 

Mr. COSTELLO [continuing]. Take place. Thank you. 

To all NGBs, what results might show up on a background check 

that would lead your NGB to deny or terminate an individual’s 

membership? Try and be brief, because I do have a followup on 

that. 

Mr. HINCHEY. Any criminal activity or charges. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Any? Shoplifting? 

Mr. HINCHEY. Anything. 

Mr. COSTELLO. OK. Anything else? 

OK. If an individual who is already a member fails a routine followup background check, what action would your NGB take? 

Mr. MCNALLY. So anybody with a felony or a pending felony 

charge would be immediately suspended and given the opportunity 

for a hearing in front of our Ethics Committee. 

Mr. COSTELLO. How about a misdemeanor? Would that be overlooked or would that also prompt the same level of scrutiny? 

Mr. MCNALLY. A misdemeanor is not an automatic referral to the 

Ethics Committee. It would depend on the seriousness. 

Mr. COSTELLO. It would depend upon the nature of the misdemeanor? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes, it would, yes 

Mr. COSTELLO. Any misdemeanor that involved any physical altercation, assault, or anything of a sexual nature would prompt it? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes, it would. Anything, including violence, sexual 

or otherwise. 

Mr. COSTELLO. OK. If a failing background check doesn’t lead to 

terminating someone’s membership, what would? I don’t like that 

question, because I don’t think it’s very clear. 

Let me ask you this. Do your policies require background checks 

on athletes in addition to coaches, employees, doctors, volunteers, 

and the like? Background checks on athletes. 

Mr. MCNALLY. USA Taekwondo doesn’t require background 

checks on athletes, no. 

Mr. HINCHEY. USA Swimming, no. 

Ms. PERRY. USA Gymnastics, no. 

Mr. DAVIS. USA Volleyball, no. 

Mr. COSTELLO. OK. Mr. McNally, as other NGBs began implementing these background checks requirement, and the issue of 

125 

sexual abuse in sports rose in prominence, especially after USA 

Swimming’s 2010 revelations, why didn’t USA Taekwondo act faster in implementing this requirement? 

Mr. MCNALLY. I’ll have to supply that as an answer following the 

hearing, because I wasn’t there. I believe they were implemented 

in late 2013. 

Mr. COSTELLO. And for all NGBs, how far into the past do the 

background checks go? 

Mr. DAVIS. USA Volleyball started in the 2004–2005 season. 

Mr. MCNALLY. I’m not entirely sure. I believe it’s as far back as 

the records. If there’s a felony from 2000, it will show up. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Yes, that was my question, Mr. Davis. The background check on a particular individual goes back to when? To the 

date that they turn 18? 

Mr. DAVIS. I’m sorry. I have to give it to you in writing exactly 

on how that process works. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Very good. 

Mr. DAVIS. But I believe it goes back to as far as they turn 18, 

yes. 

Mr. COSTELLO. OK. I would kindly request of all the NGBs, if 

you could provide that answer in writing. 

Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. 

Bilirakis. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it very 

much. Thanks for allowing me to sit in on the hearing. 

This issue came to national attention because survivors were 

willing to speak up about their experiences with abuse. It was their 

bravery that shined a light on the many problems within the national sports organizations and how the systems previously in place 

had failed them. 

For the panel, and let’s start with Ms. Lyons, how are you involving survivors and other athletes in your decisionmaking process 

and policy changes moving forward? 

Ms. LYONS. We think that the voice of the athletes is critically 

important in forming any of the changes that we make. 

I wish that many of the survivors would come and contact us. We 

actually are prevented due to some of the litigation from reaching 

out to them directly, but we would welcome their voices. 

We are setting up—we’ve just done a thousand-athlete survey, 

we received a thousand responses on the survey, to get our broader 

athlete population helping us to understand what their concerns 

are about SafeSport. 

We have been meeting with our Athletes’ Advisory Council. And 

they will be—and other athletes of course—will be part of our athlete safety panel that’s going to go forward and help us make the 

policy changes going forward. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Ms. Perry. 

Ms. PERRY. Thank you. 

This is something that I think about every day. And one of the 

first things that I did when I became president and CEO was I 

started flying everywhere and talking to athletes, and some of 

those are survivors. And their voice is incredibly important to me. 

126 

And what I have found is that there is just so much love of this 

sport, but there’s a desire to have an impact on the organization 

and its strategic direction. And one of the things that I created was 

an Athlete Task Force to have that happen. I think it’s a very important first step. 

Ms. Lyons talked about the advisory committee. That’s important. 

But for me it is really about getting in front of as many athletes 

as I can and making sure that their voice is heard and that they 

feel empowered. And I will tell you that that is something I focus 

on every day. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. OK. Please continue. Thank you. 

Mr. HINCHEY. Congressman, we sent out—I sent out a letter to 

our membership encouraging and inviting any survivors to contact 

us for a chance to meet, and I would be happy to meet with them 

personally. 

I’ve had the opportunity to meet with one survivor thus far. I’ve 

had contact with two others and plan to have two other meetings. 

Aside from that, as I said previously, we need to engage and empower athletes to be part of our solutions going forward, and that 

will happen immediately. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. McNally. 

Mr. MCNALLY. So USA Taekwondo is one of, I believe, three 

NGBs participating in the SafeSport athlete climate survey, which 

is going to reach out to a select number of athletes and get them 

involved. 

We’re also working with Fighting Spirit, which is a group that 

educates on sexual misconduct and bullying, to make sure that 

those athletes learn about this before they become victims. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Davis. 

Mr. DAVIS. We also engage our athletes and have an athlete 

council that we are engaging with to be able to talk to them about 

trying to make sure that everything is made transparent to us. 

In addition to that, we have been in constant contact with past 

victims, which were part of the reason of how we were able to be 

able to go and continue with the Mr. Butler case that we were able 

to do. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Ms. Pfohl. 

Ms. PFOHL. Yes. We actually have two athletes on our governing 

board, and we are also establishing a SafeSport Champions Program where we will able to cut across all of the sports to engage 

survivors, as well as those that are passionate about preventing 

bullying, harassment, hazing, and all forms of physical, emotional, 

and sexual abuse. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. OK. Thank you. 

Next question. These horrific events occurred for years without 

repercussions. Unacceptable, as far as I’m concerned. 

Given this sad reality, what changes has your organization made 

to encourage athletes to come forward with any complaints of 

abuse they have made, or they may have some complaints. What 

changes have you made to encourage them to come forward? 

Let’s start from here. 

Ms. Lyons. 

127 

Ms. LYONS. I think, first and foremost, we have to make sure 

that the information on how they can come forward is made better 

available. So we’ve made a lot of Web site and other communications changes so that people are aware of the Center, its role, and 

that it is a clear path to safe reporting. That’s item one. 

We also need to ensure that the athletes can, you know, reach 

out to anyone that they feel safe to discuss, and all of us need to 

make ourselves more visibly available to them. 

And I think that everyone on this panel believes that those 

voices need to be heard and is trying to build the mechanisms in 

place through either councils, working groups, surveys, whatever it 

takes to get those voices better heard. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. How do we ensure that their actions, again, the 

allegations, the victims’ allegations are acted on quickly? 

Quickly, if you could respond, because I don’t have a lot of time. 

Ms. PERRY. I think that it is really a cultural change. And that’s 

something that I’ve embarked on from day one. 

And the culture has to be one where athletes feel they can speak 

up. And you accomplish that through a lot of different ways— 

through your structure, through your policies, through your personnel. 

But nothing replaces being there in front of the athletes. Nothing 

replaces being their advocate. And as an organization, that is something that I’ve dedicated my time, and, quite frankly, the reason 

I took this job, so that they would know their voice not only matters, but it’s going to make a difference in our organization going 

forward, a very impactful difference. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. OK. And it is important, again, I’m sure you know 

this, that these allegations are acted on quickly so that we can encourage others to come forward. 

So, unfortunately, I don’t have a lot of time, so I have to yield 

back. Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentlewoman from Michigan, 

Mrs. Dingell, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. DINGELL. Thank you, Chairman Harper and Ranking Member DeGette. 

Thank you for all of you being here today. 

Like many of my colleagues, the Olympians represent courage, 

dedication, hard work, and patriotism of our young people, and 

we’re not getting to talk about that today, and they give us reason 

to celebrate and to support. 

But Team USA is more than a competitive team. It’s 13 million 

young athletes across our country. And like my colleague, Mr. 

Walberg from Michigan, I’ve stood witness to the irresponsible, despicable, unexcusable, abusive behavior that has caused catastrophic 

damage to these young people in Michigan. I’ve met them, these 

young girls. 

I’m sorry, I still get upset. 

I’m saddened. I’m disgusted. And I think all of us here in a very 

bipartisan way want to make sure it does not happen again. 

But what’s bothering me today about this hearing, and what’s 

bothered me about all of the studying that we’ve done to date, is 

128 

that it’s clear that the systems designed to protect athletes from 

the abusers failed. 

And by the way, my colleague, Mr. Walberg, was correct that the 

doctor was asked to step away, and he was very quickly back in 

the room. He was told that there should be someone in the room 

chaperoning him, and it didn’t happen. And that is what is just so 

unforgivable. Or that there were no systems in place to begin with. 

There have been far too many incidences and allegations of sexual misconduct in sports, including allegations involving the individuals associated with each of the national governing bodies before us today. 

And honestly, I’m not reassured by your testimony, because I 

don’t hear a sense of urgency. I keep hearing: Well, we’re going to 

do it, we’re going to get to this, we’re going to do it. What is out 

there? Well, who are these young people that need help that aren’t 

getting there? 

So I have some questions here. We’ve heard today that the U.S. 

Center for SafeSport plays a key role in protecting the athletes 

from abuse. Given how important this mission is, I find it deeply 

concerning that apparently it took 7 years for the U.S. Olympic 

Committee to get SafeSport off the ground. 

In fact, as early as 2010 the U.S. Olympic Committee Working 

Group for Safe Training Environments found that the Olympic 

Committee must do more to take a leadership role in protecting the 

athletes from abuse. 

By the way, that’s what you’re all saying today, but you all are 

‘‘working on it.’’ And I hope that as you’re working on it, you’re 

going to be transparent, too. 

Ms. Perry, I’m glad that you’re here today, but a lot of people 

have been wanting to hear from you since you took the job. You’ve 

got to be transparent with everybody. 

But by 2013, the working group had concluded that the authority 

to address SafeSport cases should be centralized with the new 

independent entity, referring to the U.S. Center for SafeSports. 

In 2014 SafeSport was created, but was still functionally a part 

of the U.S. Olympic Committee. Documents from that year indicate 

that this Olympics Committee board anticipated launching 

SafeSport in 2015. 

In 2015 SafeSport still was not functioning as it was intended. 

In fact, it was not fully operational in 2017. 

Ms. Lyons, are you familiar with this timeline? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, ma’am, I am. 

Mrs. DINGELL. Documents provided to the committee today suggest that a lack of funding was a major reason for the delay in 

opening SafeSport. For example, a September 2015 presentation to 

the U.S. Olympic Committee board of directors stated that the 

launch of the U.S. Center for SafeSport is contingent on raising 5 

years’ worth of funding. 

Ms. Lyons, is it accurate that funding prevented the USOC from 

launching SafeSport sooner? 

Ms. LYONS. I think the answer is there was a delay. And as we 

look back, that was a mistake. 

We did hope for the Center, in order to be totally independent, 

we had hoped very much that other sports organizations outside of 

129 

the Olympic movement would participate. We spent a fair amount 

of time trying to make that happen. It did not. In retrospect, of 

course, we should have funded it sooner and got it going. 

Mrs. DINGELL. Why should I take confidence from what you’re 

saying today when you look at this timeline. And I do want to ask 

questions about—there are only 14 people working there now, with 

some outside consultants, and the volume of work has got me worried, too. But you keep telling me: We’re working on it, we’re setting up a study. 

Is it going to take another 5 years or what we doing to protect 

these young people right now so this never happens again? 

Ms. LYONS. Well, first, I appreciate your anger and concern. And 

I share it. And I understand how frustrating it must seem and how 

incompetent it must seem that—— 

Mrs. DINGELL. Yes. 

Ms. LYONS [continuing]. We haven’t made this happen sooner. I 

will tell you that at 27 out of the last 29 board meetings, SafeSport 

was a topic of conversation. There was a steady march of increasing new procedures, putting those in place, getting all the NGBs 

to suddenly be required to do certain things they had not done before. Those things all preceded the opening of the Center. 

There were many new controls that were put in place that were 

progress, but not enough, albeit not enough and not fast enough. 

And if we could turn back the hands of time, as the chairman said, 

I certainly wish we could and make it move faster. 

Mrs. DINGELL. I just hope that everybody here realizes the time 

for talk is over and you need to walk your talk. 

Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. I want to thank each of you for being here today. 

We’re almost done, but I do have just in response to some of these 

a little followup. 

And, Ms. Perry, Dr.Burgess asked a few questions about the 

abuse that had occurred at the hands of Nassar at the Karolyi 

Ranch. And you stated you did not want the athletes to have to return to such an emotionally painful place where they were abused. 

And so USA Gymnastics terminated its agreement with the Karolyi 

Ranch on January 18 of this year. I believe that was definitely the 

right decision to make. 

However, USA Gymnastics was aware of allegations against 

Nassar in 2015 and made the decision to renew its contract with 

the Karolyi Ranch in spring of 2017. Why was this agreement renewed in April of 2017 despite knowing about his abuse, sexual 

abuse, for years? 

Ms. PERRY. Chairman Harper, I can’t answer that question. It’s 

a very important question. And, again, I think that many of these 

questions hopefully will be answered through the independent investigation with Ropes & Gray. 

But what I can tell you is that that and many things that I’ve 

done in the last 5 months have been about the athletes. Making 

sure that the ranch was closed. Making sure that we set up an athlete assistance fund for counseling and medical services. Making 

sure that we had an Athlete Task Force. And making sure they 

knew they had a voice with our organization and restructuring to 

130 

make sure that we had the adequate SafeSport personnel to handle 

the kinds of volume that we have. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Ms. Perry. 

Ms. Lyons, was the U.S. Olympic Committee involved in the decision to renew the contract for the Karolyi Ranch in April of 2017? 

Ms. LYONS. No. There actually are two different contracts. The 

USOC had what I would call a marketing license with the Karolyi 

Ranch that allows them to be designated as a training site with the 

Olympic rings upon it. The actual lease of the property was a separate agreement to the USAG. 

Mr. HARPER. OK. So my question was, was the USOC involved 

in the decision? Was the USOC even aware of the decision to open 

it back up? 

Ms. LYONS. I don’t know the answer to that. I would guess they 

probably would have known, at least the lease was coming due and 

that it might be under consideration. 

We do know that they were considering buying the ranch. 

Mr. HARPER. And we will ask that in writing to give you an opportunity to respond in more detail. 

And then my final point is, just curious, are routine drug screens 

done on the coaches? And just yes or no from each of you. 

I’ll start with you, Ms. Perry. 

Do you do routine—I know athletes are, you know, drug tested. 

Are the coaches? Are there drug screens done on the coaches? 

Ms. PERRY. I don’t know the random nature of that, but I’ll find 

that out. 

Mr. HINCHEY. Not to my knowledge, but I’ll find out. 

Mr. MCNALLY. I don’t believe so, no. 

Mr. DAVIS. I don’t believe so, but we’ll find out. 

Mr. HARPER. OK. You’re going to find out. But just curious, is 

that a problem? Would that help? Wouldn’t that be a good thing 

to probably do? And I would encourage you to do so. 

And I’ll recognize Ranking Member DeGette for her followup. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I just want to clarify a couple of things. 

The first thing is, Ms. Lyons, Mr. Carter asked you about an article from The Washington Post quoting an email by you. And I 

wanted to give you the opportunity to respond to what your entire 

email was, not just what Mr. Carter was badgering you about. 

Because the Washington Post story says, quote, ‘‘Lyons wrote a 

heated email to three other USOC execs, including the then-CEO 

Scott Blackmun.’’ Quote: ‘‘’This sounds like the same old BS,’ she 

wrote.’’ Quote: ‘‘Allowing a potential sexual predator to continue to 

coach without having an appropriate investigation and conclusion 

is unacceptable,’’ end quote. 

Was that the full content of your email? 

Ms. LYONS. No, there actually was more. 

Ms. DEGETTE. There was more? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Could you provide us a copy of that email if you 

still have it? 

Ms. LYONS. I have not been able to find it. 

Ms. DEGETTE. OK. But do you agree that you wrote those words? 

Ms. LYONS. Yes, I absolutely did. 

131 

Ms. DEGETTE. Now, one other question. Actually, I wanted to ask 

Ms. Pfohl about what Mr. McNally was talking about, which is 

that, as I understand it, Mr. McNally, you said that there are only 

certain types of misdemeanors that your organization investigates. 

It would be violent ones or sexual or something like that. Is that 

right? 

Mr. MCNALLY. Yes, that’s correct. 

Ms. DEGETTE. So, as a former criminal defense lawyer myself, I 

will say that oftentimes more serious offenses, like felonies, get 

pled down to misdemeanors, and even misdemeanors that don’t appear to be involving violence or sexual assault or things like that. 

So what I wanted to ask you, Ms. Pfohl, is does your organization 

make a distinction if a complaint comes in and it is a misdemeanor 

level or a felony level? Or would you investigate the misdemeanor 

ones as well? 

Ms. PFOHL. Thank you, ma’am. 

What we’re looking at is, did someone breach the SafeSport code 

of conduct, which is much broader than the law. 

So we let law enforcement handle law enforcement issues, absolutely. Certainly, if someone has a criminal disposition that plays 

into our investigation, obviously that would be a breach of the 

SafeSport code. But what we’re looking at is, did someone breach 

the SafeSport code. 

Ms. DEGETTE. So you’re looking at the conduct, not necessarily 

the legal disposition. 

Ms. PFOHL. Correct. 

Ms. DEGETTE. So, Mr. Chairman, I just want to make one final 

statement, and that’s this. I think that everybody in this room 

agrees this is a terrible tragedy that happened and we can’t let it 

linger along—we can’t let it drift along. The organization themselves, the USOC, can’t let it drift along. 

We need to make sure that we actually have adequate funding 

so that the Center for SafeSport can do its job. And as of today, 

I have concerns about whether they have that amount of funding 

given the way the number of complaints has escalated. 

And so I would ask if you would consider—we’ll continue to have 

conversations with everybody, but if you would consider scheduling 

a followup hearing, like 6 months from now, so we can see if these 

things are actually being implemented. 

Mr. HARPER. I can assure you that the subcommittee will stay 

on this issue. 

Thank you, Ms. DeGette. 

To those individuals in the room or who may be watching who 

have been victims, I want to thank you for having the courage to 

stand up and for the role that you’re playing in preventing future 

cases of sexual assault. We will continue this fight on your behalf. 

In conclusion, I’d like to thank our witnesses and the Members 

that have participated in today’s hearing. And I’ll remind Members 

that they have 10 business days to submit questions for the record. 

And I would ask the witnesses to promptly respond to those, if you 

so receive those questions. 

With that, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:46 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] 

132 


U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

May21,2018 

TO: Members, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

FROM: Committee Majority Staff 

RE: Hearing entitled "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect 

Athletes from Sexual Abuse." 

The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations will hold a hearing on Wednesday, 

May 23,2018, at 10:00 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn House Office Building, entitled "Examining the 

Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes from Sexual Abuse." The purpose of the 

hearing is to examine the pervasiveness of sexual misconduct within the U.S. Olympic 

community and whether there are adequate policies and procedures in place to protect athletes at 

all levels of sport. 

I. WITNESSES 

• Susanne Lyons, Acting Chief Executive Officer, United States Olympic Committee 

(USOC); 

Kerry Perry, President and Chief Executive Officer, USA Gymnastics (USAG); 

• Tim Hinchey, President and Chief Executive Officer, USA Swimming (USA-S); 

• Steve McNally, Executive Director, USA Taekwondo (USA T); 

• Jamie Davis, Chief Executive Officer, USA Volleyball (USAV); and 

• Shellie Pfohl, President and Chief Executive Officer, U.S. Center for SafeS port (USCSS). 

