U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

29–479 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018

S. HRG. 115–248 

OPEN HEARING ON THE NOMINATION 

OF MICHAEL ATKINSON TO BE INSPECTOR 

GENERAL OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY 

AND JASON KLITENIC TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL 

OF THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR 

OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE 

OF THE

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2018 

Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence 

( 

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

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(II) 

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE 

[Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong., 2d Sess.] 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina, Chairman 

MARK R. WARNER, Virginia, Vice Chairman 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

SUSAN COLLINS, Maine 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

TOM COTTON, Arkansas 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

ANGUS KING, Maine 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

KAMALA HARRIS, California 

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio 

CHUCK SCHUMER, New York, Ex Officio 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona, Ex Officio 

JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio 

CHRIS JOYNER, Staff Director 

MICHAEL CASEY, Minority Staff Director 

KELSEY STROUD BAILEY, Chief Clerk 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(III) 

CONTENTS 

JANUARY 17, 2018 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Burr, Hon. Richard, Chairman, a U.S. Senator from North Carolina ................ 1 

Warner, Hon. Mark R., Vice Chairman, a U.S. Senator from Virginia .............. 3 

WITNESSES 

Klitenic, Jason, Nominated to be General Counsel of the Office of the Director 

of National Intelligence ....................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 8 

Atkinson, Michael, Nominated to be Inspector General of the Intelligence 

Community ........................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL 

Nomination material for Jason Klitenic 

Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees ............................. 42 

Additional Prehearing Questions .................................................................... 62 

Additional Prehearing Questions for the Record ........................................... 87 

Nomination material for Michael Atkinson 

Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees ............................. 92 

Additional Prehearing Questions .................................................................... 112 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(1) 

OPEN HEARING ON THE NOMINATION 

OF MICHAEL ATKINSON TO BE INSPECTOR 

GENERAL OF THE INTELLIGENCE 

COMMUNITY AND JASON KLITENIC TO BE 

GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE OFFICE OF THE 

DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE 

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2018 

U.S. SENATE, 

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:32 a.m. in Room 

SH–216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard Burr (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. 

Committee Members Present: Senators Burr, Warner, Risch, Collins, Blunt, Lankford, Feinstein, Wyden, Heinrich, King, Manchin, 

and Harris. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, CHAIRMAN, A 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA 

Chairman BURR. I’d like to call this hearing to order. I’d like to 

welcome our witnesses today: Jason Klitenic, President Trump’s 

nominee to be the next General Counsel for the Office of Director 

of National Intelligence; and Michael Atkinson, President Trump’s 

nominee to be the next Inspector General of the Intelligence Community. 

Gentlemen, congratulations to both of you on your nominations. 

I’d like to start by recognizing the families that you’ve brought 

with you today. Jason, I understand you have your wife Kate— 

wave; good. 

[Kate Klitenic waves.] 

As well as your children Amelia, Hazel, and Clark; your Mother, 

Joyce—Joyce, where are you? 

[Joyce Klitenic waves.] 

I know you’re proud. 

Michael, I believe you have your wife, Kate. Have you guys got 

something going on here? 

[Laughter.] 

Your sons Ian and Chris; and your parents, Nelson and Janice. 

Welcome to all of the family members. This is a very special day. 

Kate, your parents are here, John and Ellen Cameron; and your 

brother-in-law and sister-in-law Scott and Beth Atkinson. Good. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

2 

Thank all of you for your support of Jason and Michael. I’m confident that they would not be here today if it were not for your 

years of love, encouragement, and, potentially more important, 

your patience. 

Our goal in conducting this hearing is to enable the Committee 

to consider both nominees’ qualifications and to allow for thoughtful deliberation by our Members. The witnesses each have already 

provided written responses to over 40 questions presented by the 

Committee and its Members. Today, of course, Members will be 

able to ask additional questions and hear directly from the nominees. 

Mr. Klitenic graduated from Johns Hopkins University and received his law degree from the University of Baltimore Law School. 

Jason then served as Deputy Associate Attorney General at the Department of Justice, where he oversaw antitrust, civil rights, and 

environmental law. Thereafter, from 2003 to 2005 he served as the 

Deputy General Counsel of the Department of Homeland Security. 