II. BACKGROUND 

a. The United States Olympic Committee and the Ted Stevens Olympic and 

Amateur Sports Act 

The International Olympic Committee (IOC), which was founded in 1894 and is 

headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland, is responsible for protecting and promoting the 

Olympic Movement. 1 When the IOC was established, the two constituent American members of 

the IOC formed a committee to organize the participation of U.S. athletes in the first modern 

1 Team USA, Structure (last visited May 16, 2018), available at https:l/www.teamusa.org/ About-the-USOC/lnsidethe-USOC/Olympic-Movement/Structure. 
133 


Majority Memorandum for May 23, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 2 

Olympic Games in Athens, Greece.2 The formal committee was then established in 1921 as the 

American Olympic Association.3 In 1961, the name of the Committee was changed to the 

United States Olympic Committee (USOC).4 

The USOC was reorganized by the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act (the 

Act), originally enacted in 1978 and amended as recently as 2018.5 The Act establishes the 

USOC as the coordinating body for all Olympic-related activity in the U.S. and gives the USOC 

exclusive jurisdiction, directly or through constituent members or committees, over "all matters 

pertaining to United States participation in the Olympic Games, the Paralympic Games, and the 

Pan-American Games, including representation of the United States in the games."6 Under the 

Act, the USOC is responsible for, among other things, promoting amateur athletic activities 7 and 

providing swift resolution of conflicts and disputes involving amateur athletes, National 

Governing Bodies (NGBs), and amateur sports organizations. 8 

The Act establishes NGBs for each Olympic sport and gives the USOC the general 

authority to review matters related to the recognition ofNGBs. 9 An amateur sports organization 

can be recognized as a NGB if, among other things, it is incorporated under the laws of a State of 

the United States or the District of Columbia as a non-profit corporation having as its purpose the 

advancement of amateur athletic competition, it submits an application to the USOC for 

recognition as a NGB, it agrees to submit to binding arbitration in certain controversies, and it 

demonstrates that it is autonomous in the governance of its sport. 10 The USOC may "only 

recognize one national governing body for each sport for which an application is made and 

approved," except there are some exceptions for Paralympic sports organizations. 11 The Act 

provides for additional requirements and responsibilities ofNGBs. 12 

The mission of the USOC is to "support U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes in 

achieving sustained competitive excellence while demonstrating the values of the Olympic 

2 Team USA, History (last visited May 16, 2018), available at https://www.teamusa.org/About-the-USOC/fnsidethe-USOC/History; Olympics.org, Athens 1896 -/lighlights of the Games (last visited May 16, 2018), available at 

https://www.olympic.org/athens-1896. 

3 Team USA, History (last visited May 16, 2018), available at https://www.teamusa.org/About-the-USOC!Jnsidethe-USOC/History. 

4 !d. 

5 The Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act is discussed in Section Il.d of 

this memorandum. 

'36 U.S.C. § 220501-3; See also Team USA, About the USOC- Inside the USOC- History (last visited May 16, 

20 18), available at https://www.teamusa.org/about-the-usoc/inside-the-usoc/history. 7 Under the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, an "amateur athlete" is defined as "an athlete who meets 

the eligibility standards established by the national governing body or Paralympic sports organization for the sport in 

which the athlete competes." 36U.S.C. § 22050l(b). 8 36 U.S.C. § 220503. Under the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, an "amateur sports organization" is 

defined as a "non-profit corporation, association, or other group organized in the United States that sponsors or 

arranges an amateur athletic competition." 36 U.S.C. § 22050l(b). 9 36 U.S.C. § 220521-29. 10 36 u.s. c. § 220522. 

II 36 lJ.S.C. § 22052J(a). 12 See generally 36 U.S.C. § 220521-29. 
134 


Majority Memorandum for May 23,2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 3 

Movement, thereby inspiring all Americans." 13 The USOC is a 50l(c)(3) non-profit organization 

and does not receive federal financial support, except for select Paralympic military programs. 14 

According to the USOC's 2016 tax disclosures, the USOC had about $336 million in revenue in 

20!6.15 In the organization's 2016 annual report, the USOC reported that it provided a total of 

$84.7 million in grants to NGBs, Paralympic Organizations, and Athletes. 16 

Each NGB has their own governance structure and applicable bylaws and policies.17 The 

USOC provides NGBs with governance support, and in some instances, the USOC has required 

changes to a NGBs bylaws related to the Act or the USOC's bylaws. 18 Over ten years ago, the 

USOC engaged in a governance reform effort and approved governance guidelines for NGBs. 19 

More recently, the USOC has engaged in a number of additional efforts to increase the 

requirements for NGBs.20 In 2010, the USOC formed a Working Group for Safe Training 

Environments to develop a set of recommendations for consideration by the USOC Board of 

Dircctors.21 The Working Group presented its recommendations to the USOC Board in 

September 2010.22 As a result, the USOC adopted a SafeSport Handbook in 2012, created a 

minimum standards policy, and required each NGB to adopt an athlete safety program by 

December 3\,2013.23 In December 2015, the USOC amended its own bylaws to require that all 

NGBs participated in the U.S. Center for SafeS port (USCSS), and, in 2017, the USOC replaced 

the minimum standards with the NGB Athlete Safety Policy.24 The results of the 2010 Working 

Group and the USCSS are discussed in more detail in Section II( d.) 

The USOC can decertify an NGB, and the USOC decertified the U.S. Team Handball 

Federation in 2006 and the National Rifle Association in 1994. Additionally, the USOC has 

placed NGBs on probation and/or discussed decertification with other NGBs.25 

13 Team USA, Mission and Culture (last visited May 16, 2018), available at 

https://www.teamusa.org/careers/mission-and-culture. 

14 Team USA, Inside the USOC (last visited May 16, 2018), available at https:/lwww.teamusa.org/about-theusoc/insidc-the-usoc. 

15 Team USA, Finance USOC Tax Disclosures (Form 990) (last visited May 16, 2018), available at 

https://www.teamusa.org/Footer/Finance. 

16 United States Olympic Committee, 2016 Annual Report (20 16), http:l/20 16annualrcport.teamusa.org/. 17 See, e.g., USA Gymnastics, Bylmvs (last revised December 20 17), available at 

https://usagym.org/PDFs/ About%20USA %20Gymnastics/Govemancelusag-bylaws.pdf; See also USA Taekwondo, 

Bylaws of USA Taekwondo, Inc. (last amended Jan. 24, 201 7), available at https://www.teamusa.org/usataekwondo/v2-resources/bylaws. 

18 Information provided to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, from the United States Olympic Committee 

(May 16, 2018) on file with the committee. 

19 !d. 

20 !d. 

21 Team USA, About the USOC- SafeSport- Key Actions. (last visited May 16, 2018), available at 

https://www.teamusa.org/About-the-USOC/Safe-Sport/Key-Actions. 

22 Working Group for Safe Training Environments, Recommendations to the USOC Board of Directors, (Sept. 28, 

2010), available at 

http://assets.teamusa.org/assetsidocumentslattached _filelfilename/31249109281 0 _ USOC _Working_ Group_ Final_Re 

commendations_to _the _Board_ of_ Directors.pdf. 23 Government Accountability Office, Youth Athletes: Sports Programs' Guidance, Practices and Policies to Help 

Prevent and Respond to Sexual Abuse, GA0-15-418 (May 2015). 24 Information provided to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, from the United States Olympic Committee 

(May 16, 2018) on file with the committee. 

25 !d. 
135 


Majority Memorandum for May 23, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page4 

b. Sexual Assault 

Sexual violence is a social and public health problem in the United States that affects 

millions each year. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) statistics on sexual 

violence note that about one in three women experienced sexual violence involving physical 

contact during her lifetime and about one in six men experienced sexual violence involving 

physical contact during his lifetime.26 Further, the CDC notes that sexual violence starts at an 

early age. One in three female rape victims experienced it for the first time between I J -17 years 

old and one in nine reported that it occurred before age ten.27 The person responsible for the 

violence is usually someone known to the victim.28 

c. Sexual Assault in the Olympic Movement 

Unfortunately, there have been widespread instances of sexual abuse within the Olympic 

movement. Indeed, from the USCSS' launch in 2017 to April 13, 2018, the Center received 

written and oral reports, complaints, and allegations regarding sexual abuse from 35 of the 48 

NGBs.29 Although allegations of sexual abuse are generally kept confidential, in recent years, 

many NGBs have been at the center of public sexual abuse scandals. These scandals have raised 

concerns about the USOC and NGBs' ability to adequately oversee the safety of athletes in 

organized sport. Below is a non-exhaustive list of some of the recent controversies regarding 

sexual assault in the Olympic movement and the associated concerns with the USOC and NGB's 

ability to protect the well-being of athletes. As discussed in the next two sections of this 

memorandum, the USOC and NGBs have taken steps to address some of the concerns that 

surfaced during these scandals. 

USA Gymnastics 

In September 2015, a former USA Gymnastics team doctor of over 20 years, Larry 

Nassar, announced via Facebook that he was going to retire from his position at USA 

Gymnastics.30* About a year later, a media outlet published a lengthy report detailing how USA 

Gymnastics had failed to protect athletes from sexual abuse and seldom referred allegations of 

child abuse to law enforcement or child protective scrvices. 31 In 2016, former gymnasts filed 

26 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Division of 

Violence Prevention, Preventing Sexual Violence (20 17), available at 

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-factsheet.pdf. 

27 ld 28 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Violence Prevention, Sexual Violence (last updated May 1, 20 18), 

available at https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/index.html. 29 Information provided to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, from the U.S. Center for SafeSport (Apr. 13, 

20 18) on file with the committee. 30 Mark Alesia, M. Kwiatkowski, and T. Evans, Timeline: Former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar, lNDYSTAR 

(Sept. 20, 2016), available at https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/09/20/larry-nassar-timeline/90733320/. 

• In an earlier version ofthis memorandum Larry Nassar was incorrectly listed as a coach. 31 Marisa Kwiatkowski, M. Alesia, and T. Evans, A blind eye to sex abuse: How USA Gymnastics failed to report 

cases, lNDYSTAR (Aug. 4, 2016), available at https://www.indystar.com/story/news/investigations/2016/08/04/usagymnastics-sex-abuse-protected-coachcs/85829732/. 
136 


Majority Memorandum for May 23,2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 5 

criminal complaints against Nassar accusing him of sexually abusing young athletes. 32 In 

January 2018, Larry Nassar was sentenced to 40 to 175 years in prison for sexual abuse after 

more than 150 women and girls confronted him in court for having sexually abused them over 

the past two decades.33 On May 16, 2018, Michigan State University agreed to a $500 million 

settlement with 332 of Larry Nassar's victims.34 

Questions have surfaced about when USA Gymnastics and the USOC learned ofNassar's 

sexual abuse of young athletes and whether they adequately responded to the allegations. 35 

Some lawsuits have alleged that USA Gymnastics and the USOC failed to protect young 

athletes. For example, recently, gymnasts have sued the USOC alleging that the "organization 

failed to protect athletes and that top USOC officials lied about when they first learned of the 

matter."36 Recent reports indicate that there are plans to continue settlement talks with USA 

Gymnastics and the USOC.37 Similarly, concerns have been raised about the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation's response to the reports it received about sexual abuse allegations against 

Nassar. 38 

In response to the scandal, USA Gymnastics hired an investigator, former federal 

prosecutor Deborah Daniels, to conduct an independent investigation of USA Gymnastics' 

bylaws, policies, procedures, and practices related to handling sexual misconduct matters. 39 

Daniels released her extensive report in June 2017.40 In February 2018, USA Gymnastics 

announced that the law firm Ropes & Gray is also conducting an independent investigation of 

the sexual abuse by Nassar and is charged with determining when USA Gymnastics and USOC 

first became aware of any evidence relating to Nassar's sexual abuse of athletes. 41 

32 Tim Evans, M. Alesi a, and M. Kwiatkowski, Former USA Gymnastics doctor accused of abuse, INDYSTAR (Sept. 

12, 20 16), available at https://www.indystar.com/story/news/20 16/09/12/former-usa-gymnastics-doctor-accusedabuse/89995734/; USA Today Network, Who is Lany Nassar? (last visited May 16, 20 J 8), available at 

https://www.cincinnati.com/pages/interactives/larry-nassar-timeline/. 

33 Eric Levenson, Larry Nassar sentenced to up to 175 years in prison for decades of sexual abuse, CN'N (Jan. 24,. 

20 18), available at https://www.cnn.com/20 18/0 1/24/us/larry-nassar-sentencing/index.html. 34 Matt Mencarini and Justin A. Hinkley, Lansing State Jourhnal, lvlichigan State and 332 of Larry Nassar's victims 

reach 'historic' $500 million settlement, (last visited May 17, 2018), available at 

https://www. 1ansingstatejourna1 .com/story /news/1oca1/20 18/05/ 16/larry-nassar-michi gan-state-settlementlawsuit/614502002/. 

35 See, e.g., Rebecca Davis O'Brien, Gymnast Aly Raisman Sues U.S. Olympic Committee Over Nassar Scandal, 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL (Mar. 2, 2018), available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/gymnast-aly-raisman-sues-us-ol ympic-comm ittee-over-nassar-scandal-152002704 7. 36 Rebecca Davis O'Brien, Olympics Committee Failed to Act on Nassar's Alleged Abuse for a Full Year, THE 

WALL STREET JOURNAL (Feb. 1, 2018), available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/olympics-officials-didnt-act-ongymnasts-abuse-allegations-in-20 15-1517484 720. 37 See, Supra note 41. 38 Scooby Axson, Report: FBI Opens Internal Review Into Handling of Larry Nassar Allegations, SPORTS 

ILLUSTRATED (Mar. 1, 20 18), available at https://www.si.com/olympics/20 18/03/0 1/fbi-larry-nassar-internal-probe. 39 Deborah J. Daniels, J.D., Report to USA Gymnastics on Proposed Policy and Procedural Changes for the 

Protection of Young Athletes, KRIEG DEVAULT (Jun. 26, 2017). 

4o I d. 41 Team USA, USOC Announces Selection of Independent Investigator to Examine Larry Nassar's Abuse of Athletes 

(Feb. 2, 2018), available at https://www.teamusa.org/Media/News/USOC/USOC-ANNOUNCES-SELECTlON-OFIN'DEPENDENT -INVESTlGA TOR-TO-EXAMlN'E-LARR Y -NASSARS-ABUSE-OF-A THLETES. 
137 


Majority Memorandum for May 23,2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page6 

USA Swimming 

In 2010, a 20/20 investigation detailed inappropriate relationships between USA 

Swimming coaches and minor athletes.42 The report revealed that, as of 20 I 0, USA Swimming 

had imposed a lifetime ban on 36 coaches due to instances of sexual misconduct or inappropriate 

sexual behavior and kept the list of banned coaches confidential.43 Following the 2010 sexual 

abuse scandal, the USOC created a Working Group in 2010 to develop a set of recommendations 

for promoting safe training environments and addressing misconduct in sport44 and, in 2013, 

USA Swimming contracted with a program of Gunderson Health System to conduct an 

independent assessment of USA Swimming's Safe Sport Program.45 

Since the 2010 sexual abuse scandal within USA Swimming, additional instances of 

sexual assault within the NOB have been revealed. As of February 15,2018, USA Swimming 

had banned 89 individuals for sexual misconduct-related violations since Fall20 l 0 and USA 

Swimming now releases the names of banned coaches through a publicly accessible list.46 This 

year, the Southern California News Group published a report indicating that USA Swimming 

may have ignored or covered up hundreds of sexual abuses cases over several decades.47 

Moreover, as recently as a few months ago, two top USA Swimming officials resigned following 

reports indicating that the organization had ignored sexual misconduct by coaches. 48 

USA Taekwondo 

Earlier this year, an Olympic taekwondo coach, Jean Lopez, was banned from USA 

Taekwondo after the USCSS found him guilty of sexual misconduct with a minor.49 According 

to press articles, USA Taekwondo initiated the investigation into Jean Lopez about three years 

ago and the investigation was referred to the USCSS after it opened in March 2017.50 Jean 

Lopez's brother, Taekwondo Olympian Steven Lopez, is also under investigation by the USCSS 

42 Megan Chuchmach and Avni Patel, ABC News Investigation: USA Swimming Coaches Molested, Secretly Taped 

Dozens of Teen Swimmers, ABC NEWS (Apr. 9, 2010), available at https://abcnews.go.com/Biotter/abc-newsinvestigation-usa-swimming-coaches-raped-molested/story?id~ I 0322469. 43 ESPN, 46 coaches on banned list, ESPN.COM NEWS SERVICES (May 26, 2010), available at 

http://www.espn.com/olympics/swimming/news/story?id~5220940. 

44 The U.S. Center for SafeSport is discussed in Section II.d of this memorandum. 45 Gunderson National Child Protection Training Center, USA Swimming Report (Jan. 27, 2014), available at 

hltp://www.gundersenhealth.org/ncptc!trainings-educationlpublications/usa-swimming-rcport/. 

46 lnformation provided to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, from USA Swimming (Feb. 15, 2018), on file 

with the committee; USA Swimming, List of Individuals Permanently Suspended or Ineligible for Membership 

(updated May 9, 2018), available at https://www.usaswimming.org/utility/landing-pages/safe-spottlbannedmember-list---perm. 

47 Scott M. Reid, 1 OOs of USA swimmers were sexually abusedfor decades and the people in charge knew and 

ignored it, investigation finds, THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER (Feb. 16, 20 18), available at 

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/02/16/investigation-usa-swimming-ignored-sexual-abuse-for-decades/. 

48 Matt Stevens, 2 U.S.A. Swimming Officials Resign Amid Accusations of Ignored Abuse, THE NEW YORK TIMES 

(Feb. 24, 2018), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/24/sports/usa-swimming-resignations.html. 49 Nancy Armour and Rachel Axon, Olympic taekwondo coach Jean Lopez banned for sexual misconduct with a 

minor, USA TODAY (Apr. 4, 2018), available at 

https ://www. usatoday .com/ story /sports/o lympics/20 18/04/04/olympic-taekwondo-coach-jean-lopez-banned-sexualmisconduct-minor/485501002/. 

so Id. 
138 


Majority Memorandum for May 23,2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 7 

and he has been placed under an "interim measure-restriction" for sexual misconduct 5 1 

Although there were ongoing year-long active investigations into the brothers at the time, both 

attended the 2016 Rio Olympic Games. 5

2 Filings in a recent lawsuit accuse both Jean Lopez and 

Steven Lopez of sexually assaulting minors for years. 5

3 

In addition to the ongoing controversy regarding the Lopez btothers, USA Taekwondo 

has been involved in other public sexual abuse scandals. For example, in 2015, a USA 

Taekwondo coach, Marc Gitelman, was convicted of sexually abusing a minor athlete and 

another girl. 54 Prior to this conviction, both USA Taekwondo and the USOC had been aware of 

the sexual assault allegations yet failed to protect the athletes from the abuse. In a March 10, 

2014 email regarding the allegations, then-USOC board member Susanne Lyons wrote: "Here 

we go again. This sounds like the same old BS .... Allowing a potential sexual predator to 

continue to coach without having an appropriate investigation and conclusion is unacceptable."55 

USA Volleyball 

In 1995, USA Volleyball banned one if its coaches, Rick Butler, due to claims that the 

coach had sexual relationships with underage athletes. 56 USA Volleyball partially lifted the ban 

just five years later in 2000. In January 2018, however, USA Volleyball permanently banned 

Rick Butler from coaching again. 57 Additionally, recent lawsuits have been filed related to 

claims that Rick Butler sexually abused and raped minor athletes in the 1980s.58 

In addition, multiple other NGBs have been involved with public sexual abuse scandals, 

including but not limited to U.S. Figure Skating, U.S. Speedskating, and USA Water Polo. As 

mentioned at the start of this section, USCSS has received written and oral reports, complaints, 

and allegations regarding sexual abuse from 35 of the 48 NGBs between its launch in March 

2017 and April 13, 2018. 

5lJd. 

52 !d. 