Following his government service, Jason worked in the private sector, most recently as a partner at the law firm Holland & Knight. 

Mr. Atkinson earned his undergraduate degree from Syracuse 

University, his law degree from Cornell. After his time in the private sector as a partner at Winston & Strawn, Michael served as 

a trial attorney in the Fraud Section of the Department of Justice 

Criminal Division from 2002 through 2006. 

From 2006 to 2016, Michael served as Assistant U.S. Attorney in 

the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. During that 

time, he was Deputy Chief of the Fraud and Public Corruption Section and Acting Chief of the Fraud and Corruption Section. Michael 

currently serves as the Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General 

and Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the Department of Justice National Security Division. 

Jason, you’ve been asked to be the lead counsel for the Office of 

the Director of National Intelligence at a time we’re facing threats 

from state and non-state actors and are engaged in a robust debate 

at home on the scope and scale of intelligence collection and what 

authorities are right and appropriate and lawful. I trust that you 

will provide sound legal counsel and judgment and will speak truth 

to power as the Director of National Intelligence works through 

some incredibly complex and divisive issues. 

Michael, independent and empowered inspectors general are critical to the integrity and the efficient management of the intelligence community. I trust that you will lead the Inspector General 

of the Intelligence Community’s Office with integrity and will ensure that your officers operate lawfully, ethically, and morally. 

The Committee will ask for your responsive, transparent, and 

timely responses in our interactions, a necessary condition for us 

to conduct effective oversight. As I have mentioned to other nominees during their confirmation hearings, I can assure you that this 

Committee will continue to faithfully follow its charter and conduct 

vigorous and real-time oversight over the intelligence community, 

its operations, and its activities. We will ask difficult and probing 

questions of you, and your staff, and we expect honest, complete responses. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

3 

I enjoyed meeting both of you and discussing your qualifications 

and the reasons for pursuing continued public service. I look forward to supporting your nominations and ensuring their consideration without delay. I want to thank you both again today for being 

here, for your years of service to our country. I look forward to your 

testimony, and I now recognize the Vice Chairman for any comments he might have. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK R. WARNER, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA 

Vice Chairman WARNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Klitenic. Congratulations on 

your nominations to serve as Intelligence Community Inspector 

General and General Counsel for the Office of the DNI. Both of 

these positions are critically important to ensuring the intelligence 

community runs efficiently and effectively, that it abides by the 

laws of this country, and that the IC protects against waste, fraud, 

and abuse. 

One of the most important attributes that both of you, if you’re 

confirmed, will have to bring to these roles is the willingness to 

speak truth to power. For this reason, I’ll be asking each of you to 

uphold your principles, to always provide unbiased, unvarnished, 

and timely advice to both the Director of National Intelligence and 

to the Congress. 

You’re also aware that this Committee is leading the review into 

the Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. 

During this hearing I want to hear assurances from both of you 

that you will fully cooperate with this review and provide this 

Committee with all the information requested in a timely fashion. 

Mr. Atkinson, as the Inspector General of the Intel Community 

your job is especially critical because of the nature of the material 

that they handle every day, whistleblowers within the IC generally 

can’t go public to expose misbehavior and misuse of official resources. We the Congress and the American people will depend 

upon you as an independent agent of accountability for the Office 

of the DNI and, for that matter, for the whole intel community. 

While you don’t have previous experience as an inspector general, I look forward to hearing your plans for the righting of the 

ship at the IC’s IG when it comes to both whistleblower protections 

and investigations. I’m very concerned by the significant number of 

open cases that I believe have lingered too long. If confirmed, I will 

ask you to make the whistleblower program a priority. This is an 

area that cuts across party lines and committee jurisdictions. 

Senators Grassley, Wyden, Collins, and I together have requested a GAO study to review IC-wide whistleblower policies and 

procedures. This study, when completed, will help inform your approaches and ours as we seek to address some of the gaps. 