53 Jacey Fortin, Lawsuit Accuses Taekwondo Olympian and His Coach, Who Are Brothers, ofSexual Abuse, THE 

NEW YORK TIMES (May 6, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/06/sports/lopez-taekwondo-sex-abuse.html. 54 Will Hobson and Steven Rich, An athlete accused her coach ofsex abuse. Olympic officials stayed on the sideline, 

THE WASHINGTON PosT (Feb. 14, 2017), available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/an-athleteaccused-her-coach-of-sex -abuse-olympic-officials-stayed -on-sideline/20 17/02/14/3 5 a6fc 7 6-d2eb-ll e6-a 783-

cd3 fa950f2 fd _ story.html?utm _term= .23e890c8fdac. 

55 !d. 

56 Jon Seidel and Michael O'Brien, A Sun-Times Investigation- Net Pains: Volleyball Coach Rick Butler, His 

Players- and the Damage That's Been Done, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES (Nov. 24, 2017), available at 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/feature/coach-rick-butler-vollcyball-players-damage-done/. 

57 Christian Red, Rick Butler officially receives lifetime ban from USA Volleyball for violating protective order, l\TY 

DAILY NEWS (Jan. I 0, 2018), available at http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/rick-butler-receiveslifetime-ban-usa-volleyball-article-1.3750 125. 58 Christine Hauser, Top Volleyball Coach Raped Teenage Athletes, Lawsuit Alleges, THE NEW YoRK TIMES (Mar. 

2, 2018), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/sports/volleyball-coach-rape-rick-butler.html. 
139 


Majority Memorandum for May 23, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 8 

d. U.S. Center for SafeSport 

The 20 I 0 sexual abuse controversy in USA Swimming was exposed with a two-part 

20/20 report in April 20 I 0. A few months later, Scott Blackmun, who stepped down as CEO of 

the USOC in February 2018, informed the Board at the USOC's June 28, 20!0 Board Meeting59 

that the USOC had established a Working Group for Safe Training Environments to develop a 

set of recommendations for promoting safe training environments and addressing misconduct in 

sport.60 After a five month review of sexual and physical misconduct, the Working Group 

released a report to the USOC Board of Directors on September 28, 2010, detailing six key 

recommendations.61 The Working Group recommended that:(!) "the USOC should play a 

leadership role in promoting safe training environments;" (2) "the USOC should lead by example 

in promoting safe training environments;" (3) "the USOC should develop and provide a 

centralized set of training and education materials focused on sexual and physical misconduct 

that can be adopted by NGBs, clubs and grassroots sports organizations;" (4) "the USOC should 

develop a centralized online toolkit that provides a set of resources addressing various issues 

pertaining to sexual and physical misconduct in sport that can be used by NGBs, clubs and 

grassroots sports organizations;" (5) "the USOC should work with NGBs to centralize and 

standardize the delivery of services designed to promote safe training environments;" and (6) 

"the USOC should encourage NGBs to adopt policies, practices, programs and tools to address 

sexual and physical misconduct, and NBGs should, in turn, encourage clubs and other grassroots 

organizations in its sport to adopt similar measures. "62 

Following the Working Group's recommendations, the USOC launched its SafeSport 

initiative in 2012.63 The program was designed to improve the safety of athletes by providing 

information, training, and resources.64 In 2013, USOC established a SafeSport Working Group 

on Investigation, Adjudication, and Sanctions. The purpose of the working group was to "survey 

the resources currently available to NGBs, look at various models for investigating and enforcing 

misconduct in sport, and make a recommendation to the USOC on a clear way forward." 65 In 

October 2013, Malia Arrington, the then-Director of Ethics and Safe Sport, presented the Board 

59 Team USA, About the USOC -Inside the USOC- Meetings-- Board of Directors- 2010--June 28, 2010-

Approved Minutes (June 28, 2010), available at https://www.teamusa.org/About-lhe-USOC/Inside-theUSOC/Mectings/Board-of-Directors/20 1 0. 60 Team LISA, About the USOC- SafeSport- Key Actions (last visited May 16, 2018), available at 

https:/ /www. teamusa.org/ About -the-U SOC/Safe-Sport/Key· Actions. 61 Team USA, Safe Training Environments Working Group Issues Report (Sept. 28, 20 I 0), available at 

https://'Www .teamusa.org/News/20 I 0/September/28/Safe-Training-Environments-W orking-Group-lssues-Report. 62 The U.S. Olympic Committee, Working Group .for Safe Training Environments- Recommendations to the USOC 

Board of Directors (Sept. 28, 201 0), available at 

http://assets.teamusa.org/assets/documentslattached _file/filename/31249/09281 0 _ USOC _Working_ Group_ Finai_Re 

commendations_to _the_ Board_ of_ Directors. pdf. 63 Team LISA, U.S Olympic Committee launces Safe Sport program (Mar. 16, 2012), available at 

https:l/www.teamusa.org/Media!News/USOC/US-01ympic-Committee-launches-Safe-Sport-program. 

64 Team USA, USA Weight Lifting, CEO Appointed to Safe Sport Working Group (Aug. I, 2013), available at 

https:/ /www .teamusa.org/USA ·Weight! ifting!F eatures/20 131 August/0 I! CEO-Appointed-to-Safe-Sport. 

65 !d. 
140 


Majority Memorandum for May 23, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 9 

with the recommendations of the Safe Sport Working Group on investigations and 

adjudications.66 According to the approved Board minutes, the Working Group recommended: 

(T]hat case management for sexual misconduct cases should be consolidated under 

a new, independent entity with an independent board of directors. The new entity 

would focus on sexual misconduct (and any related behaviors) and have the 

authority to investigate, make findings and issue disciplinary measures. The entity 

would be focused on an investigation-based procedure rather than a criminal type 

process .... Further, as Ms. Arrington explained, in order to ensure consistency and 

efficiency, the Group believes that NGB participation should be required through 

the USOC's Bylaws.67 

The USOC approved the creation ofthe USCSS in June 2014 and USCSS launched on 

March 3, 2017.68 USCSS was established as a wholly independent entity designed to oversee 

education programs for safe sport and investigate and adjudicate claims of sexual misconduct in 

the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movements' 47-member NGBs. Participation in USCSS is a 

condition of continued membership in the USOC.69 uscss has exclusive authority to 

investigate and resolve alleged violations of the SafeSport Code for the U.S. Olympic and 

Paralympic Movement (the Code) involving sexual misconduct by a Covered Individual and 

misconduct that is reasonably related to an underlying allegation of sexual misconduct.70 

Moreover, at the request of an NOB or the USOC, USCSS may accept discretionary authority 

over alleged violations involving any form of misconduct as set forth in the Code.71 

USCSS' board consists of nine independent board members that meet four times per 

year.72 Most of the funding for USCSS comes directly from the USOC and the NGBs. 73 On 

February 28,2018, the USOC announced that it planned to double the amount offunding it 

provides to USCSS, and in March 2018, it was reported that the USCSS had an annual budget of 

$4.3 million and employed nine full time staff and several contract investigators.74 According to 

66 Team USA, About the USOC- Inside the USOC- Meetings- Board of Directors- 2013- October 10, 2013 

Approved Minutes (Oct. 10, 20 13), available at https://www.teamusa.org/ About-the-USOC/Inside-theUSOC/Meetings/Board-of-Directors/20 13. 

67 !d. 68 Team USA, US Olympic Committee Announces Formation of U.S. Center for Safe Sport Advisory Council (Feb. 

9, 2015), available at https://www.teamusa.org/News/20 15/february/09/US-01ympic-Committee-Announcesformation-Of-US-Center-For-Safe-Sport-Advisory-Council; Team USA, About the USOC- Inside the USOCMeetings- Board of Directors -2014 -June 10. 2014 -Approved Minutes {Jun. 10, 2014), available at 

https://www.teamusa.org/About-the-USOC/Inside-the-USOC/Meetings/Board-of-Directors/2014. 

69 Team USA, Safe Sport (last visited May 16, 2018), available at https://www.teamusa.org/about-the-usoc/safesport. 

70 U.S. Center for SafeSport, Policies & Procedures (last visited May I 6, 20 18), available at 

https://safesport.org/files/index/tag/policies-procedures. 

"!d. 

12 U.S. Center for SafeSport, Who We Are (last visited May 16, 2018), available at https://safesport.org/who-we-are: 

U.S. Center for SafeSport, Bylaws (last visited May 16, 2018), available at 

https:/ /safesport.org/files/index/tag/bylaws. 73 Cecelia Townes, Q&A with Shelli Pfohl, CEO of the U.S. Center for SafeSport, ESPN (Apr. 6, 2017), available at 

http://www .espn.com/ espnw/voices/article/190823 80/qa-shel lie-pfohl-ceo-us-center-safesport. 74 Team USA, U.S Olympic Committee announces significant changes tofilflher protect athletes (Feb. 28, 2018), 

available at https://www.teamusa.org/Media/News/USOC/022818-USOC-announces-significant-changes-to-
141 


Majority Memorandum for May 23,2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 10 

information provided to the Committee by USCSS, USCSS projects it will have 26 staff by July 

1, 2018. There have been a significant number of reports to USCSS since it opened last year. 

Data received by the Committee indicates that, in 2017, USCSS received 227 written and oral 

reports, complaints, and allegations regarding sexual abuses.75 As of Aprill3, 2018, USCSS 

received 261 written and oral reports, complaints, and allegations regarding sexual abuses in 

2018. Moreover, between March 2017 and April 13, 2018, USCSS resolved 156 cases and 

investigations. 76 In 120 of these 156 instances the individual became permanently ineligible to 

participate in the organization.77 

Congress recently designated the USCSS to serve as the independent national safe sport 

organization and exercise jurisdiction over the USOC, each NOB, and each Paralympie sports 

organization with regard to safeguarding amateur athletes against abuse through enactment of the 

Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act.78 This act 

provides that, among other things, adults authorized to interact with certain minors and amateur 

athletes must report evidence of child abuse and the USCSS is the independent national safe 

sport organization and is responsible for developing training, oversight practices, policies, and 

procedures to prevent the emotional, physical, and sexual abuse of amateur athletes participating 

in amateur activities through NGBs and Paralympic sports organizations.79 Shortly after the 

Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act was signed into 

law, Congress passed additional legislation that created a $2.5 million grant program to protect 

young athletes from emotional, physical, and sexual abuse in sports. 80 

e. Additional Reeent Aetions to Address Allegations of Sexual Abuse and 

Remaining Challenges 

While the USOC and NGBs have made efforts to improve their policies and procedures, 

challenges remain. The USOC engaged Baker Tilly Virchow Krause to conduct audits of the 

USOC and all of the NGBs and High-Performance Management Organizations to assess their 

compliance with safe sport policies and procedures. These audits began in April 2017, which 

included reviews and testing and the reports for each organization were issued in October 2017. 81 

Some of the organizations were found to be in compliance with the SafeSport policies and 

further~protect-athletes; Brian Murphy, As scandals rock youth sports, this group has taken hundreds of calls in its 

first year, THE NEWS & OBSERVER (Mar. 5, 2018), available at 

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article203579369.html. 

"Information provided to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, from the U.S. Center for SafeSport (Apr. 13, 

20 18) on file with the committee. 76 Td. 

77 !d. 

78 S. 534 Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of2017 (enacted Feb. 14, 

20 18), available at https://www.congress.gov/biii/J 15th-congressisenate-bill/534/text?format=txt. 79 Id. 

so H.R. 1625 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (enacted Mar. 23, 2018), available at 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1625/text; Melissa Nann Burke, Spending bill funds 

program to fight abuse in sports, THE DETROIT NEWS (Mar. 22, 2018), available at 

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/20 18/03/22/spending-bill-funds-program-fight-abuse-youthsports/331803011. 

81 Team USA, About the USOC -Safe Sport-Safe Sport Audit Reports, (last visited May 16, 2018), available at 

https://www.teamusa.org/About-the-USOC/Safe-Sport/Safe-Sport-Audit-Reports. 
142 


Majority Memorandum for May 23, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page II 

procedures and didn't have any observations, but 43 organizations had deficiencies including, 

but not limited to, the application of policies being inconsistent with the requirements listed in 

the Athlete Safety Standards; inconsistent enforcement of requiring criminal background checks; 

inconsistencies in tracking education and training requirements; and a lack of guidance and/or 

requirements from the USOC, which leads to inconsistencies with how each NGB chooses to 

implement a requirement. Each organization was given 90 days to correct any deficiencies while 

the USOC's Audit Division monitored and reviewed the corrective actions and issued SafeSport 

follow-up reports to the NGBs that were found to have deficiencies. Some organizations 

required a second follow-up report, the most recent of which was only issued in April2018. The 

findings in the Baker Tilly Audits suggest that challenges remain with respect to the USOC and 

NGBs implementation of the Athlete Safety Policy, which could put athletes at SafeSport-related 

misconduct risk. 

NGBs have different policies regarding whether they maintain lists of banned coaches, 

and if they do, whether they publicize the list. In the March 7, 2018 letter that the Committee on 

Energy and Commerce (the committee) sent to all48 NGBs, the committee asked each NGB 

whether or not the NGB maintained a list of individuals banned or suspended from participation 

with the NGB, and if so, whether the list was publicly availablc. 82 In response to the question, 

the committee received a variety of responses including, but not limited to, that: (I) the NGB 

does not maintain a suspension/ban list; (2) there are no individuals who are banned from the 

NGB and the NGB therefore does not currently have a list of such persons; (3) the NGB does 

have a list of banned individuals, but does not make the list publicly available; and (4) the NGB 

does have a list of banned individuals and does make the list publicly available. 83 The USCSS 

maintains a searchable database and a website that links to the NGB lists of banned and/or 

suspended coaches that are publicly available. 84 Currently, 18 NGBs have a banned or 

suspended list that is available to the general public. 85 Other NGBs reported to the committee 

that they share banned or suspended lists with their members, but do not publicly post those lists; 

have banned lists, but only share it with certain officials; maintain a searchable database of 

members in good standing; or have not banned or suspended any individuals, but would make a 

list public if they were to do so.86 

Although the Olympic community continues to examine vulnerabilities for athlete safety 

and adopt reforms to improve the community's responsiveness to allegations of sexual abuse, it 

remains unclear whether these reforms will adequately protect athletes. According to a February 

2018 statement from USOC's interim CEO, Susanne Lyons, the organization is currently 

"evaluating the USOC's role and oversight of all the National Governing Bodies, considering 

potential changes to the Olympic structure and aggressively exploring new ways to enhance 

82 See Individuals Letters from the Committee on Energy and Commerce to each of the 48 NGBs (March 7, 2018), 

available at https://energycommerce.house.gov/news/letter/letters-u-s-olympic-committee-48-national-governingbodies-michigan-state-university-sexual-abuse-organized-sports/. 

83 lnformation provided to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, from recipients of the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce's March 7, 2018 letter to NGBs (2018) on file with the committee. 84 U.S. Center for Safe Sport, Disciplinary Records (last visited May 17, 2018), available at 

https://safesport.org/userviolations/scarch. 

85 See supra, note 83. 86 These are examples of disclaimers provided by NGBs, but it is not an exhaustive list. 
143 


Majority Memorandum for May 23,2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Hearing 

Page 12 

athlete safety and help prevent and respond to abuse."87 The actions that the USOC plans to 

adopt include, but are not limited to: (I) "Launching a review of the USOC and NGB 

governance structure as defined by the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act, including seeking input 

from safe sport advocacy groups, the NGB Council, the Athletes' Advisory Council, current 

athletes and policymakers to consider clarifications and changes to this structure;" (2) 

"Revisiting USOC SafeS port procedures to determine what measures are necessary to ensure 

allegations of abuse are reported to the USCSS, in addition to law enforcement, and that 

necessary follow-ups occur;" and (3) "Forming an advisory group to bring together survivors, 

advocates, child psychologists and other medical professionals to guide the USOC on stronger 

safeguards against abuse throughout the Olympic community, and effective support for 

victims. "88 

III. ISSUES 

The following issues will be examined at the hearing: 

• How we can learn from the past and examine opportunities to reform the system 

to ensure the investigation process is thorough, unbiased, and effective; 

• Whether existing policies and procedures are adequate to ensure the safety of 

athletes; 

• The challenges currently facing the Olympic community regarding how to 

properly and effectively handle cases of sexual misconduct; and 

• How to ensure better oversight, accountability, and restore public confidence 

within the US Olympic community. 

IV. STAFF CONTACTS 

If you have any questions regarding the hearing, please contact Brittany Havens, 

Brighton Haslett, or Natalie Turner at (202) 225-2927. 

87 Team USA, U.S. Olympic Committee Announces Significant Changes to Further Protect Athletes (Feb. 28, 2018), 

available at https://www .teamusa.org/News/20 18/F ebruary/28/US-Olympic-Committee-Announces-SignificantChanges-To-Further-Protect-Athletes. 88 Id. 
144 


GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

Ms. Susanne Lyons 

Acting CEO 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

~ongre~~ of tbt Wntteb ~tate~ 

.,ouiie of l\epresentattbeii 

COMMITIEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HousE OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority (202) 225-2927 

Minority {202) 225-3641 

July 13,2018 

United States Olympic Committee 

One Olympic Plaza 

Colorado Springs, CO 80909 

Dear Ms. Lyons; 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on May 23, 

2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes 

from Sexual Abuse." 

Pursuant to the Rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the hearing record remains 

open for ten business days to permit Members to submit additional questions for the record, which are 

attached. To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Friday, July 27, 2018. Your responses should be mailed to 

Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn House Office 

Building, Washington, DC 20515 and e-mailed in Word format to Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

&; #.,-. 

Gregg Harper 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Attachment 
145 


Responses of Ms. Susanne Lyons, Acting CEO of the U.S. Olympic Committee, 

to the Questions for the Record in the May 23, 2018, Hearing of the 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Energy and Commerce 

July 27,2018 

The Honorable Michael C. Burgess 

"Larry Nassar was licensed in the state of Michigan, but treated gymnasts at the Karolyi Ranch 

in Texas without a Texas medica/license. He also treated gymnasts during competitions abroad, 

including at the World Championships and Olympics. 

"How does the United States Olympic Committee and its National Governing Bodies ensure that 

its physicians are compliant with licensing obligations?" 

Health care providers that are credentialed by the Olympic Committee (i.e., as part of a U.S. 

Delegation to an Olympic or Pan-American Games or for services provided at an Olympic 

Committee sports medicine clinic) undergo a criminal background check and a medical 

credential review. The medical credential review includes a review of the provider's 

professional credentials and materials from the American Medical Association, the Drug 

Enforcement Administration, and licensing boards. The four sports medicine clinics operated by 

the Olympic Committee operate pursuant to the licensure requirements of the states in which 

they are located. The Olympic Committee requires that health care providers traveling abroad 

comply with international licensing obligations. This typically requires obtaining temporary 

licensure from the relevant host country. Most recently, for the 2018 Winter Olympic Games, 

the Olympic Committee required each national governing body to certify that its healthcare 

providers would follow the Olympic Committee's standards of care regardless of the location or 

setting of the services provided. 

"Is parental consent required for amateur athletes to be treated by a team doctor? Are parents 

provided with information, such as status ofmedicallicense,for these providers?" 

The Olympic Committee obtains parental consent for medical care of a minor athlete who is part 

of a U.S. Delegation to an Olympic or Pan-American Games. As described above, the Olympic 

Committee conducts a medical credentials review for health care providers. This information is 

available to athletes or parents of minor athletes. 

"Many athletes begin training when they are very young and often do so outside of parental 

supervision. 

"Do athletes and/or parents receive training and education when a child joins a sport 

organization governed by a United States Olympic Committee National Governing Body?" 

The U.S. Center for Safe Sport makes available a number of resources and training materials, and 

national governing bodies may supplement that information with their own training. Under the 

rules associated with the Center, anyone that the Olympic Committee or a national governing 

body authorizes, approves, or appoints to a position of authority over athletes, or to have frequent 

contact with athletes, is required to complete the SafeSport training. 
146 


"Are athletes and parents made aware ofSafeSport and how to get in contact?" 

Yes, the Olympic Committee's NOB Athlete Safety Policy requires each national governing 

body to publish SafeSport materials to its members, including in online resources. Information 

concerning SafeSport is also available on the Olympic Committee's and the Center's websites. 

"According to audit reports issued in October 2017, 43 organizations under the United State 

Olympic Committee had deficiencies in their compliance of safe sport policies and procedures. 

Congress recently passed a $2.5 million grant program to help fund the US. Center for 

SafeSport, which I understand currently has 9 employees and will have approximately 26 by July 

2018. 

"How do you plan to remedy these deficiencies and continue to evaluate these organizations for 

future compliance? 

The Olympic Committee expects that all recommendations identified in the 2017 SafeSport 

audits conducted by Baker Tilly will be implemented by September I, 20 I 8. (There is currently 

only one outstanding issue related to Team Handball's background checks and training 

requirements.) The Olympic Committee is currently auditing the national governing bodies, on a 

rolling basis through the year, to assess continuing compliance. Under the Protecting Young 

Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act, the Center for SafeSport will 

conduct future regular and random audits of national governing bodies. 

The Honorable Chris Collins 

Non-disclosure agreements are widely used in business resolutions, and serve as usejitl tools in 

not only creating confidential relationships between parties. but also protecting certain 

confidential and proprietary iriformation. Whether it be unilateral or multilateral, they vary in 

nature- protecting trade secrets and intellectual property, formalizing a relationship between 

collaborating organizations, or serving as an added layer when resolving disputes between 

individuals and entities. Within the Olympic community, various news sources revealed some 

sexual assault victims are bound by NDAs as part of their settlement agreement. One of the most 

widely publicized instance is the case of Olympic gold medalist, McKay/a Maroney, who signed 

an NDA with USA Gymnastics in late 2016. However, USA Gymnastics chose not to seek action 

against Maroney when she breached her NDA earlier this year by speaking at the sentencing 

hearing of serial child molester, Larry Nassar. I would like to better understand the driving 

factors in NDA utilization within the O(vmpic community, as it may be indicative of protecting 

the brand and management more so than treating the problem at its source stopping sexual 

abuse. 

"How many NDAs has your organization entered into since 2005 and when was the most recent 

NDA or settlement entered into? Of those NDAs, how many were minors at the time of the 

dispute?" 

The Olympic Committee has not been a party to a nondisclosure agreement regarding sexual 

abuse, to the best of my knowledge after diligent inquiry by counsel. (As noted in the question, 

the Olympic Committee may use nondisclosure agreements in commercial matters.) 
147 


"As to the nature of these NDAs or settlements, do the agreements prohibit the victim from 

speaking about the details of the settlement- such as the amount of any financial award- or do 

they prohibit the victim from speaking about the details of the case - such as the fact that they 

were abused, where and when the abuse occurred, who their abuser was, etc.? Are any of these 

NDAs entered into in lieu of the responding party being given appropriate sanctions, such as 

being suspended or banned from the NGB?" 

[Not applicable.] 

The Honorable Frank Pallone, Jr. 

"The U.S. Olympic Committee is in a position to make sure that all sports are conducting the 

strongest background and reference checks on those who have contact with young athletes. The 

U.S. Olympic Committee's current NGB Athlete Safety Policy requires sports governing bodies 

to conduct criminal background checks at least once every two years on anyone who either is in 

a position of authority over an athlete or who has frequent contact with an athlete. However, the 

policy does not provide specific direction on how to design background check programs. For 

example, it does not specifY whether all sports governing bodies should use a common 

background check provider. It similarly does not specifY whether governing bodies should 

require background or reference checks of all staff and volunteers. Has the U.S. Olympic 

Committee developed a "best practices" for background checks and reference checks? Does it 

intend to provide further guidance to the sports governing bodies on how to conduct background 

and reference checks?" 

As noted in the question, the Olympic Committee's NGB Athlete Safety Policy requires each 

national governing body to conduct a criminal background check, at least every two years, on 

anyone that a national governing body authorizes, approves, or appoints to a position of authority 

over athletes, or to have frequent contact with athletes. In addition, the Olympic Committee's 

SafeSport Handbook provides guidance for creating policies and procedures for screening and 

criminal background checks. (See pages 5 to 13 of the SafeSport Handbook.) The Olympic 

Committee's background check policy is currently undergoing a review in an effort to 

standardize and strengthen background checks across the Olympic community. The Olympic 

Committee expects to have the results reviewed by outside experts. 
148 


GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

Ms. Kerry Perry 

President and CEO 

USA Gymnastics 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

O.Congrtss of tbt Wnittb !itatts ~oust of l\epresentattbes 

COMMITIEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HousE OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority !202) 225-2927 

Minority (202)225-3841 

July 13,2018 

130 E. Washington Street, Suite 700 

Indianapolis, IN 46204 

Dear Ms. Perry: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on May 23, 

2018, to testifY at the hearing entitled "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes 

from Sexual Abuse." 

Pursuant to the Rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the hearing record remains 

open for ten business days to permit Members to submit additional questions for the record, which are 

attached. To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Friday, July 27,2018. Your responses should be mailed to 

Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn House Office 

Building, Washington, DC 20515 and e-mailed in Word format to Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

&.,_~ Gregg Harper 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Attachment 
149 


RESPONSES OF KERRY PERRY 

CEO AND PRESIDENT, USA GYMNASTICS 

TO QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD 

MAY 23, 2018 HEARlNG BEFORE 

HOUSE ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS 

EXAMINING THE OLYMPIC COMMUNITY'S ABILITY TO PROTECT ATHLETES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE 

August 31, 2018 

The Honorable Gregg Harper 

1. According to various reports, some NGB members that have been accused of sexual abuse 

have been allowed to continue coaching or competing, and having contact with minor 

athletes, even while they are under investigation. The purpose of interim measures is to 

prevent an alleged abuser from continuing the pattern of abuse during the period of time in 

which that individual is under investigation . .Is it your practice to take an interim measure, 

such as suspending the member, while that individual is under investigation? 

Response: According to the SafeSport Code for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movement, the 

U.S. Center for SafeSport (the "Center") maintains exclusive jurisdiction over the investigation 

and resolution of all matters involving allegations of sexual misconduct and/or abuse. The 

Center's authority to impose interim measures, however, is not exclusive. The SafeSport Practices 

and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movement (the "SafeSport Procedures") 

state that National Governing Bodies ("NGBs"), which include USA Gymnastics, are not 

prohibited by the SafeS port Procedures from taking appropriate interim measures upon notice of 

an imminent threat of harm. It is USA Gymnastics' policy to assess each case and impose interim 

measures, such as suspension, when the Gymnastics community may be at risk. In the case of 

complaints originating with the Center, however, USA Gymnastics has limited information on 

which to assess the case and may have to rely on the Center's notification as the basis for taking 

an interim measure. 

a. If so, what are the types of interim measures that might be used and what 

determines which type of interim measure is used? 

Response: Interim measures may include, but are not limited to, altering training schedules, 

providing chaperones, implementing contact limitations, imposing restrictions on a member club, 

or suspensions. In cases where USA Gymnastics recognizes a threat of imminent harm, USA 

Gymnastics will issue an immediate suspension, effectuating total prohibition from any contact 

with members, member clubs, or sanctioned events. 
150 


b. If an allegation is turned over to the U.S. Center for SafeS port, what authority 

does USA Gymnastics have to implement interim measures while the Center 

investigates? 

Response: Please refer to the answer to Question 1 above. 

i. Does the nature of the interim measure adopted differ based on 

whether the NGB or the Center is conducting the investigation? 

Response: The Center has exclusive jurisdiction over investigations of sexual abuse and/or 

misconduct. 

c. Is some measure taken in every case, or is this determined on a case-by-case 

basis? If a measure is not taken in some cases, why not? 

Response: USA Gymnastics assumes that "measure" as used in Question l(c) is intended to refer 

only to interim measures. Interim measures imposed by USA Gymnastics are decided on a caseby-case basis. USA Gymnastics may impose interim measures to ensure the safety and wellbeing of the gymnastics community or where an allegation is sufficiently serious that the accused 

individual's continued participation could be detrimental to the sport or its reputation. USA 

Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of the Center. 

d. If an interim measure is imposed, how quickly are such interim measures 

implemented? 

Response: In emergency circumstances, an interim measure can be imposed immediately--even 

prior to notice from the Center. Absent emergency circumstances, the accused party may request 

a hearing, which is conducted on an expedited basis. USA Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf 

of the Center regarding its process and time line for implementing interim measures. 

e. Whose responsibility is it to enforce the interim measures? What are the 

potential consequences if an interim measure is not adequately enforced? 

Response: It is the responsibility of USA Gymnastics to notify the relevant or affiliated member 

club of imposed interim measures. These members are expected to ensure that the imposed 

interim measures are followed. Notice is also provided to the general public via the USA 

Gymnastics website. USA Gymnastics may revoke a club's member status for disregarding 

interim measures if certain criteria are met. 

2. Recently, USA Gymnastics terminated its agreement with Karolyi Ranch. During the 

hearing, you stated that you did not want the athletes to have to return to such an 

emotionally painful place where they were abused. I then asked you why USA Gymnastics 

renewed its contract with Karolyi Ranch in Spring of 2017 even though USA Gymnastics 

was aware of the allegations against Nassar in 2015. You indicated that you could not answer 

the question and you hoped that it was one of the questions that will be answered through 

the independent investigation with Ropes & Gray. Can you answer this question today? If 

not, when do you believe you will be able to answer the question? 

2 
151 


Response: My tenure at USA Gymnastics began on December !, 2017. I was not with the 

organization in the spring of2017 when it renewed the Karolyi Ranch lease; thus, I do not have 

personal knowledge about why that decision was made. The Ropes & Gray independent 

investigation remains ongoing, and we anticipate reviewing the findings-including those related 

to the renewal of the Karolyi Ranch lease-when the investigation is complete. 

3. During the hearing, Representative Costello asked you what types of background check 

results would lead USA Gymnastics to deny or terminate an individual's membership. Can 

you please clarify the types of background check results that would lead USA Gymnastics 

to deny or terminate an individual's membership? 

Response: USA Gymnastics has partnered with the National Center for Safety Initiatives 

("NCSI") to perform background screening for members of USA Gymnastics. NCSI will issue 

results to the applicant and USA Gymnastics based upon a "Red Light"/"Green Light" system. A 

Red Light finding results from reportable convictions, pending dispositions or registrations, or 

disclosures of convictions of any of the following offenses or registrations: 

• Any felony (any crime punishable by confinement of greater than one year); 

• Any lesser crime involving force or threat of force against a person; 

• Any lesser crime in which sexual relations is an element, including "victimless" crimes of 

a sexual nature (including pornography, indecent exposure, or lewd behavior); 

• Any lesser crime involving controlled substances (not paraphernalia or alcohol); 

• Any lesser crime involving cruelty to animals; 

• Any sex offender registrant; or 

• Any lesser crime involving harm to a minor. 

Additionally, a Red Light finding also results from any charge involving a sexual offense or harm 

to minors, even if it resulted in a disposition favorable to the applicant, including but not limited 

to, pardons or dismissals after deferred adjudication. These criteria are contained within the 

guidelines developed by the National Council on Youth Sports ("NCYS") and have been adopted 

by USA Gymnastics. We understand and believe that the NCYS considers this criteria for a Red 

Light finding to be consistent with the principles of the federal PROTECT Act of2003. 

Once informed of an applicant's Red Light finding, a USA Gymnastics review panel will evaluate 

the Red Light status. Absent evidence of a pardon, mistaken identify, or an overturned conviction 

on merit by a court of law, the review panel will uphold the NCSI's Red Light determination for 

the following offenses: offenses involving an element of control; stalking; voyeurism; public 

indecency involving sexual activity; invasion of privacy or violation of a restraining, protective, 

or similar judicial order; or any category of "special misconduct"' as defined in the Bylaws. 

Similarly, and also absent evidence of a pardon, mistaken identity, or an overturned conviction 

1 Article 9 of the Bylaws defines Special Categories of Misconduct to include (i) listings on any state or federal sex 

offender list or registry; (ii) status as a sex offender in any applicable state or federal jurisdiction; or (iii) 

convictions of or guilty pleas, statements of no contest, or sentencing to any affirmative terms related to a criminal 

charge or indictment issued by an applicable city, county, state, or federal jurisdiction, and such charge or 

indictment directly or indirectly involved or related to sexual misconduct, child abuse, or conduct that is a 

violation of any law or regulation that is specifically designed to protect minors. 

3 
152 


on merit by a court of law, the review panel will uphold NCSI's Red Light determination for 

felony drug offenses; violent offenses; offenses causing bodily injury; or operating while 

intoxicated felonies that include prior convictions and/or serious bodily injury or death, unless 

exceptional circumstances are shown and the applicant can meet his or her burden of proof beyond 

a reasonable doubt. For offenses other than those described above, the review panel may consider 

criteria including, but not limited to: the age of the individual at the time the offense occurred; 

the amount of time that has lapsed since the offense occurred; the severity of the offense 

(misdemeanor or felony); crime classifications that are inconsistent from state to state; criminal 

history or pattern of offenses; status of the case; evaluation of appeal request, including 

recommendation letters and support documentation; evaluation of whether an individual may pose 

a threat to athlete welfare; and consistent policy application. 

The Honorable Michael C. Burgess 

1. Larry Nassar was licensed in the state of Michigan, but treated gymnasts at the Karolyi 

Ranch in Texas without a Texas medical license. He also treated gymnasts during 

competitions abroad, including at the World Championships and Olympics. 

a. How does the United States Olympic Committee and its National Governing 

Bodies ensure that its physicians are compliant with licensing obligations? 

Response: USA Gymnastics guidelines require that all National Medical Staff members meet 

current regulatory, licensing, insurance, and other requirements to practice and be in good 

standing with the appropriate state and/or national Boards. Potential USA Gymnastics National 

Medical Staff professionals must submit a resume or curriculum vitae, which the Athlete Care 

Coordinator or designated member of the USA Gymnastics Medical Task Force will review to 

verify that the applicant has the appropriate medical certifications, licenses, and experience. USA 

Gymnastics cannot answer on behalf of the United States Olympic Committee or other National 

Governing Bodies. 

b. Is parental consent required for amateur athletes to be treated by a team 

doctor? Are parents provided with information, such as status of medical 

license, for these providers? 

Response: A Consent to Treat form must be completed by participating gymnasts or parents or 

guardians of minors. USA Gymnastics will provide information about the National Medical Staff, 

such as the status of a physician's medical license, upon the request of an athlete, parent, or 

guardian. 

2. Some victims of Larry Nassar have expressed concern that USA Gymnastics personnel 

who knew about the abuse may still be actively involved in the sport. Were all individuals 

involved in the Junior and Senior level national teams investigated following allegations of 

misconduct? 

a. If not, why not? If so, do you plan to follow up on the continuing concerns of 

these athlete victims? 

4 
153 


Response: Over the last several months, USA Gymnastics has undergone a leadership 

transformation, removing and replacing the entire Board of Directors and the CEO and President. 

USA Gymnastics also underwent a reorganization that resulted in staff changes in May 2018. It 

is the intent of USA Gymnastics to ensure that, going forward, the leadership reflects the 

organization's mission, protecting athletes and creating a culture of empowerment. 

USA Gymnastics will take swift and decisive action if it becomes aware, via the ongoing Ropes 

& Gray independent investigation or otherwise, that any USA Gymnastics member who works 

with the Women's National Team or otherwise was involved in sexual misconduct and/or abuse, 

or failed to report the same. 

The Honorable Chris Collins 

1. Non-disclosure agreements are widely used iu business resolutions, and serve as useful 

tools in not only creating confidential relationships between parties, but also protecting 

certain confidential and proprietary information. Whether it be unilateral or multilateral, 

they vary in nature - protecting trade secrets and intellectual property, formalizing a 

relationship between collaborating organizations, or serving as an added layer when 

resolving disputes between individuals and entities. Within the Olympic community, various 

news sources revealed some sexual assault victims are bpund by NDAs as part of their 

settlement agreement. One of the most widely publicized instances is the case of Olympic 

gold medalist, McKayla Maroney, who signed an NDA with USA Gymnastics in late 2016. 

However, USA Gymnastics chose not to seek action against Maroney when she breached her 

NDA earlier this year by speaking at the sentencing bearing of serial child molester, Larry 

Nassar. I would like to better understand the driving factors in NDA utilization within the 

Olympic community, as it may be indicative of protecting the brand and management more 

so than treating the problem at its source-stopping sexual abuse. 

a. How many NDAs has your organization entered into since 2005 and when was 

the most recent NDA or settlement entered into? Of those NDAs, bow many 

were minors at the time of the dispute? 

Response: While USA Gymnastics has entered into a small number of settlements that contain 

confidentiality agreements, we are aware of only one NDA entered into since 2005. The NDA 

was executed in 2016 as part of a mutual settlement agreement ("the 2016 Agreement"). The other 

party to the 2016 Agreement was not a minor. USA Gymnastics has since released the other party 

from provisions of the 2016 Agreement that would prohibit the athlete's ability to speak publicly 

about the abuse. 

b. As to the nature of these NDAs or settlements, do the agreements prohibit the 

victim from speaking about the details of the settlement-such as the amount 

of any financial award -or do they prohibit the victim from speaking about 

the details of the case - such as the fact that they were abused, where and 

when the abuse occurred, who their abuser was, etc.? Are any of these NDAs 

entered into in lieu of the responding party being given appropriate sanctions, 

such as being suspended or banned from the NGB? 

5 
154 


Response: USA Gymnastics released the other party from provisions of the 2016 Agreement that 

would prohibit the athlete from speaking publicly about the abuse. The 2016 Agreement's 

nondisclosure provisions remain enforceable as to the details of the settlement, such as the amount 

of any financial award. The 2016 Agreement was not executed in lieu of sanctions against Larry 

Nassar, including permanently banning Nassar from USA Gymnastics. 

Similarly, the confidentiality clauses of the settlement agreements referenced above related to the 

details of the settlement; these clauses are not intended to prohibit the athlete from speaking 

publicly about the abuse. 

USA Gymnastics will not enter into, or enforce, nondisclosure agreements that prevent or prohibit 

victims of sexual abuse from speaking publicly about their experiences. 

The Honorable Frank Pallone, Jr. 

1. The U.S. Olympic Committee's current NGB Athlete Safety Policy requires sports 

governing bodies to conduct criminal background checks at least once every two years on 

anyone who is in a position of authority over an athlete or who has frequent contact with an 

athlete. However, the policy does not provide specific direction on how to design background 

check programs. For example, it does not specify whether all sports governing bodies should 

use a common background check provider. It similarly does not specify whether governing 

bodies should require background or reference checks of all staff and volunteers. What does 

USA Gymnastics do beyond the minimum requirements of the Athlete Safety Policy when 

conducting criminal background checks and reference checks? 

Response: As a condition to being granted the privilege of membership in USA Gymnastics, 

individuals over the age of 18 applying for professional or instructor memberships2 must submit 

to criminal background screening. USA Gymnastics also checks at least two references for each 

applicant. Background checks are also required for all directors and officers, board members, 

members of standing committees and special committees, individuals serving in any elected 

capacity on a national, regional, or state-level USA Gymnastics committee, or any individual 

representing USA Gymnastics in a leadership capacity including, but not limited to, international 

representatives, national coaching staff members/clinicians, medical staff members, meet 

directors or referees, presenters at national or regional congresses, instructors for USA 

Gymnastics University, and staff members. USA Gymnastics, in its sole discretion, may require 

other members or individuals to complete background checks. 

USA Gymnastics continually monitors and reviews individuals subject to criminal background 

searches, with the primary goal of safeguarding gymnasts and other participants through 

proactive measures while conforming to legal norms and industry best practices. Background 

screening must be performed upon application and every two years thereafter. 

The background screens performed by USA Gymnastics, in connection with NCSI, check two 

independent national databases, the sex offender registries of all available states, the federal 

2 Personal coaches of athletes participating in USA Gymnastics sanctioned events, designated training camps, and 

domestic/international competitions must be members of USA Gymnastics. 