Mr. Klitenic, your job will be to give Director Coats the best possible legal counsel possible, even when doing so, as we discussed, 

might be inconvenient or even uncomfortable. I value your commitments that you have made to me and I hope you’ll reiterate some 

of those commitments publicly. One, that you will ensure that all 

of the work of the ODNI and the IC is consistent, is constitutional 

and consistent with the law; that, again, that you’ll speak truth to 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

4 

power regardless of political considerations or the willingness of 

those in power to hear that truth; that you will see your legal obligation to keep the intelligence oversight committees—and this is 

terribly important—fully and currently informed of all significant 

intelligence activities, as just the bare minimum of our engagement; that as chief lawyer for the intelligence community, I believe 

you’ll have to make sure, as we touched on as well, that policies 

like issues that particularly Senator Feinstein has been a champion of, of making sure that interrogation practices—that we don’t 

go back to the past. 

To both of our nominees, again echoing the Chairman, congratulations. It’s an honor that you’ve been nominated to serve our country. I want to thank you for accepting these opportunities and 

these positions and look forward to the opportunity to question you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BURR. Thank You, Vice Chairman. 

Mr. Klitenic and Mr. Atkinson, would you please stand. I’m going 

to ask you to raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear to give the Committee the truth, the full 

truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. Please be seated. 

Jason and Michael, before we move to your statements I’ll ask 

you to answer five standard questions that the Committee poses to 

each nominee who appears before us. They just require a simple 

yes or no response. 

Do you agree to appear before the Committee here or in any 

other venue when invited? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. If confirmed, do you agree to send officials from 

your office to appear before the Committee and designated staff 

when invited? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. Do you agree to provide documents or any other 

materials requested by the Committee in order for us to carry out 

our oversight and legislative responsibilities? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. Will you both ensure that your office and your 

staffs provide such materials to the Committee when requested? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. Do you agree to inform and fully brief to the 

fullest extent possible all Members of the Committee of the intelligence activities and covert action, rather than only the Chair and 

Vice Chairman, where appropriate? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. Thank you very much. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

5 

We’ll now proceed to your opening statements, after which I’ll 

recognize Members by seniority for up to five minutes of questions. 

Jason, I’ll ask you to begin, followed by Michael. 

STATEMENT OF JASON KLITENIC, NOMINATED TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL 

INTELLIGENCE 

Mr. KLITENIC. Chairman Burr, Vice Chairman Warner, Members 

of the Committee: Thank you for providing me the opportunity to 

appear before you today as you consider my nomination to be General Counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. 

I also want to thank the President and Director Coats for placing 

their confidence in me. If confirmed, I commit to working every day 

to maintain this confidence and to demonstrate to them and to 

each of you that I will uphold the highest standards of the office. 

With your indulgence, I would like to recognize my family, without whose love and support I would not be here. Joining me today 

are: my mother, Joyce Klitenic; my sister Jenny Whittaker; my 

brother-in-law John Whittaker; my brother-in-law Evan Howell; 

and my sister-in-law Helen Wray. I would also like to recognize my 

sister, Sarah Wear, who is back home with her husband awaiting 

the birth of their child, which I believe to be imminent. 

Also seated behind me are four more very important people in 

my life: my wife of 24 years, Kate; and our three children, Amelia, 

Clark, and Hazel. In a setting such as this, it is difficult to explain 

how grateful I am to my family for their never-ending support. And 

thank-you to my close friends and colleagues who took time out of 

their busy days to join us here today. 

Additionally, I want to remember someone who is not with us 

today. My father, Earl Klitenic, passed away three years ago. I 

think about him each day as I strive to live up to the high standards that he and my mother set for me. 

By way of background, I grew up in the Washington, D.C., area, 

fortunately in a house with parents who loved me and who from 

the beginning taught me the difference between right and wrong, 

the importance of unyielding integrity, and the value of hard work. 

My parents also taught me how lucky I am to be an American and 

that I should never take the attendant freedom for granted. 

They taught me about patriotism, democracy, security, free 

speech, and the rule of law, and that the role of our government 

is to keep us safe from harm while protecting the civil liberties that 

enable us to live in a free, open, and diverse society. Millions of 

people throughout the world suffer under regimes that provide neither security nor freedom. Here we are blessed to have both. 