6 
155 


terrorist database, and county criminal records of all jurisdictions of residence in the past seven 

years, as well as validate the individual's social security number, name, and address. 

NCSI will issue results to the applicant and USA Gymnastics based upon a "Red Light"/"Green 

Light" system. A Red Light finding results from reportable convictions, pending dispositions or 

registrations, or disclosures of convictions of any of the following offenses or registrations: 

• Any felony (any crime punishable by confinement of greater than one year); 

• Any lesser crime involving force or threat of force against a person; 

• Any lesser crime in which sexual relations is an element, including "victimless" crimes of 

a sexual nature (including pornography, indecent exposure, or lewd behavior); 

• Any lesser crime involving controlled substances (not paraphernalia or alcohol); 

• Any lesser crime involving cruelty to animals; 

• Any sex offender registrant; or 

• Any lesser crime involving harm to a minor. 

Additionally, a Red Light finding results from any charge for a sexual offense or involving harm 

to minors, even if it resulted in a disposition favorable to the applicant, including but not limited 

to, pardons or dismissals after deferred adjudication. These criteria are contained within the 

guidelines developed by NCYS and have been adopted by USA Gymnastics. We understand and 

believe that the NCYS considers this criteria for a Red Light finding to be consistent with the 

principles of the federal PROTECT Act of2003. 

Once informed of an applicant's Red Light finding, a USA Gymnastics review panel evaluates 

the Red Light status. Absent evidence of a pardon, mistaken identify, or an overturned conviction 

on merit by a court oflaw, the review panel will uphold the NCSI's Red Light determination for 

the following offenses: offenses involving an element of control; stalking; voyeurism; public 

indecency involving sexual activity; invasion of privacy or violation of a restraining, protective, 

or similar judicial order; or any category of "special misconduct"' as defined in the Bylaws. 

Similarly, and also absent evidence of a pardon, mistaken identity, or an overturned conviction 

on merit by a court of law, the review panel will uphold NCSI's Red Light determination for 

felony drug offenses; violent offenses; offenses causing bodily injury; or operating while 

intoxicated felonies that include prior convictions and/or serious bodily injury or death, unless 

exceptional circumstances are shown and the applicant can meet his or her burden ofproofbeyond 

a reasonable doubt. For offenses other than those described above, the review panel may consider 

criteria including, but not limited to: the age of the individual at the time the offense occurred; 

the amount of time that has lapsed since the offense occurred; the severity of the offense 

(misdemeanor or felony); crime classifications that are inconsistent from state to state; criminal 

history or pattern of offenses; status of the case; evaluation of appeal request, including 

3 Article 9 ofthe Bylaws defines Special Categories ofMisconduct to include (i) listings on any state or federal sex 

offender list or registry; (ii) status as a sex offender in any applicable state or federal jurisdiction: or (iii) 

convictions of or guilty pleas, statements of no contest, or sentencing to any affirmative terms related to a criminal 

charge or indictment issued by an applicable city, county, state, or federal jurisdiction, and such charge or 

indictment directly or indirectly involved or related to sexual misconduct, child abuse, or conduct that is a 

violation of any law or regulation that is specifically designed to protect minors. 

7 
156 


recommendation letters and support documentation; evaluation of whether an individual may pose 

a threat to athlete welfare; and consistent policy application. 

In addition, USA Gymnastics has suggested that each Member club should adopt its own 

background check policies, in addition to the requirements of USA Gymnastics. 

8 
157 


GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR .. NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

Mr. Tim Hinchey 

President and CEO 

USA Swimming 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

<!tongre~~ of tbe mntteb ~tate~ 

~ouse of ~epnsentatibes 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HousE OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority 1202) 225-2927 

Minority i202}225-3641 

July 13,2018 

One Olympic Plaza 

Colorado Springs, CO 80909 

Dear Mr. Hinchey: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on May 23, 

2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes 

from Sexual Abuse." 

Pursuant to the Rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the hearing record remains 

open for ten business days to permit Members to submit additional questions for the record, which are 

attached. To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Friday, July 27, 2018. Your responses should be mailed to 

Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn House Office 

Building, Washington, DC 205 IS and e-mailed in Word format to Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

&"?~- Gregg 

Chairman 

Harper 

~ 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and lnvestigations 

Attachment 
158 


VIA EMAIL 

July 30, 2018 

One Olympic Plaza 

Colorado Springs, CO 

80909-5770 

0 719.886.4578 

f 719.866.4669 

usaswimming.org 

The Honorable Greg Walden 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515-6115 

Dear Chairman Harper: 

I am writing on behalf of USA Swimming in response to your July 13, 2018letter requesting 

responses to questions from the Subcommittee following the Subcommittee's May 23, 2018 hearing 

entitled, "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes from Sexual Abuse." The enclosed 

information, attached as Appendix A to this letter, contains USA Swimming's written responses to 

the Subcommittee's questions for the record. 

In responding to the Subcommittee's questions at the May 23 hearing, I used my best efforts 

to be as accurate and responsive as possible based on my knowledge and recollection of the facts. 

Similarly, in responding to the Subcommittee's questions for the record, USA Swimming has used its 

best efforts to be as accurate and responsive as possible based on its understanding of the terms 

used in your letter. The representations herein are based on reasonably available information and 

are not intended to, and do not, capture every event related to the Subcommittee's questions for the 

record, nor are they an exhaustive description of the events discussed. 

Thank you for your consideration of this submission, as well as the opportunity to testify 

before the Subcommittee on these issues. 

Tim Hinchey III 

USA Swimming Chief Executive Officer 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette 

Enclosure 
159 


Appendix A 

USA SWIMMING'S RESPONSE TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S REQUESTS 

DATED JULY13, 2018 

USA Swimming submits the following in response to the Subcommittee's Questions for the Record. 

The Honorable Gregg Hamer 

1. According to various reports, some NGB members that have been accused of sexual 

abuse have been allowed to continue coaching or competing, and having contact 

with minor athletes, even while they are under investigation. The purpose of interim 

measures is to prevent an alleged abuser from continuing the pattern of abuse during 

the period of time in which that individual is under investigation. Is it your practice 

to take an interim measure, such as suspending the member, while that individual is 

under investigation? 

USA Swimming has taken interim measures based on allegations of child sexual abuse. 

a. If so, what are the types of interim measures that might be used and what 

determines which type of interim measure is used? 

USA Swimming's rules permit an emergency hearing to be held after an initial investigation has been 

completed to determine if a member should be suspended pending the outcome of a full hearing. 

This type of temporary suspension is the most common interim measure employed by USA 

Swimming, as well as the most effective way the organization can ensure that an individual who has 

been accused of sexual abuse cannot continue participating. However, the Center now has exclusive 

authority to investigate sexual abuse allegations, so the circumstances in which USA Swimming 

would conduct an initial investigation and emergency hearing are limited. 

b. If an allegation is turned over to the U.S. Center for SafeSport (the Center), 

what authority does USA Swimming have to implement interim measures 

while the Center investigates? 

According to the Center's current SafeSport Practices and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic and 

Paralympic Movement, "Nothing in these Procedures prevents the Office, LAO, NGB or USOC from 

taking appropriate interim measures upon notice of an imminent threat of harm. In such emergency 

circumstances, it may be appropriate to immediately remove a Covered Individual to address such a 

threat." 

It is our understanding that the Center is considering updating those Procedures to prevent an NGB 

from imposing an interim suspension once the Center has provided notice to an NGB that it is 

exercising jurisdiction over the matter. 

i. Does the nature of the interim measure adopted differ based on 

whether the NGB or the Center is conducting the investigation? 
160 


USA Swimming no longer investigates allegations of child sexual abuse, as they fall under the 

exclusive authority of the Center. To the extent that USA Swimming may investigate another type 

of abuse or misconduct (e.g., physical abuse, bullying, harassment, hazing, etc.), the interim measure 

adopted may differ. For example, USA Swimming has worked with its member clubs to impose 

safety planning in instances of peer-to-peer bullying that did not involve a suspension of 

membership. 

c. Is some measure taken in every case, or is this determined on a case by case 

basis? If a measure is not taken in some cases, why not? 

Whether or not to take an interim measure is determined on a case by case basis. Like the Center, 

USA Swimming will consider whether an interim measure would help ensure the safety and wellbeing of the victim(s) or other athletes. The decision is also impacted by a number of other factors, 

including available information and the action (or inaction) by the Center. For example, if an 

allegation has been reported direcdy to the Center, USA Swimming may not immediately be privy to 

the identity of the alleged offender, whether or not he/she is still participating in sport, the nature of 

the allegations, etc. and therefore unable to assess whether or not an interim measure is appropriate. 

In those circumstances, the NGB must defer to the judgment of the Center and whether or not it 

has taken an interim measure. 

d. If an interim measure is imposed, how quickly are such interim measures 

implemented? 

USA Swimming's rules require that an emergency hearing be conducted to determine whether an 

interim suspension should be imposed on a member and that the hearing results be issued within 21 

days of when the hearing was ordered. If an emergency hearing results in an interim suspension, the 

suspension takes effect immediately. 

e. Whose responsibility is it to enforce the interim measures? What are the 

potential consequences if an interim measure is not adequately enforced? 

USA Swimming provides notice of an interim measure, including a suspension of membership, to 

the applicable local level entities (the member club, the regional organization responsible for 

member registration, etc.). Those entities then share USA Swimming's responsibility to ensure 

interim measures are being enforced. USA Swimming's Code of Conduct prohibits a member club 

or coach to knowingly: (i) allow any person who has been sanctioned with a membership 

suspension by the Center or USA Swimming to coach or instruct any of its athlete members; (ii) aid 

or abet coaching or instruction of athletes by any person who has been sanctioned with a 

membership suspension by the Center or USA Swimming; or (iii) allow any person who has been 

sanctioned with a membership suspension by the Center or USA Swimming to have an ownership 

interest in such member club or its related entities, so a failure of applicable local level entities to 

enforce the interim measure (i.e., suspension) may result in a suspension of their own respective 

memberships. 

2. During the hearing, Representative Costello asked you what types of background 

check results would lead USA Swimming to deny or terminate an individual's 

membership. Can you please clarify any policies or procedures that USA Swimming 
161 


has regarding background checks on any individuals associated with USA 

Swimming (e.g., athletes, coaches, volunteers, etc.)? 

USA Swimming's criminal background check program identifies all criminal activity reportable 

under applicable state and federal law and available through relevant databases. However, only 

certain offenses result in automatic or potential disqualification, and they are set forth in the 

USA Swimming Criminal Background Check Policy'. 

Automatic disqualifiers include the following offenses: 

(1) Any felony involving: 

a. Violence against a person; 

b. Violent crimes involving weapons (including armed robbery and 

aggravated assault with a weapon); 

c. Animal abuse or animal neglect 

(2) Any felony or misdemeanor involving: 

a. All sexual crimes (excluding only those potential dis qualifiers 

provided in 3c below); 

b. Drug use or possession, (including the usc of drug paraphernalia) 

within the previous 3 years; 

c. Other drug related crimes including drug distribution, intent to 

distribute, manufacturing, trafficking; 

d. Child endangerment, neglect or abuse. 

Potential disqualifiers include the following offenses: 

(1) Other felonies not included in Automatic Disqualifiers above; 

(2) Crimes involving vehicular bodily harm; 

(3) Other misdemeanors for: 

a. Drug related crimes which are not covered in Automatic Disqualifiers 

above; 

b. Violence against a person (including crimes involving firearms); 

c. Prostitution, indecent exposure, and public indecency; 

.d. Stalking or harassment; 

e. Destruction of property, including arson, vandalism, and criminal 

mischief; 

f. Animal abuse or neglect. 

All non-athlete members of USA Swimming (e.g., coaches, officials, those having frequent and 

direct contact with athletes) must complete a criminal background check. 

USA Swimming also conducts criminal background checks on athletes in limited circumstances. 

Pursuant to the USA Swimming National Office Athlete Protection Policy, "All athlete 

representatives assigned or appointed by USA Swimming to serve as an athlete representative 

on a USA Swimming-selected team, training camp, or other similar activity shall be subject to 

social network and Google media searches, and in the event the athlete representative is 18 

years of age or older, a criminal background check. For the avoidance of doubt, athletes 

1 This policy is publicly available at: https://www.usaswimming.org/docs/default-source/safe·sportdocuments/3.-

complcte-requirements/a.-initiate-a-background-check/usa-swimrning back.ground-check-programswnmru;y pdf?sfvrsn 3. 
162 


competing on behalf of USA Swimming in international or protected competition do not 

constitute 'athlete representatives' for purposes of this section." 2 For example, a current adult 

National Team member may be invited to speak with athletes at a National Junior Team camp. 

The National Team member constitutes an athlete representative and would be subject to a 

criminal background check; however, the National Team member is not a camp participant 

(i.e., not training in the pool). 

The Honorable Chris Collins 

1. Non-disclosure agreements are widely used in business resolutions, and serve as 

useful tools in not only creating confidential relationships between parties, but also 

protecting certain confidential and proprietary information. Whether it be unilateral 

or multilateral, they vary in nature -protecting trade secrets and intellectual property, 

formalizing a relationship between collaborating organizations, or serving as an 

added layer when resolving disputes between individuals and entities. Within the 

Olympic community, various news sources revealed some sexual assault victims are 

bound by NDAs as part of their settlement agreement. One of the most widely 

publicized instance is the case of Olympic gold medalist, McKayla Maroney, who 

signed an NDA with USA Gymnastics in late 2016. However, USA Gymnastics chose 

not to seek action against Maroney when she breached her NDA earlier this year by 

speaking at the sentencing hearing of serial child molester, Larry Nassar. I would 

like to better understand the driving factors in NDA utilization within the Olympic 

community, as it may be indicative of protecting the brand and management more 

so than treating the problem at its source - stopping sexual abuse. 

a. How many NDAs has your organization entered into since 2005 and when 

was the most recent NDA or settlement entered into? Of those NDAs, how 

many were minors at the time of the dispute? 

b. As to the nature of these NDAs or settlements, do the agreements prohibit the 

victim from speaking about the details of the settlement - such as the amount 

of any financial award - or do they prohibit the victim from speaking about 

the details of the case - such as the fact that they were abused, where and 

when the abuse occurred, who their abuser was, etc.? Are any of these NDAs 

entered into in lieu of the responding party being given appropriate sanctions, 

such as being suspended or banned from the NGB? 

USA Swimming has been a defendant in civil litigation relating to allegations of abuse made by 

athletes. Some of those matters were resolved through agreements between or among the parties. 

Those agreements typically contain confidentiality provisions that apply to the terms of the 

agreement (or often just the settlement amount); however, such confidentiality provisions typically 

do !1QJ; apply to the athletes' abilities to discuss publicly their experiences. 

2 This policy is publicly available at: https-//www.usaswimmingorg/docs/default-source/policy-manual-public/section20-safe-sport -athlete-protection-post.pdt?sfvrsn -7. 
163 


Upon current information and belief, since 2005, USA Swimming was a party to or was made aware 

of one such agreement in 2010, two in 2011, four in 2012, one in 2013, seven in 2014, one in 2015, 

two in 2016, none in 2017, and most recently one in 2018. Of those, six agreements were entered 

into with the swimmer's parent(s) because the swimmer was a minor at the time of the agreement. 

One such agreement (2010) includes a provision restricting the swimmer's ability to discuss publicly 

the details of the case. These agreements were not entered into in lieu of the responding party being 

given appropriate sanctions. 3 

The Honorable Frank Pallone. Jr. 

1. USA Swimming created its own SafeSport program in 2010 to foster "a healthy, safe 

and inclusive environment." Still, in each year since 2010, USA Swimming has 

received multiple reports of sexual misconduct. For example, the documents you 

submitted to the committee indicate that there were 18 reports in 2015; 12 reports in 

2016; and 16 reports in 2017. Has USA Swimming conducted a thorough examination 

to understand why the number of reports of abuse has not declined since 2010? If so, 

what has USA Swimming learned? 

USA Swimming has not conducted an examination regarding the number of reports of abuse it 

has received since 2010. 

2. USA Swimming commissioned the Gundersen National Child Protection Training 

Center to review the USA Swimming Safe Sport program in 2013. You received a 

report from Gunderson on 2014, and follow-up Progress Updates in 2015 and 2017. 

The 2017 Progress Update included several recommendations that had not yet been 

implemented, such as requiring all children and parents to take Safe Sport training, 

placing a Safe Sport coordinator in every club, and developing a pool of medical and 

mental health treatment experts. Has USA Swimming implemented these 

recommendations? If not, why not, and what is the timetable for full 

implementation? 

USA Swimming continues to make progress implementing the 52 recommendations contained 

in the Gunderson report. In particular, requiring all children and parents to take Safe Sport 

training and having a Safe Sport coordinator in every club fall under the Safe Sport Recognized 

Club program, which is set to launch by October 2018. Many children and parents already have 

received Safe Sport training and many clubs already have a Safe Sport coordinator, but the Safe 

Sport Recognized Club program will track and standardize these expectations. Initially, certain 

Safe Sport Recognized Club criteria will be optional (except for those components already 

required by USA Swimming Rules) before ultimately becoming mandatory. 

USA Swimming has not yet developed a pool of medical and mental health treatment experts to 

use as a resource and is instead identifying those individuals on a case by case basis. However, 

3 USA S\vim.ming considers the information contained in this response to be highly confidential and sensitive in nature 

and respectfully requests advance notice of any contemplated disclosure of this information, as well as a reasonable 

opportunity to raise any concerns or objections. 
164 


USA Swimming is exploring various athlete wellness initiatives and will likely incorporate this 

recommendation into a broader initiative that extends beyond Safe Sport. 

3. Before USA Swimming commissioned the Gundersen National Child Protection 

Training Center, USA Swimming requested that Praesidium and Child Welfare 

League to produce comprehensive athlete protection education programming. How 

many studies were conducted on sexual misconduct previous to Gunderson? Please 

summarize the findings of those studies. 

USA Swimming created its Safe Sport program in 2010. In the program's inception and 

development, USA Swimming consulted a number of leading subject matter experts and 

resources, including Praesidium and the Child Welfare League. However, the Gundersen report 

commissioned in 2013 and completed in 2014 was the first comprehensive assessment of USA 

Swimming's Safe Sport program. We are currendy initiating a review and assessment of our Safe 

Sport educational content, which we anticipated will be completed in the next three to six 

months. 
165 


GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

Mr. Steve McNally 

Executive Director 

USA Taekwondo 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

<!Congtttjtj of tbt Wnittb ~tatetj 

;t,ouse of 1\epresentatibes 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN House OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority (202) 225-2927 

Minority (202)225-3641 

July 13,2018 

One Olympic Plaza 

Colorado Springs, CO 80909 

Dear Mr. McNally: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on May 23, 

2018, to testif'y at the hearing entitled "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes 

from Sexual Abuse." 

Pursuant to the Rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the hearing record remains 

open for ten business days to permit Membe1·s to submit additional questions for the record, which are 

attached. To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Friday, July 27, 2018. Your responses should be mailed to 

Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn House Office 

Building, Washington, DC 205 IS and e-rnailed in Word format to Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

~ Greltr 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Attachment 
166 


The Honorable Gregg Harper 

1. According to various reports, some NGB members that have been accused of sexual 

abuse have been allowed to continue coaching or competing, and having contact with 

minor athletes, even while they are under investigation. The purpose of interim measures is 

to prevent an alleged abuser from continuing the pattern of abuse during the period of time 

in which that individual is under investigation. Is it your practice to take an interim measure, 

such as suspending the member, while that individual is under investigation? 

Yes. If USA Taekwondo receives a direct report of sexual abuse, in contravention of the 

SafeSport policy, then it will suspend the individual pending the result of the investigation by 

the U.S. Center for SafeSport and add their name to the Suspended List until a final 

determination is reached. 

Should the Center for SafeSport issue an interim measure in a case reported to them, USA 

Taekwondo will enforce that measure without question. 

a. If so, what are the types of interim measures that might be used and what 

determines which type of interim measure is used? 

Interim measures can range from full temporary suspension of membership and all activity with 

the organization for the duration of the investigation, to special measures such as removal from 

a team as a coach or a no-contact order. If the interim measure is imposed by USA Taekwondo 

then the determination of which type of measure is used is made based on the seriousness of 

the allegation. In cases where the interim measure is being imposed by the U.S. Center for 

SafeSport, USA Taekwondo will follow their instructions on what actions to take. 

b. If an allegation is turned over to the U.S. Center for SafeSport, what authority 

does USA Taekwondo have to implement interim measures while the Center 

investigates? 

USA Taekwondo turns ALL reports that contain any trace of sexual misconduct over to the U.S. 

Center for SafeSport. Until the Center for SafeSport exercises jurisdiction over a matter USA 

Taekwondo has full authority to implement an interim measure. Once the Center exercises 

jurisdiction USA Taekwondo will typically follow their instructions on whether an interim 

measure is necessary and appropriate, or not. 

1. Does the nature of the interim measure adopted differ based on whether 

the NGB or the Center is conducting the investigation? 

No, it does not. USA Taekwondo no longer conducts any investigation into sexual misconduct. 

Any and all sexual misconduct investigations are conducted by the U.S. Center for SafeSport. 

c. Is some measure taken in every case, or is this determined on a case by case 
167 


basis? If a measure is not taken in some cases, why not? 

In every case that contains an element of sexual misconduct USA Taekwondo will submit it to 

the U.S. Center for SafeSport, and to the appropriate law enforcement agencies. Interim 

measures imposed by USA Taekwondo independent of a ruling by the Center are taken on a 

case by case basis, determined by the seriousness and source of the allegations. If a report is 

made directly by a potential victim (or their guardian) USA Taekwondo will implement an 

interim measure appropriate to the seriousness of the allegation. In the case of third party 

reports, hearsay or rumor USA Taekwondo will file these with the Center for investigation and 

implement their ruling on either interim or final measures. 

d. If an interim measure is imposed, how quickly are such interim measures 

implemented? 

Interim measures are implemented immediately. 

e. Whose responsibility is it to enforce the interim measures? What are the potential 

consequences if an interim measure is not adequately enforced? 

It is USA Taekwondo's responsibility to enforce interim measures, whether they have been 

determined by USA Taekwondo or the Center for SafeSport. Potential consequences of not 

adequately enforcing interim measures might include placing the athlete or others at further 

risk of abuse, or mental distress at having to be in close proximity to their alleged abuser at, for 

example, an event hosted by USA Taekwondo. 

2. During the hearing, Representative Costello asked why USA Taekwondo delayed its 

decision to impose background check requirements. Can you please clarify any policies or 

procedures that USA Taekwondo has regarding background checks on any individuals 

associated with USA Taekwondo (e.g., athletes, coaches, volunteers, etc.) and describe why 

USA Taekwondo delayed its decision to impose background check requirements? 

USA Taekwondo requires all staff, board members, coaches, referees, vendors and technicians 

with competition floor access to take a background check at the time of appointment, and 

every two years subsequently. Any individual who 'fails' a background check (for example, for 

having a felony conviction on their record) will receive immediate notice of denial/suspension 

of membership and be offered a hearing with USA Taekwondo's independent Ethics Committee 

to petition the decision. If a hearing is requested the membership remains suspended/denied 

until the conclusion of that process. If a hearing is not requested, the suspension/denial is made 

permanent. 

USA Taekwondo began working on implementing background checks in 2012. The process of 

acquiring a provider and integrating the checks into the database system took over a year and 

the system was ready for use in mid 2013. The organization faced difficulties with the 

integration project at the time, due to the nature of the software used for membership, but did 
168 


manage to implement a solid system on completion of the project. There are no details on file 

as to why it wasn't implemented faster, but equally, I cannot find any evidence of an intentional 

delay to the beginning of the project. 

3. In your March 21, 2018 letter to the Committee, USA Taekwondo indicated that there 

are roughly two dozen individuals facing suspensions or lifetime bans from your sport. Can 

you please clarify the answer you provided during the hearing to the question regarding 

whether any of these individuals have been reported to law enforcement? 

22 of the 29 people on the suspended list are for incidents that involved law enforcement. 

There are 4 of 29 where, following a diligent search of the records, I have not been able to 

uncover whether or not law enforcement was involved. 

Only 3 of 29 people on the list were not referred to law enforcement. 

a. If some of the individuals were not referred to law enforcement, can you please 

describe why they were not referred to law enforcement? 

It depends on the seriousness of the allegations- not all suspensions are for sexual misconduct. 

Some allegations are clearly violations of the SafeSport policy or Code of Ethics but do not rise 

to the level of a criminal act. USA Taekwondo is committed to reporting all allegations of sexual 

misconduct to both law enforcement and the Center for SafeSport for investigation. 

The Honorable Chris Collins 

1. Non-disclosure agreements are widely used in business resolutions, and serve as useful 

tools in not only creating confidential relationships between parties, but also protecting 

certain confidential and proprietary information. Whether it be unilateral or multilateral, 

they vary in nature -protecting trade secrets and intellectual property, formalizing a 

relationship between collaborating organizations, or serving as an added layer when 

resolving disputes between individuals and entities. Within the Olympic community, 

various news sources revealed some sexual assault victims are bound by NDAs as part of their 

settlement agreement. One of the most widely publicized instance is the case of 

Olympic gold medalist, McKayla Maroney, who signed an NDA with USA Gymnastics in late 

2016. However, USA Gymnastics chose not to seek action against Maroney when she 

breached her NDA earlier this year by speaking at the sentencing hearing of serial 

child molester, Larry Nassar. I would like to better understand the driving factors in NDA 

utilization within the Olympic community, as it may be indicative of protecting the brand and 

management more so than treating the problem at its source -stopping sexual abuse. 

a. How many NDAs has your organization entered into since 2005 and when was 

the most recent NDA or settlement entered into? Of those NDAs, how many were minors at 

the time of the dispute? 
169 


USA Taekwondo has no records of any NDAs being entered into with athletes since 2005. This is 

not something we have done or intend to do in the future. NDAs are not used with athletes in 

any circumstance. 

b. As to the nature of these NDAs or settlements, do the agreements prohibit the 

victim from speaking about the details of the settlement such as the amount of any financial 

award -or do they prohibit the victim from speaking about thedetails of the case such as the 

fact that they were abused, where and when the abuse occurred, who their abuser was, etc.? 

Are any of these NO As entered into in lieu of the responding paity being given appropriate 

sanctions, such as being suspended or banned from the NGB? 

See answer above. USA Taekwondo does not enter into NDAs with athletes, and will not do so 

in the future. 

The Honorable Frank Pallone, Jr. 

l.The U.S. Olympic Committee's current NGB Athlete Safety Policy requires sports governing 

bodies to conduct criminal background checks at least once every two years on anyone who 

either is in a position of authority over an athlete or who has frequent contact with an 

athlete. However, the policy does not provide specific direction on how to design background 

check programs. For example, it does not specify whether all sports governing bodies should 

use a common background check provider. It similarly does not specify whether governing 

bodies should require background or reference checks of all staff and volunteers. What does 

USA Taekwondo do beyond the minimum requirements of the Athlete Safety Policy when 

conducting criminal background checks and reference checks? 

USA Taekwondo requires all staff, board members, coaches, referees, vendors and technicians 

with competition floor access to take a background check at the time of appointment, and 

every two years subsequently. Any individual who 'fails' a background check (for example, for 

having a felony conviction on their record) will receive immediate notice of denial/suspension 

of membership and be offered a hearing with USA Taekwondo's independent Ethics Committee 

to petition the decision. If a hearing is requested the membership remains suspended/denied 

until the conclusion of that process. If a hearing is not requested, the suspension/denial is made 

permanent. 

USA Taekwondo uses a company called Verified Volunteers as its background check supplier 

but would support an initiative to utilize a common background check provider. 

The Honorable Jan Schakowsky 
170 


1. Following up on my last question in the hearing, what steps - if any - is USA Taekwondo 

taking to hold to account those not only abusers but also those who helped cover up for 

abusers? 

USA Taekwondo works with the Center for SafeSport and law enforcement to hold abusers to 

account. USA Taekwondo has received no reports against anyone currently involved with the 

organization, accusing them of such behaviors as covering up for abusers. If we were to receive 

such reports they would be investigated with through the Center, or USA Taekwondo's 

independent ethics processes. 

2. USA Taekwondo arranges training camps and exchanges for its athletes. It is my 

understanding that, in at least one instance, one of those events involved a coach with a 

pattern of inappropriate relationships with young athletes. How does USA Taekwondo vet 

the coaches and other staff with whom athletes will come into contact at camps and 

exchanges that it arranges? 

All coaches and staff (administrative, referee or medical) must pass a background check, 

complete the SafeSport training and have no current SafeSport sanctions in place against them 

before they will be allowed to attend a training camp or athlete exchange. 

3. How does USA Taekwondo vet referees and vendors at its events? Are banned coaches 

allowed to return to USAT events in non-coach roles? 

Referees and vendors must pass a background in order to be granted access to USA Taekwondo 

events. Bans issued are from any participation in a USA Taekwondo event, so banned coaches 

would not be allowed to take any non-coaching role at a USA Taekwondo event. 
171 


GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

Mr. Jamie Davis 

CEO 

USA Volleyball 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

QCongre~~ of tbt Wntteb ~tate~ 

~ou~e of 1\eprt~entatil:lt~ 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN House OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority !202!225-2927 

Minority (202)225-3641 

July 13,2018 

4065 Sinton Road, Suite 200 

Colorado Springs, CO 80907 

Dear Mr. Davis: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on May 23, 

2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes 

from Sexual Abuse . ., 

Pursuant to the Rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the hearing record remains 

open for ten business days to permit Members to submit additional questions for the record, which are 

attached. To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Friday, July 27, 2018. Your responses should be mailed to 

Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn House Office 

Building, Washington, DC 20515 and e-mailed in Word format to Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort prepal'ing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

&;,. 

Gregg Harper 

~ Chainnan 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Attachment 
172 


~. USA Volleyball 

July26, 2018 

The Honorable Gregg Harper, Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Attn: Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Ali.Fulling@mail.house, gov 

RE: Supplemental Questions of Committee on Energp and Commerce dated July 13,1018 

Dear Chairman Harper and Ranking Member DeGette: 

Please allow this correspondence to serve as USA Volleyball's response to the House of Representatives 

Committee on Energy and Commerce's communication dated July 13,2018. USA Volleyball 

respectfully reserves the right to amend its responses should further information be discovered at a Jater 

date. 

The Honorable Gregg Harper 

1. According to various reports, some NGB members that have been accused of sexual abuse 

have been allowed to continue coaching or competing, and having contact with minor athletes, 

even while they are under investigation. The purpose of interim measures is to prevent an alleged 

abuser from continuing the pattern of abuse during the period of time in which that individual is 

under investigation. Is it your practice to take an interim measure, such as suspending the 

member, while tbat individual is under investigation? 

USA Volleyball employs an interim measure suspension as a protective measure for all involved. 

a. If so, what are the types of interim measures that might be used and what 

determines which type of interim measure is used? 

Proud Member 
173 


USA Volleyball is committed to ensuring the safety of all its participants. Therefore, the 

interim measure of suspension is used for all individuals under investigation. 

b. If an allegation is turned over to the U.S. Center for SafeSport, what authority does 

USA Volleyball have to implement interim measures while the Center investigates? 

USA Volleyball has been instructed by the U.S. Center for SafeSport that once the U.S. 

Center for SafeS port assumes jurisdiction of a matter, USA Volleyball may implement 

interim measures short of suspension of participation, as such interim measure is reserved 

exclusively for the U.S. Center for SafeS port at that point. Any interim measures placed 

by USA Volleyball after the U.S. Center for SafeS port assumes jurisdiction are to be 

coordinated through and approved by the U.S. Center for SafeS port. 

i. Does the nature of the interim measure adopted differ based on whether the 

NGB or the Center is conducting the investigation? 

As discussed above, USA Volleyball always places the individual on an interim 

suspension, which occurs prior to the U.S. Center for SafeS port assuming 

jurisdiction. The U.S. Center for SafeS port may accept jurisdiction in a matter of a 

day, or it may take several weeks to make a jurisdiction determination. 

Once the U.S. Center for SafeS port has assumed jurisdiction, it may enforce the 

interim measure suspension placed by USA Volleyball, or it may assume or enforce a 

different interim measure(s). Should the U.S. Center for SafeSport assume a different 

interim measure, it faits to the responsibility of USA Volleyball to enforce. 

USA Volleyball reports all matters involving sexual misconduct to the U.S. Center 

for SafeS port since it has exclusive jurisdiction over such matters. USA Volleyball 

only investigates those matters not involving sexual misconduct. 

c. Is some measure taken in every case, or is this determined on a case by case basis? 

If a measure is not taken in some case, why not? 

USA Volleyball almost always takes an interim measure suspension. In those rare 

instances when USA Volleyball does not take an interim measure, one of two things 

occurred: (I) the U.S. Center for SafeS port was notified of the matter first and is 

preparing its own interim measure, or (2) the nature of the circumstances did not present 

a danger to our participants (for example, the nature of the complaint is against a foreign 

participant who has returned to his/her home country with no possibility of return). 

USA Volleyball Page 2 
174 


d. If an interim measure is imposed, how quickly are such interim measures 

implemented? 

When USA Volleyball imposes an interim measure, the interim measure goes into effect 

immediately and the individual is sent a notification by electronic communication. 

As discussed above, the U.S. Center for SafeSp01t may impose a sanction in one day or 

several weeks. Once imposed, notification is sent to the individual with a copy to USA 

Volleyball. 

e. Whose responsibility is it to enforce the interim measures? What are the potential 

consequences if an interim measure is not adequately enforced? 

The responsibility to enforce any interim measure falls upon USA Volleyball. USA 

Volleyball has been diligent in enforcing interim measures and is, therefore, unaware of 

the consequences of not adequately enforcing an interim measure since this situation has 

not occurred. 

The Honorable Chris Collins 

1. Non~disclosure agreements are widely used in business resolutions, and serve as useful tools 

in not only creating confidential relationships between parties, but also protecting certain 

confidential and proprietary information. Whether it be unilateral or multilateral, they vary in 

nature w protecting trade secrets and intellectual property, formalizing a relationship between 

collaborating organizations, or serving as an added layer when resolving disputes between 

individuals and entities. Within the Olympic community, various news sources revealed some 

sexual assault victims are bound by NDAs as part of their settlement agreement. One of the most 

widely publicized instance is the case of Olympic gold medalist, McKay Ia Maroney, who signed an 

NDA with USA Gymnastics in late 2016. However, USA Gymnastics chose not to seek action 

against Maroney when she breached her NDA earlier this year by speaking at the sentencing 

hearing of serial child molester, Larry Nassar. I would Jike to better understand the driving 

factors in NDA utilization within the Olympic community, as it may be indicative of protecting the 

brand and management more so than treating the problem at its source w stopping sexual abuse. 

a. How many NDAs has your organization entered into since 2005 and when was the 

most recent NDA or settlement entered into? Of those NDAs, how many were 

minors at the time of the dispute? 

USA Volleyball Page 3 
175 


USA Volleyball does not currently utilize NDAs, and to the best of our knowledge, bas 

never utilized NDAs for purposes of settlement agreements. To that end, no minor has 

ever executed an NDA with USA VolleybalL 

Within the past few years, members ofthe USA Volleyball Board of Directors have 

executed NDAs for purposes of reviewing financial records and other tax documents. 

None of the NDAs executed in those instances related to settlement agreements. 

b. As to the nature of these NDAs or settlements, do the agreements prohibit the victim 

from speaking about the details of the settlement~ such as the amount of any 

financial award • or do they prohibit the victim from speaking about the details of 

the case- such as the fact that they were abused, where and when the abuse 

occurred, who their abuser was, etc.? Are any of these NDAs entered into in lieu of 

the responding party being given appropriate sanctions, such as being suspended or 

banned from the NGB? 

As discussed above, USA Volleyball does not utilize NDAs for purposes of settlement 

agreements. 

The Honorable Frank Pallone. Jr. 

I. In USA Volleyball's March 20th letter to the Committee, USA Volleyball reported 

receiving 14 complaints in 2017, and 30 in 2018. There are also allegations that your organization 

banned a coach in 1995 after receiving reports that he abused athletes. USA Volleyball then 

reportedly reinstated him in 2000, after which he had contact with nearly 20,000 athletes before 

USA Volleyball banned him again earlier this year. Has USA Volleyball conducted a thorough 

examination of the reports of abuse made to your organization? If not, why not? If so, have you 

learned anything that has changed the way USA Volleyball will handle similar cases in the future? 

USA Volleyball has long championed a culture of protection for all its participants. We were 

one of the first NOB's to implement a robust background screening policy. Beginning in the 

2004/2005 volleyball season, USA Volleyball started working with the nationally respected 

background screening company SSCI and implemented a policy requiring individuals who 

participate with junior volleyball clubs to submit to a background screen. 

Recognizing a need to do more to protect athletes of all ages, USA Volleyball formed a 

commission in 2010 to address participant safety, named the Special Commission on Athlete 

Safeguards. This commission set out to review the current trends and best practices in athlete 

safety and produced recommendations for USA Volleyball to implement. 

USA Volleyball Page 4 
176 


The recommendations of the commission were extensive, but included: 

1) developing a procedure for reporting sexual harassment or abuse allegations, 

2) formulating written policies that define inappropriate behavior, and 

3) providing continual education on these kinds of topics to USA Volleyball participants 

and parents. 

This commission's work paved the way for USA Volleyball to establish early SafeSport policies 

and procedures before it was ever called '

1

SafeSport" We are proud to have been a very early 

endorser of a SafeS port program and the U.S. Center for SafeS port and we take seriously 

examining all reports of alleged abuse made to our organization. 

In addition, USA Volleyball continues to look for ways to further protect our members. Starting 

in 2014, USA Volleyball added the position ofSafeSport Coordinator. The primary job duties of 

that position include, but are not limited to: relaying reports of abuse made to USA Volleyball to 

the U.S. Center for SafeS port, acting as a liaison of information between USA Volleyball and the 

U.S. Center for SafeSport, tracking matters and following-up with the U.S. Center for SafeS port 

on the status of those matters, communicating with victims about their rights and our reporting 

obligations, reporting alleged misconduct to law enforcement, and tracking data on the matters 

that are filed with the U.S. Center for SafeSport. 

Additionally, USA Volleyball has simplified its reporting system, and made it easier for victims 

to report allegations to the U.S. Center for SafeSport. On USA Volleyball's website, we have 

included an easily identifiable graphic regarding SafeS port and reporting. Also, we began using a 

centralized reporting form that links to the U.S. Center for SafeSport and includes all necessary, 

pertinent information. 

In regard to your question concerning the coach banned in 1995, Mr. Rick Butler is a wellknown private volleyball club owner and coach in the Chicago land suburb of Aurora, IL. His 

club, Sports Performance Volleyball, is not owned or operated by USA Volleyball however it's 

athletes and coaches are required to be members of USA Volleyball if they wish to participate in 

USA Volleyball sanctioned events. In 1995, allegations of sexual misconduct were brought forth 

by three women that took place while they were members and players at his privately~owned 

club. The women claimed that Mr. Butler had a sexual relationship with them in the 1980's while 

he was their coach and while they were under the age of 18. As a result of those allegations, 

USA Volleyball found that Mr. Butler had violated our rules and voted to ban him for life. 

After five years passed, and upon Mr. Butler's request for reinstatement, USA Volleyball voted 

to conditionally reinstate Mr. Butler's membership in the year 2000 under the limitation of Mr. 

Butler's inability to ever coach junior girls in USA Volleyball sanctioned events. To be clear, 

regardless of all the headlines surrounding this matter, since the year 1995, Mr. Butler has been 

banned from coaching junior girls under USA Volleyball, a condition of his lifetime ban that has 

USA Volleyball Page 5 
177 


never changed. Furthermore, these allegations are a result of Mr. Butler's activities as a club 

director and coach for his privately-owned club and not a part of the U~A Volleyball national 

team programs. 