My parents also taught me the importance of public service. They 

were career government civil servants. My father served in the Department of Defense, the Justice Department, and the United 

States Information Agency. Before retiring, my mother spent the 

bulk of her career at the Justice Department, where she served in 

the Office of Intelligence Policy Review and, after its creation, the 

National Security Division. 

Following in my parents’ footsteps, I have had the privilege to 

serve both in the Justice Department and the Department of 

Homeland Security. I’ve been among and around the national secuLAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

6 

rity community throughout my life, both personally and professionally. 

I have the highest regard for the men and women who serve in 

the intelligence community. Both in private practice and while 

serving in government, I have had the opportunity to work closely 

with the people who protect us from our adversaries and in doing 

so preserve our values as a Nation. These people, who work outside 

the limelight and beyond the scope of credit and accolades, each 

day perform their jobs with discipline, attention to detail, and unrelenting dedication to the mission. If confirmed, it would be an 

honor for me to serve with them again on behalf of our country. 

My past experience has prepared me well for this position. During my tenure at DHS and DOJ, I worked on complex legal issues 

involving counterterrorism, cyber security, data privacy, and government-wide information-sharing initiatives, work that I believe 

helped keep this Nation safe while preserving our civil liberties. 

Through my past government service, I also gained significant 

management experience and became adept at navigating the interagency processes that are integral to the effective functioning of 

our government. In all this work, I stressed the importance of 

working together across the government to do what was lawful and 

what was right. 

Once public service is in your blood, you can never truly step 

away from it. In private practice, I lead my firm’s homeland security team and continue to work closely and collaboratively with the 

people who serve in our national security agencies. 

The General Counsel position for which I have been nominated 

is, of course, a legal position, an important legal position. If confirmed, my allegiance would be to the constitution and my vow 

would be to uphold the rule of law. Based on my prior government 

experience, I am keenly aware that legal advice cannot be given in 

a vacuum. By that I mean, while I may be opining on a legal issue 

within the safe and comfortable confines of the headquarters office, 

the ultimate end consumer of my advice might be a career analyst 

or operator out in the field. When I render legal advice, I will be 

thinking of people whom I may never meet, but who are relying on 

my views in the course of performing difficult and dangerous jobs 

on behalf of our country. 

I never want to fail those people. It is important to me that they 

be able to rely upon my legal advice with the full confidence that 

it is timely, clear, actionable, and fully supported by law. There is 

no corner-cutting in this line of work. 

I also believe strongly in my responsibility, if confirmed, to keep 

Congress fully and currently informed and my responsibility to 

support your oversight over the IC. The IC’s unique missions are 

often practiced in secrecy to protect critical sources and methods in 

support of our national security. That secrecy makes my relationship and engagement with this Committee all the more important. 

I pledge to build open relationships of trust with this Committee 

and your House counterparts, as I recognize the critical role that 

you play in representing the American people for these sensitive 

matters. 

In closing, I want to stress that, if confirmed, I would very much 

look forward to working with each of you and your staffs. I am 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

7 

mindful of this Committee’s important oversight role and I would 

hope that you would find me to be a trusted resource and dependable public servant. 

I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Klitenic follows:] 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

8 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 46 here 29479.046
9 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 47 here 29479.047
10 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 48 here 29479.048
11 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 49 here 29479.049
12 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 50 here 29479.050
13 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 51 here 29479.051
14 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 52 here 29479.052
15 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 53 here 29479.053
16 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 54 here 29479.054
17 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 55 here 29479.055
18 

Chairman BURR. Jason, thank you very much. 

Michael, the floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL ATKINSON, NOMINATED TO BE 

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY 

Mr. ATKINSON. Chairman Burr, Vice Chairman Warner, Members of the Committee: Thank you for scheduling this hearing to 

consider my nomination to be the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community. I am honored to have been nominated for this 

position by President Trump, with the support of the Director of 

National Intelligence, Dan Coats. 

I first want to thank and recognize my family members and 

friends who are here today and watching remotely. Here with me 

today are: my wife Kate; and our two sons, Ian and Christopher; 

my parents, Nels and Jan Atkinson; my wife’s parents, John and 

Eileen Cameron; and my youngest brother and his wife, Scott and 

Beth Atkinson. 