In late 2016, several brave women came forward to USA Volleyball to provide new allegations 

against Mr. Butler for sexual misconduct dating back to the 1980's. Based on these women's 

claims, USA Volleyball filed new charges against Mr. Butler and in January 2018, USA 

Volleyball's Ethics and Eligibility Committee held a hearing regarding these allegations and Mr. 

Butler was once again found to have violated our rules and as a result, Mr. Butler was banned 

from total participation in USA Volleyball for life without the possibility of reinstatement. The 

current ban against Mr. Butler prohibits him from ever being reinstated as member of USA 

Volleyball, insuring the protection of our members in perpetuity. 

2. The U.S. Olympic Committee's current NGB Athlete Safety Policy requires sports 

governing bodies to conduct criminal background checks at least once every two years on anyone 

who is in a position of authority over an athlete or who has frequent contact with an athlete. 

However, the policy does not provide specific direction on how to design background check 

programs. For example, it does not specify whether all sports governing bodies should use a 

common background check provider. It similarly does not specify whether governing bodies 

should require background or reference checks of all staff and volunteers. What does USA 

Volleyball do beyond the minimum requirements of the Athlete Safety Policy when conducting 

criminal background checks and reference checks? 

fn the 2004/2005 volleyball season, USA Volleyball started working with the nationally 

respected background screening company Southeastern Security Consultants, Inc, or SSCI to 

conduct background screens. We have maintained that relationship to this day. 

While there are no specified standards for what infmmation should be reviewed, USA Volleyball 

has worked with SSCI to determine parameters set by state and federal laws (for example, the 

Fair Credit Reporting Act) as to how far back we, as a vendor, may review information in an 

individual 1s background screen, 

fn accordance with the Athlete Safety Policy, USA Volleyball's background screens are 

extended to anyone having frequent contact or authority over athletes. For USA Volleyball, this 

includes, but is not limited to: coaches, officials, chaperones, applicable volunteers, medical 

professionals, independent contractors, all USA Volleyball Board of Directors, and all USA 

Volleyball staff. 

Up through this last season, USA Volleyball employed automatic disqualifiers to prohibit 

membership to an individual whose background screen revealed such a disqualifier. Per USA 

Volleyball's background screen policy, those disqualifiers are: 

USA Volleyball Page 6 
178 


Anyone found guilty, entering a plea of guilty, or a plea of nolo contendere (no contest) 

regardless of adjudication or received court directed programs and/or other sentencing 

directives in lieu of a finding of guilt,for the following criminal offenses; All Sex 

offenses, Murder, and Homicide regardless of time limit; Felony Violence and Felony 

Drug offenses in the past 10 years; any misdemeanor violence offenses in the past 7 

years; any multiple misdemeanor drug and alcohol offenses within the past 7 year; or 

any other crimes (not listed) against children in the past 7 years (the time frames 

associated with the categories of crime listed above are calculated based on the date of 

the offense). Individuals found to have pending court cases for any of the disqualifYing 

offenses will be disqualified. If the disposition of the pending case does not meet the 

criteria for disqualification as listed above, the individual would then be cleared and 

reinstated. Falsification of information on any membership application or the 

consent/release form is grounds for membership revocation or restriction of membership. 

For the start of the 201812019 season, USA Volleyball has been directed by the United States 

Olympic Committee that we can no longer utilize a system of'1

automatic" disqualifiers, but 

instead! must offer a hearing to individuals found to have met one of the disqualifiers above. To 

be clear, these hearings are to be extended to individuals that would have otherwise been 

disqualified from membership with USA Volleyball. 

While USA Volleyball's background screening is robust, and has been for some time, we view 

the background screen as an initial filtering process for USA Volleyball membership eligibility. 

After the background screen, USA Volleyball maintains additional safety measures. 

We believe this communication has effectively and transparently responded to the supplemental 

questions. Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned should you have any other questions or 

comments. 

Jamie Davis 

CEO 

USA Volleyball 

USA Volleyball Page 7 
179 


GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

Ms. Shellie Pfohl 

President and CEO 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

CCongre~~ of tbe mtniteb $tate~ 

J)ouse of l\epresentatibes 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HousE OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority (202} 225-2927 

Minority (202) 225-3641 

July 13,2018 

U.S. Center for SafeSport 

1385 S. Colorado Boulevard, Suite A-706 

Denver, CO 80222 

Dear Ms. Pfohl: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and [nvestigations on May 23, 

2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining the Olympic Community's Ability to Protect Athletes 

from Sexual Abuse." 

Pursuant to the Rules of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the hearing record remains 

open for ten business days to pennit Members to submit additional questions for the record, which are 

attached. To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Friday, July 27, 2018. Your responses should be mailed to 

Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Raybu·rn House Office 

Building, Washington, DC 20515 and e-mailed in Word format to Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

~i"~ Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Attachment 
180 


U.S. CENTER FOR 

SAFES PORT CHAMPION RESPECT. END ABUSE. 

Attaebment-Addjtjonal Ouestjops for the Record 

Responses from the U.S. Center for SafeSport 

July 30, 2018 

The Honorable Gregg Harper 

L During the May 23 hearing, you testified that the U.S. Center for SafeSport (the 

Center) had received reports, complaints, and allegations regarding sexual abuse that 

related to 38 of the National Governing Bodies (NGBs). Can you please provide a list 

of these 38 NGBs that have been associated with reports, complaints, and allegations 

received by the Center regarding sexual abuse? 

Please see Appendix B to April2018 responses. 

a. Have you received reports, complaints, or allegations regarding sexual assault from 

additional NGBs since the hearing? If so, from which NGBs? 

No, there have not been reports, complaints, or allegations regarding sexual assault 

received from additional NGBs since the hearing. 

2. During the May 23 hearing, you testified that the Center had received over 800 reports 

regarding sexual abuse since the Center opened in March 2017. Please provide an 

update on the total number of reports regarding sexual abuse that the Center has 

received since it opened in March 2017 and the date associated with this updated 

count. 

As of July 27,2018, the Center has received 975 reports involving some form of 

sexual misconduct. 

a. How many reports have been resolved since the Center opened in March 2017? 

There are currently 398 open matters. 223 of the reports have been resolved (i.e., 

investigated and adjudicated) through the Center's process since it opened in 

March 2017. 

b. On average, how long does it take the Center to resolve a case relating to sexual 

abuse? 

63 days. 

c. Of the NGBs that are associated with these reports of sexual abuse, how many NGBs 

have over 100 complaints associated with them, over 50 complaints associated 

with them, and over 25 complaints associated with them? 

Over I 00 complaints: 3 NGBs 

Over 50 complaints: 2 NGBs 

Over 25 complaints: 5 NGBs 
181 


3. From the documents we received during our investigation, the Committee learned that 

the Center requested the historical codes of conduct from each NGB on March 14, 

2018 to create a comprehensive database of policies. 

a. Based on SafeS port's Code of Conduct, there is no statute of limitations that 

prevents the Center from investigating, assessing, or considering relevant conduct 

under its provisions, correct? 

Correct- there is no statute of limitations. 

b. Was the March 14,2018 request the first time that the Center requested that the 

NGBs provide the Center with all of their historical codes of conduct? 

March 14, 2018, was the first time the Center requested that the NGBs provide the Center 

with all historical codes of conduct to create a database of historical policies. But it was not 

the first time Center requested the applicable policy or policies from an NGB if and when it 

received allegations of sexual misconduct that pre-dated the SafeSport Code. Rather, if the 

Center did not have a policy in its database, it would request applicable documentation 

from the relevant NGB on a case-by-case basis. 

c. The Center indicated that it was requesting the historical codes of conduct because, 

if a report is made regarding conduct that occurred before the effective date of the 

SafeSport's Code, the Office will apply the relevant NOB's substantive rules and 

regulations and/or other standards applicable at the time of the alleged conduct. Do you 

now have a database of historical policies from each NGB? 

No. The Center anticipates completing the process of creating a database of historical 

policies by August 31,2018. Because there is no statute of! imitations, matters may date 

back as far as the 1960s. 

d. What did the Center do when investigating historical cases during the first year of its 

operation? 

During its first year of operations, the Center requested applicable policies from the 

NGB as needed and on a case-by-case basis. In addition, if policies were not (or are 

not) available, the Center identifies community standards in effect at the time. 

e. As you have worked through the first year, how else have you changed or adapted 

your operating procedures to more efficiently handle your caseload? 

Criminal dispositions 

Broadened the definition of criminal disposition 

• Modified process for temporary suspensions 

• Clarified notice provisions and the time within which a hearing must be 

provided (72 hours from the request for a hearing) 

• Added requirement that Responding Party share in the costs of an interim 

measures hearing 

• Created a rebuttable presumption that allegations are true for purposes of 

interim measures hearing 

• Removed the option for a three-judge panel for merits hearing (now all panels will be 

one judge) 

Removed an ex-parte communication provision during hearings 

• Added provision making willful tolerance of a violation an independent violation 
182 


4. Does the Center have a standard process for investigating reports regarding sexual 

abuse? If so, please describe this process, including the parties that generally are 

involved in the process, their roles, and how the parties are updated on the status of the 

investigation. 

Yes, the Center has a standard process for investigating reports regarding sexual 

misconduct. 

When the Center receives notice of a matter within its exclusive authority, or accepts a 

matter within its discretionary authority, it undertakes a preliminary inquiry to 

determine ifthere is reason to believe an individual within its jurisdiction violated the 

SafeS port Code. If, after a preliminary inquiry, the Center concludes there is reason to 

believe an individual within its jurisdiction has violated the Code, it will initiate 

proceedings, which may include an informal or formal resolution. 

The Center may initiate proceedings without a formal report and reserves the right to 

initiate proceedings without a report from, or participation by, a complainant (reporting 

party). The Center may, at any point before a matter is final, seek interim measures. 

The parties 

There are two parties to the process: the reporting party (often referred historically to 

as the victim) and the responding party (often referred historically to as the 

perpetrator). 

The parties' roles 

During an investigation, both the Reporting Party and the Responding Party are 

permitted to provide evidence, including written statements, lists of potential 

witnesses, and other physical or documentary evidence. 

Full cooperation and participation in the investigation process is important to ensure 

that all relevant facts and evidence are presented to the Center so it can determine 

whether a violation of the SafeSport Code occurred. If a party declines to cooperate or 

participate in an investigation, the Center will make its decision based on the available 

evidence. 

Other individuals who may have a role in the process include witnesses and the 

parties' advisor (who may be an attorney). 

Formal investigation 

If the Center determines that a full investigation is necessary, it will appoint trained 

investigators. The number of investigators assigned and the length of the investigation will 

depend on the nature and/or complexity of the matter. 

The investigator may take the following steps: 

Seek to notifY the Reporting Party that the Center is conducting an investigation into a 

possible SafeSport Code violation and inform the Reporting Party of the right to meet 

with the investigator and present evidence in support of the complaint along with the 

names and/or contact information of any potential witnesses with direct knowledge of 

the allegations. 

• Seek to interview the Responding Party and advise the Responding Party of the nature 

of the allegations before making a determination. The Responding Party will be 

provided the opportunity to present a response to the allegations, including evidence 

and the names and/or contact information of potential witnesses with direct knowledge 

of the allegations. 

• Seek to interview witnesses with direct knowledge of the allegations. 

Seek evidence and take any other action as the investigator may deem relevant to the 
183 


investigation. 

• Review the evidence provided by a third-party reporter, the Reporting Party, the 

Responding Party, or any other source 

Document all investigative efforts, including but not limited to interviews, receipt of 

relevant documentation, database searches, and review and collection of other publiclyavailable information (e.g., social media, public records). 

At any point before the final resolution the Center may close the investigation if (a) the 

investigator could not conduct or complete the investigation, (b) it is determined the Center 

does not have authority or jurisdiction over the alleged violation, or (c) it is determined there is 

no reason to believe there has been a violation. The Center may, at its discretion, reopen any 

case it has closed. 

Investigative Report 

Upon completing the investigation, the investigator prepares a report that, based on the 

preponderance of the evidence, sets forth findings offact and references disputed facts and any 

credibility assessments. The investigator's report will also state whether the Responding Party 

violated the Code. 

The Director's Decision 

The Director of Investigations and Outcomes will consider the investigative report and any 

other relevant information. If the Director decides no further investigation is necessary, the 

Director will issue a Decision that (a) states whether a violation of the Code occurred, and (b) 

the code Violation, and (c) the sanction to be imposed (if any), consistent with the sanctioning 

guidelines. The Decision will incorporate the investigator's report, include a summary of the 

relevant standards, facts and evidence relied upon in reaching the Decision. 

The Director will provide written notice and a copy of the Decision to the Responding Party 

and the Reporting Party. The written notice states the Responding Party's opportunity to 

request a hearing to challenge all or part of the Decision. The Decision also includes notice of 

the Reporting Party's right (as applicable) to request a hearing to challenge a determination that 

the Responding Party did not violate the Code. 

• If the Director decides there was no violation of the Code by the Responding Party, the 

matter will be closed. However, the Reporting Party may initiate arbitration to request a 

finding that the Responding Party did violate the Code. 

If a violation of the Code is found, the Responding Party may request a hearing 

concerning the finding that there was a violation of the Code, the sanction, or both. 

All materials created during an investigation are deemed confidential as is the identity of the 

Reporting Party(ies) (i.e., victim(s)). 

a. After the Center launches an investigation, what information do all parties have 

access to during and after the investigation? If access to information is different for 

the various parties involved in the investigation, please describe what information 

each pmlycan access at the different stages of the investigation. 

All parties have access to the same information, including the nature of the 

allegations (including date and location), relevant policies, the involved 

individuals, information provided by witnesses- however, that information may be 

shared at different times with the parties and may be redacted to protect the 

integrity of the ongoing investigation or the identities of parties or witnesses. After 

the investigation is complete, the parties both have access to the investigation 

report, which includes any exhibits and documentary evidence relied upon in 

reaching the decision, and the Director's Decision. 
184 


b. During an investigation, how does the Center typically work with the USOC or 

NGBs? 

The Center's Response and Resolution Office shares information with NGBs as necessary 

to resolve an allegation and enforce disciplinary action. At a minimum, the Center must 

always initially determine whether it has personal and subject matter jurisdiction over the 

individual who allegedly violated relevant policy (i.e., the Responding Party)- information 

that the NGB must provide as they have exclusive control over their current and historical 

membership rolls. In addition, the Center shares information with NGBs necessary to 

enforce a sanction as NGBs are required to and have the ability to enforce sanctions. To 

this end, the policies and procedures state: 

It will be necessary for the Center to: 

a) notify the NGB of an allegation involving a Covered Individual 

[Responding Party] from that NGB; 

b) if the Office seeks an interim measure (e.g., a no-contact measure, 

safety planning, or a suspension); 

c) if the Office proceeds to a full investigation, and 

d) any final decision regarding whether a violation occurred and what 

sanctions, if any, must be enforced. 

However, the Center will not disclose the identity of a Reporting Party to 

the NGB unless necessary to the case. 

Example 1 -The Reporting Party requests a no-contact order be implemented between 

them and the Responding Party. The Reporting Party and Responding Party are 

scheduled to compete at an event sanctioned and staffed by an NGB. The two parties 

compete at different times, but there is a possibility that the two schedules may overlap. 

To both implement and monitor the no-contact order during the sanctioned event, the 

NGB must be aware of both the Reporting and Responding parties' identities. 

Example 2- A Reporting Party notifies the Center of allegations that were previously 

addressed and resolved by the NGB prior to the opening ofthe Center in March 2017. 

This is, in essence, requesting an appeal or are-review of the previous NGB 

adjudication. To determine whether such review is appropriate, the Center must obtain 

any historical files from the NGB. 

Interim (Temporary) Measures by an NGB 

Under the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 

2017, the Center must develop a mechanism by which an NGB can "withhold providing to an 

adult who is the subject of an allegation of child abuse authority to interact with an amateur 

athlete who is a minor until the resolution of such allegation." Under certain circumstances, this 

may require that the NGB be aware of information concerning the identity of both parties. 

Reporting obligations and abuse o(process 

The Center's rules are designed to maximize the disclosure of any and all relevant information 

to both the Center and any other appropriate agencies (e.g., law enforcement, child protective 

services, etc.)-through ongoing reporting obligations, a prohibition on the destruction or 

concealment of evidence, and privacy rules. 

Covered Adults1, such as NGB staff, are mandatory reporters of child abuse. The obligation to 

report is an ongoing one and is not satisfied simply by making an initial report. The obligation 

1 A Covered Adult is a Covered Individual, who is 18 years of age or older. A Covered Individual is an individual 

who is within the Center's jurisdiction, i.e., any individual who currently is, or was at the time of a possible 

violation of the SafeSport Code, within the governance or disciplinary jurisdiction of an NGB or who is seeking to 

be within the governance or disciplinary jurisdiction of an NGB. This includes NGB staff. 
185 


includes reporting, on a timely basis, all information about which a Covered Adult becomes 

aware. If the Covered Adult learns additional information, including information regarding the 

nature of an incident, the identity of witnesses, statements regarding the incident including 

statements by the Reporting Party (the person(s) who may be the victim of the alleged 

behavior), Responding Party (the person(s) accused of the alleged behaviors), or a third-party 

Reporter (e.g., a friend, parent, coach, teammate, etc.), or the existence of evidentiary material 

(including any documents, electronic communications, emails, text messages, medical reports, 

photographs, audio or video recordings, or social media activity), it must be reported promptly 

to the Center. See SafeSport Practice and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic 

Movement at Part II (Reporting, Confidentiality, and Privacy). 

The Center prohibits NGBs from and may sanction staff for: (a) falsifying, distorting, or 

misrepresenting information, and (b) destroying or concealing information prior to or during 

an investigation. See SafeSport Practice and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic 

Movement at Part IV (Misconduct Related to the Office's Proceedings) (prohibiting abuse of 

process). 

c. What information does a party have access to during and after a SafeSport 

investigation? 

Please see 4(a), above. 

The Honorable Mjchael C Burgess 

I. Larry Nassar was licensed in the state of Michigan, but treated gymnasts at the Karolyi 

Ranch in Texas without a Texas medical license. He also treated gymnasts during 

competitions abroad, including at the World Championships and Olympics. 

a. How does the United States Olympic Committee and its National Governing Bodies 

ensure that its physicians are compliant with licensing obligations? 

The Center refers questions concerning how the United States Olympic Committee 

and the National Governing Bodies ensures that its physicians are compliant with 

licensing obligations to those organizations. 

However, when the Center is confronted with such issues, the Center attempts to 

coordinate with the governing medical boards in the relevant jurisdictions. 

b. Is parental consent required for amateur athletes to be treated by a team doctor? 

Are parents provided with information, such as status of medical license, for these 

providers? 

The Center refers questions concerning how the United States Olympic Committee 

and the National Governing Bodies addresses parental consent for treatment by a 

team doctor to those organizations. 

2. Many athletes begin training when they are very young and often do so outside of 

parental supervision. 

a. Do athletes and/or parents receive training and education when a child joins a sport 

organization governed by a United States Olympic Committee National Governing 

Body? 

The U.S. Center for Safe Sport disseminates all education materials through its website and 

directly to National Governing Bodies to distribute to their membership, including athletes 

and parents. In May 2018 the Center published a parent toolkit and a free online parent 

training. The Center's core SafeSport training covers the topics addressing sexual, physical 
186 


and emotional abuse set forth in Attachment A. 

In the Education policies that the U.S. Center for SafeS port will be issuing soon to 

NGBs, per the requirement under the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual 

Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of2017, all NGBs will be required to offer 

and provide training annually to minor athletes with parent/legal guardian consent. The 

Center is currently developing minor athlete training resources, which will be launched and 

made available to NGBs in October 2018. 

b. Are athletes and parents made aware ofSafeSport and how to get in contact? 

The U.S. Center for SafeSport is planning to disseminate parent education resources this 

fall, as part of a back to school awareness campaign. This will include sending NGBs 

sample communications and resources to distribute to parents, as well as the contact 

information for the Center. Additionally, the Center has been in communication with the 

Athletes Advisory Council over the last several months, working to identifY a date to meet 

with and provide training with the AAC. 

3. According to audit reports issued in October 2017, 43 organizations under the United 

State Olympic Committee had deficiencies in their compliance of safe sport policies and 

procedures. Congress recently passed a $2.5 million grant program to help fund the 

U.S. Center for SafeS port, which l understand currently has 9 employees and will have 

approximately 16 by July 2018. 

a. How do you plan to remedy these deficiencies and continue to evaluate these 

organizations for future compliance? 

The USOC Audit 

The audit reports referenced in question 3 were conducted by the USOC to audit NGBs 

concerning compliance with USOC's NOB Athlete Safety Policy (first effective 2013), an 

historical USOC policy that predates the Center's 2017 opening and the 2018 federal 

legislation. The USOC policy will be largely, if not entirely, supplanted by new Center 

education policies (effective August 2018), which include policies for education 

requirements and minimizing one-on-one interactions. 

Per the information made publicly-available on the USOC website, it "engaged Baker Tilly 

Virchow Krause, a full-service advisory firm that offers industry-specialized services in 

audit, to assist the USOC in the completion of audits to assess compliance with safe sport 

policies and procedures at the USOC and all of its National Governing Bodies and High 

Performance Management Organizations. The audit focused on compliance with the 

USOC's NGB Athlete Safety Policy. During the audit, many organizations were in the 

process of updating their athlete safety polices to identifY those individuals who come 

within the jurisdiction of the newly formed U.S. Center for SafeSport and to comply with 

the updated NGB Athlete Safety Policy approved in June 2017. Following the initial audit, 

each organization, the USOC included, was given 90 days to correct remaining 

deficiencies. Corrective actions are being monitored and reviewed, and follow-up reports" 

are published and available through teamusa.org. 

US. Center for SafeSport 

The Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 

2017 requires the Center to include in its policies and procedures "oversight procedures, 

including regular and random audits conducted by subject matter experts unaffiliated with, 

and independent of, a national governing body or a Paralympic sports organization of each 

national governing body and Paralympic sports organization to ensure that policies and 

procedures developed ... are followed correctly." 

To this end, the Center is currently creating a compliance department, which will have the 
187 


responsibility for developing, implementing, and executing on the audit requirement. The 

Director of Compliance position is currently posted, and we anticipate filling that role by 

September. The Director will, in turn, hire two additional compliance staff. The Director of 

Compliance will work to monitor historical remediation as it prepares to evaluate the NGBs 

for compliance with Center policies on a moving forward basis. 

The Honorable Chrjs Collins 

l. Non-disclosure agreements are widely used in business resolutions, and serve as useful 

tools in not only creating confidential relationships between parties, but also protecting 

certain confidential and proprietary information. Whether it be unilateral or multilateral, 

they vary in nature - protecting trade secrets and intellectual property, formalizing a 

relationship between collaborating organizations, or serving as an added layer when 

resolving disputes between individuals and entities. Within the Olympic community, 

various news sources revealed some sexual assault victims are bound by NDAs as part 

of their settlement agreement. One of the most widely publicized instance is the case of 

Olympic gold medalist, McKay Ia Maroney, who signed an NDA with USA 

Gymnastics in late 2016. However, USA Gymnastics chose not to seek action against 

Maroney when she breached her NDA earlier this year by speaking at the sentencing 

hearing of serial child molester, Larry Nassar. I would like to better understand the 

driving factors in NDA utilization within the Olympic community, as it may be 

indicative of protecting the brand and management more so than treating the problem at 

its source- stopping sexual abuse. 

a. How many NDAs has your organization entered into since 2005 and when was the 

most recent NDA or settlement entered into? Of those NDAs, how many were 

minors at the time of the dispute? 

The Center has not entered into any NDAs. 

b. As to the nature of these NDAs or settlements, do the agreements prohibit the 

victim from speaking about the details of the settlement- such as the amount of 

any financial award -or do they prohibit the victim from speaking about the details 

of the case- such as the fact that they were abused, where and when the abuse 

occurred, who their abuser was, etc.? Are any of these NDAs entered into in lieu of 

the responding party being given appropriate sanctions, such as being suspended or 

banned from theNGB? 

Not applicable. 

c. Would Safe Sport consider using an NDA in the case of sexual abuse where the 

NDA would require the victim to not discuss the assault? 

The U.S. Center for SafeSport would not consider using an NDA to resolve an 

allegation of sexual abuse where the NDA would require the victim to not discuss 

the assault. 

The Honorable Diana DeGette 

1. How do criminal convictions impact SafeSport's investigation of a misconduct 

allegation? 

It is a violation of the SafeS port Code for a person within the Center's jurisdiction to 

be convicted of, or subject to, a Criminal Disposition. A "Criminal Disposition" is any 

disposition of a criminal proceeding, other than an adjudication of not guilty, including 

an adjudication of guilt or admission to a criminal violation; a plea to a lesser included 

offense; a plea of no contest; the disposition of the proceeding through a diversionary 
188 


program, deferred adjudication, disposition of supervision, conditional dismissal, or 

similar arrangement; or the existence of a warrant for arrest or any pending charges." 

SafeS port Code at Parts II.G. and III. 

Because the standards for finding a violation of criminal law are different (e.g., 

reasonable doubt) from the standards for finding a violation of the Code 

(preponderance ofthe evidence), the resolution of a criminal proceeding is not 

determinative of(but may be relevant to) whether a violation of the Code has occurred, 

regardless of the outcome of any criminal process. Conduct may constitute sexual 

misconduct under the Code even if the Responding Party is not charged, prosecuted or 

convicted for the behavior that constitutes a potential violation of the Code, is 

acquitted of a criminal charge, or legal authorities decline to prosecute. 

The Center's resolution will not typically be altered or precluded on the grounds that 

(a) a civil case or criminal charges involving the same incident or conduct has been 

filed, or (b) that charges have been dismissed or reduced; or (c) a lawsuit has been 

settled or dismissed. 

SafeSport Practices and Procedures for the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movement at Part VII 

(Effect of Criminal or Civil Proceedings). 

a. Are there any differences in how cases involving felony and misdemeanor charges are 

handled? 

Both felonies and misdemeanors are considered Criminal Dispositions. Whether a 

Criminal Disposition is a felony or misdemeanor may- but will not necessarilyaffect a sanction or disciplinary action. 

b. What would happen in a situation in which a prosecutor permitted an individual 

charged with felony level offense to plea down to a misdemeanor? 

Criminal Dispositions include a plea to a lesser included offense; a plea of no 

contest; the disposition of the proceeding through a diversionary program, deferred 

adjudication, disposition of supervision, conditional dismissal, or similar 

arrangement. The Center may include the original charge in determining a 

sanction. 

2. What happens to a misconduct allegation if there is civil litigation involved where the 

defendant has been found at fault and damages may have been assigned? 

The Center may utilize the civil litigation as evidence in its proceedings. 

The Honorable Jan Scha]sowsky 

1. For each of your current board members, please list what prior associations they have 

with the U.S. Olympic Committee or individual National Governing Bodies. 
189 


Summary of Governance Structure 

The U.S. Center for SafeSport's Board of Directors is comprised of nine individuals, 

all of whom must meet the independence requirement (as described below). Of those 

nine individuals, five are at-large directors, two are recommended by the National 

Governing Body Council and two are recommended by the Athlete's Advisory 

Council. (Under the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, §220504, the U.S. 

Olympic Committee is required "to establish and maintain provisions with respect to its 

governance for reasonable representation of-(!) amateur sports organizations recognized as 

national governing bodies and Paralympic sports organizations in accordance with section 

220521 of this title, including through provisions which establish and maintain a National 

Governing Bodies' Council composed of representatives of the national governing bodies and 

any Paralympic sports organizations" (emphasis supplied)). 

Qualifications -Independence 

Each director for the U.S. Center for SafeS port's board of directors shall be 

"independent". A person is "independent" under the Center's Bylaws if he or she has 

no material affiliation or relationship, directly or indirectly, with any National 

Governing Body, any Paralympic Sports Organization, the Athletes Advisory Council 

of the USOC, or the United States Olympic Committee and such person is free of any 

other direct or indirect relationships that could reasonably be expected to interfere with 

the exercise of independent judgment of such person. The Nominating and Governance 

Committee may determine that while a prospective candidate does not strictly meet all 

of the criteria for independence, such person nonetheless, under all the facts and 

circumstances, does not have any relationship that would interfere with, or appear to 

interfere with such person's independent judgment, and thus such person may be 

deemed independent. The Nominating and Governance committee will only nominate 

candidates it determines to be independent for election by the Board of Directors. 

By way of comparison, the U.S. Olympic Committee's directors need not all be 

considered an "independent director" and three individuals are recommended by the 

NGB Council and three from the Athlete Advisory Counsel. In this regard, the USOC 

Bylaws provide that a director will not be considered an "independent director" if, at 

any time during the two years preceding commencement of or during his or her term as 

position as a director: 

a) the director was employed by or held any paid position or any volunteer 

governance position with the corporation, a corporation-member sports governing 

body, the IOC, the !PC, an OCOG, PASO or ANOC; 

b) an immediate family member of the director was employed by or held any paid 

position or any volunteer governance position with the corporation, a corporationmember sports governing body, the IOC, the !PC, an OCOG, PASO or ANOC; 

c) the director was affiliated with or employed by the corporation's outside auditor or 

outside counsel; 

d) an immediate family member ofthe director was affiliated with or employed by the 

corporation's outside auditor or outside counsel as a partner, principle or manager; 

or 

e) the director held a paid position or any volunteer governance or leadership position 

with, the ACC, NGB Council, or the Multisport Organization Council. 

Election 

• At-Large Directors (4): At each annual meeting of the Board of Directors, the 

Nominating and Governance Committee will recommend a nominee for each 

at-large director position to be filled. 

• Athlete Directors (2): Consistent with the independence requirement, athlete 

directors must be independent. No later than 60 days prior to each annual 

meeting of the Board of Directors where an athlete director position is to be 

filled, the AAC shall submit a list of at least two recommendations for each 
190 


position to the Nominating and Governance Committee. If the NGC does not 

wish to submit for election any of the recommended persons, it may request 

new recommendations for such position from the AAC or nominate a candidate 

of its own choosing for election by the Board of Directors. 

• NGB Directors (2): Consistent with the independence requirement, NGB 

directors must be independent. No later than 60 days prior to each annual 

meeting of the Board of Directors where an NGB director position is to be 

filled, the NGB Council shall submit a list of at least two recommendations for 

each position to the Nominating and Governance Committee. If the NGC does 

not wish to submit for election any of the recommended persons, it may request 

new recommendations for such position from the NGB Council or nominate a 

candidate of its own choosing for election by the Board of Directors. 

Current Board o(Directors (9) 

The first Board of Directors was seated in January 2016. 

• Becker, Regis 

Former Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer, Pennsylvania State University 

Recommended by the NGB Council- Regis Becker was hired in 2013 as Pennsylvania 

State University's first director of university ethics and compliance. In this role, he 

oversaw compliance issues, chaired the university's Ethics and Compliance Council 

and developed the university's first comprehensive program of institutional ethics. 

Becker was also directly responsible for athletic compliance, youth protection, privacy, 

export control, investigations and training. Becker has been a member of USA 

Weightlifting since 1994, served on USA Weightlifting's Board of Directors and its 

foundation board from 2008-2012, and its Nominating and Governance Committee 

from 2012-2014. As oftoday's date, it has been more than four years since Becker has 

had an association with the NGB. 

• Giardino, Angelo 

Chair, Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Chief Medical Officer, 

Primary Children's Hospital in Salt Lake City 

At-Large -Dr. Angelo Giardino currently chairs the Department of Pediatrics at the 

University of Utah. Previously, Giardino was with the Texas Children's Hospital, and 

served as a professor of pediatrics and section chief of academic general pediatrics at 

the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. Giardino is a distinguished fellow of the 

American College of Medical Quality and is sub-boarded in child abuse pediatrics by 

the American Board of Pediatrics. Giardino has published several textbooks on child 

abuse and neglect and frequently presents on these and other pediatric topics at 

conferences around the country. In 2015, Dr. Giardino served as a member of the U.S. 

Center for SafeS port's independent Advisory Council (unpaid volunteer), comprised of 

subject matter experts and thought leaders in abuse prevention. During the Center's 

start-up phase, the Advisory Council was responsible for delivering an understanding 

of industry trends and best practices at the intersection of abuse and sport. Giardino has 

no prior association with the U.S. Olympic Committee or National Governing 

Bodies. 

• Herrera-Flanigan, Jessica 

Executive Vice President, Government & Corporate Affairs, Univision 

Communications, Inc. 

At-Large-Jessica Herrera-Flanigan oversees the Univision Communications, Inc. 

Washington, D.C., office, where she leads the company's federal and state government 

relations efforts, coordinates the company's corporate social responsibility, social 

impact, and philanthropic efforts, and serves as the President of the Univision 

Foundation. From 2008 to June 2015, Herrera-Flanigan was a partner at Monument 

Policy Group, where she advised clients on media, technology, sports/outdoors, and 

national security policy and communications management. The Monument Policy 
191 


Group is currently and has been for the past ten years a registered lobbying firm 

of the U.S. Olympic Committee. She holds a bachelor's degree in American studies 

from Yale University and a law degree from Harvard Law School. As oftoday's date, 

it has been more than three years since Herrera-Flanigan has had any association with 

the U.S. Olympic Committee. · 

• Harned, Patricia 

Chief Executive Officer, Ethics & Compliance Initiative 

Recommended by the NGB Council- Patricia Harned is chief executive officer of the 

nonprofit Ethics & Compliance Initiative (ECI). The mission of the ECI is to empower 

organizations across the globe to operate with the highest levels of integrity. As CEO, 

Dr. Harned oversees all ofECl's strategy and operations. She also directs educational 

outreach efforts to policymakers and federal enforcement agencies worldwide, and she 

speaks and writes frequently as an expert on ethical leadership, ethics in the workplace, 

corporate governance, and global integrity. Dr. Harned chaired the ECI's Blue Ribbon 

Panel on High-Quality Ethics & Compliance Programs, which established a new 

industry standard for effective ethics and compliance efforts in organizations. Harned 

has no prior association with the U.S. Olympic Committee or National Governing 

Bodies. 

Jones, Reuben 

Executive Director, Kentucky Workers' Compensation Funding Commission 

At-Large -Reuben Jones currently serves as the executive director of the Kentucky 

Workers' Compensation Funding Commission. Jones previously served as a major 

general in the U.S. Army where he commanded the Army Family and Morale, Welfare 

and Recreation Command and oversaw a $3.5 billion non-appropriated funds program. 

The Army's World Class Athletes Program was a subordinate organization of his 

command. Jones has no prior association with the U.S. Olympic Committee or 

National Governing Bodies. 

Marshall, Frank 

Principal, The Kennedy/Marshall Company 

At-Large- Frank Marshall is an American film producer and director with a career 

spanning almost 50 years and 80 films. In 1981, Marshall formed Amblin 

Entertainment with his wife, Kathleen Kennedy, and acclaimed director Steven 

Spielberg. In 1991, Marshall and Kennedy launched The Kennedy/Marshall Company 

of which Marshall has been the sole proprietor since 2012. Marshall served on the U.S. 

Olympic Committee Board of Directors from 1992-2004, as a public sector 

member on the USA Gymnastics Board of Directors from 2009-2013, and the 

USAT&F Foundation Board between 2004 and March 2018. As oftoday's date, it has 

been more than five years since Marshall has had an association with the U.S. Olympic 

Committee or a National Governing Body. 

Novak, Julie 

Vice President of Child Safety, Big Brothers Big Sisters of America 

At-Large-At-Large- Prior to her current role with Big Brothers Big Sisters of 

America (BBBSA), Julie Novak held the positions of Associate Vice President and 

National Director of Child Safety and Quality Assurance for BBBSA and served as 

Chief Executive Officer of the organization's northwestern Wisconsin affiliate. She is 

BBBSA's leading national expert and spokesperson on child safety and youth 

protection matters. During her time with the organization, Novak has developed 

nationwide child abuse, violence prevention and crisis management training. Between 

August, 2013 and February 2014, Novak served as an independent volunteer member 

(unpaid) of the 2013 SafeSport Working Group for Case Management Models, which 

recommended externalizing sexual misconduct matters to an independent entity. As of 

today's date, it has been approximately four years since Novak had any association 

with the U.S. Olympic Committee or a National Governing Body. 
192 


Ryther, Megan 

Associate Attorney, Ice Miller 

Recommended by the AAC- Megan Ryther is an attorney at Ice Miller in Indianapolis 

and previously worked as an attorney at Baker & McKenzie and Quarles & Brady 

and for the NCAA where, she oversaw student-athlete eligibility cases. Nominated by 

the Athlete's Advisory Council, Ryther competed as part of the USA Open Water 

Swimming World Championship Team in 1998,2000 and 2003, earned a gold medal at 

the 1998 World Championships and served as Team Capitan in 2003. Ryther 

also served as an athlete representative on the following: United States Sports 

Insurance Company LLC Board ofDirectors (2015); USA Swimming Board of 

Directors (2010-2014); USA Swimming Background Screen Appeals Panel, Vice Chair 

(2011-2015); USA Swimming Olympic and International Operations Committee 

(2003-2014); USA Swimming Steering Committee (2012-2014); USA Swimming 

Rules and Regulations Committee (20 10-2011 ); USA Swimming Audit Committee 

(2009-2010). As oftoday's date, it has been over three years since Ryther had any 

association with the NGB. 

• Smotek, Connie 

Office Manager, Texas A&M University AgriLife Extension 

Recommended by the AAC- Nominated by the Athlete's Advisory Council (AAC), 

Connie Smotek is a two-time Olympian in the sport of shooting. Smotek currently is an 

Extension Program Specialist for Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service where she 

oversees continuing education activities for tax practitioners and assists with 

development of risk management materials. Smotek served on the Athlete Advisory 

Council for the 2005-2008 and 2009-2012 terms. The U.S.A. Shooting Bylaws place 

the Athlete Advisory Council representative for U.S.A. Shooting on the U.S.A. 

Shooting Board of Directors Executive Committee. She was also a member of the 

U.S.A. Shooting Board of Directors as the elected athlete representative from 1995-

2001. As oftoday's date, it has been over six years since Smotek has had an association 

with the NGB as a hoard member and more than six years since Smotek had an 

affiliation with the AAC. 
193 


ATTACHMENT A 
194 


U.S. CENTER FOR 

SAFES PORT CHAMPION RESPECT. END ABUSE. 

Online Training Course Outline 

1. Mandatory Reporting: Understanding Your Responsibilities 

o Barriers to reporting 

o Legal Requirements 

o Suspicion of abuse 

o Reporting process 

2. Sexual Misconduct Awareness Education 

o Creating a safe and respectful environment 

o Relationship dynamics 

Coach-athlete relationship 

Power dynamics and imbalances 

o Understanding the differences between laws and policies 

Criminal laws 

U.S. Center for SafeS port policies 

Organizational policies 

o What is sexual misconduct? 

Definition 

Types of sexual misconduct 

o Understanding consent 

Definition of consent 

Age of consent 

Capacity to consent 

Consent and power imbalances 

o Child sexual abuse 

Legal definitions 

SafeSport policy definitions 

Grooming 

The victim's perspective 

How victims respond 

• Why they don't report 

Signs and symptoms of abuse 

Prevention and response 

• Managing high risk situations (travel, social media and electronic 

communications, etc.) 

• Do's and don'ts 
195 

Æ 


3. Emotional and Physical Misconduct 

o Bullying 

Definition of bullying 

Cyberbullying 

Effects of bullying 

Preventing bullying behaviors 

o Hazing 

Definition of hazing 

Preventing hazing 

o Harassment 

Definition 

Creating a safe environment for all athletes 

o Emotional misconduct 

Definition 

Types of emotional misconduct 

Effects of emotional misconduct 

o Physical misconduct 

Definition 

Types of physical misconduct 

•• Each module includes a pre- and post-testing component and points users to additional resources. 

16