I also see friends and colleagues in the audience and I thank 

them for their support. I also want to thank my family and friends 

who are watching this hearing remotely. 

The prehearing materials that I submitted to the Committee 

summarize my background and experience. I want to take just a 

few minutes to add some context to those materials and to recognize additional people who have helped me to be here today. 

After graduating from law school at Cornell University, I went 

to work as an associate at Winston & Strawn here in Washington, 

D.C., where I stayed for 11 years and was elected partner. Winston 

& Strawn provided me with good, excellent legal training, superb 

mentors and colleagues, and challenging legal experiences in complex civil litigation and white collar criminal defense matters. I was 

fortunate to have such an enjoyable start to my legal career. 

But I also felt that some things in my professional life were missing. I wanted more challenges, greater responsibilities, and different rewards. After the September 11th attacks, I decided to seek 

public service work. In 2002, I was delighted when the leaders in 

the Criminal Division in the United States Department of Justice 

offered me a position as a trial attorney in the Fraud Section. 

The Fraud Section filled the professional gaps I had been feeling 

in private practice. I was able to work exclusively on complex white 

collar criminal fraud matters, with talented and experienced prosecutors and law enforcement agents from around the country. I was 

given greater responsibilities, including an opportunity to try my 

first jury trial. Thankfully, I was paired with a hard-working and 

much more experienced trial partner, as we were up against some 

of the best defense attorneys in the country. I am thankful that one 

of those defense attorneys, Reid Weingarten, was gracious enough 

to write a letter of recommendation for me in support of my nomination. 

While at the Department of Justice, I also had the opportunity 

to experience the different professional rewards I had been seeking. 

My sense of professional accomplishment was never higher. For 

that I also have to thank my wife, who remained in private practice and made her own personal and professional sacrifices to help 

me realize my professional goals. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

19 

I left the Fraud Section in 2006 to become an Assistant United 

States Attorney in the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. The U.S. Attorney’s Office provided me with all 

the challenges and rewards that I had come to enjoy at the Fraud 

Section, but with some added benefits. I was able to reduce the 

amount of time I was on the road and to spend more time in the 

area as my wife and I raised our two sons. 

Becoming an AUSA also gave me an opportunity to become part 

of a new family at the U.S. Attorney’s Office and to experience an 

extraordinary camaraderie with colleagues, special agents, and investigators. I am grateful to them for their work ethic, professionalism, and friendship, which allowed me to be part of a highly 

effective team in helping to root out fraud and public corruption 

here in our Nation’s capital. 

I left the U.S. Attorney’s Office after ten years to take on greater 

responsibilities within the Department of Justice in an area of the 

law that I did not have much experience, national security. I joined 

the Department’s National Security Division in 2016 and began to 

learn in detail about cyber security, export controls, and sanctions, 

economic espionage, unauthorized disclosures, and foreign direct 

investment. 

I thank my colleagues at the National Security Division for their 

patience and support in helping me to learn these complex areas 

of the law, especially for helping someone like me, who once had 

to pay a $75 fine as a teenager for illegally spearing fish to understand that illegal spear phishing in today’s world typically has 

nothing to do with fish. 

I believe that my prior experiences and substantive knowledge 

suit me well for my next challenge, which, if confirmed, would 

make me the Intelligence Community Inspector General, or the IC 

IG. 

As I have made my rounds through your offices during the past 

several weeks, meeting with the Chairman, the Vice Chairman, 

several other Committee Members, Senator Grassley, and numerous professional staff members, I’ve been left with two primary impressions about the Office of the IC IG. I want to share those impressions, and I particularly want to share them with any current 

employees of the IC IG who may hear or read my statement. 

First, I am left with the impression that this Committee and 

other members of the Senate are unified in their desire to see the 

IC IG succeed as an office. As was the case when Congress created 

the IC IG in 2010, there are many contentious issues within the 

intelligence community, but the need for an IC IG is not one of 

them. My impression is that the Committee remains unified in its 

support for an IC IG that can identify problem areas and find the 

most efficient and effective business practices required to ensure 

that critical deficiencies are addressed before it is too late, before 

we have an intelligence failure. 

There also remains strong bipartisan support for an Inspector 

General of the Intelligence Community who, as the Chair of the IC 

IG Forum, works together with the intelligence community IGs to 

build a strong coalition, identify issues of common interest, and initiate cross-jurisdictional reviews. Such unified support is a good 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

20 

thing for any organization and is especially good for a relatively 

new governmental organization in today’s budget climate. 

But this goodwill must not be taken for granted, because it can 

be squandered. This brings me to my second impression. My second 

impression about the Office of the IC IG is not nearly as favorable. 

I do not believe I am revealing any confidences when I share my 

impression that there is a broad view among the Committee, its 

staff, and other Members that the Office of the IC IG is not currently functioning as effectively as Congress intended. It is not difficult to find some of the sources for this view. One recent press 

article reported that the Office of the IC IG is ‘‘in danger of crumbling,’’ ‘‘barely functioning,’’ ‘‘on fire,’’ and ‘‘gutted.’’ 

Now, perhaps things inside the Office of the IC IG are not as bad 

as the press and others portray them. I for one certainly hope so. 

And as a prosecutor and former defense attorney, I know there are 

at least two sides to nearly every story. Nevertheless, real or not, 

this is an ultimately unsustainable impression for the Committee 

to have of the IC IG. 

The impression is also that the current problems are internal. 

This needs to change before the IC IG loses the support of this 

Committee and the Congress as a whole. Simply put, it appears 

that the IC IG needs to put its house in order, and the sooner the 

better. 

My experience has taught me that the effectiveness of any team 

is dependent first and foremost on having the right people on the 

team, with a shared set of goals and values. I see no reason to believe that an Office of Inspector General is any different. My first 

objective as Inspector General, if confirmed, will be to make sure 

that the IC IG’s house is in order. This will involve making sure 

the right people are in the IC IG. I am confident there are right 

people for the IC IG already there, people with a commitment to 

integrity, discipline, excellence, and independence, and I hope they 

stay. 

If I’m confirmed, the IC IG will work together as a team to 

achieve Congress’ most ambitious intentions for the office. In the 

near term, we will work together to encourage, operate, and enforce 

a program for authorized disclosures by whistleblowers within the 

intelligence community that validates moral courage without compromising national security and without retaliation. 

Over the long term, if confirmed, we will work together and with 

the IC IG Forum members to look across the intelligence landscape, as Congress and this Committee intended, to help improve 

management, coordination, cooperation, and information-sharing 

within the intelligence community. Throughout my tenure, we will 

work together to be responsive to this Committee so that you are 

able to fulfill your oversight obligations and to ensure that U.S. intelligence activities meet our Nation’s security needs, respect our 

laws, and reflect American values. 

I thank you for your time in listening to me, and I appreciate the 

opportunity to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Atkinson follows:] 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

21 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 1 here 29479.001
22 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 2 here 29479.002
23 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 3 here 29479.003
24 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 4 here 29479.004
25 

Chairman BURR. Thank you to both of you for your testimony. 

Members should know that I’ll recognize Members based upon 

seniority for up to five minutes after the Chair and the Vice Chair. 

I recognize myself. 

Jason, the Committee’s access to legal analysis is sometimes crucial to our ability to assess the intelligence community’s collection 

tools. If confirmed, can our Committee be assured that you or your 

designee will keep us appropriately informed of any and all legal 

opinions and interpretations that your office performs as to intelligence tools? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. If asked by the Committee, will your office provide briefings and assessments of the intelligence community’s 

views and findings on legal matters? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. Michael, to you: The Committee’s timely access 

to intelligence is crucial to our ability to conduct vigorous oversight 

over the intelligence community and meet our Congressional obligations. We view the IC Inspectors General as partners in oversight. We rely on Inspectors General to identify problems and to 

bring issues to this Committee’s attention. If confirmed, can our 

Committee be assured that you or your designee will keep us appropriately informed of any significant complaints received by your 

office? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. If asked by the Committee, will you provide the 

interview subjects or methodologies behind your office’s finished reports and assessments? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes. 

Chairman BURR. One last question on my behalf to you, Mr. Atkinson. As you mentioned in your statement for the record, the IC 

IG is an office with some reported challenges, particularly regarding the whistleblower program that has been frequently reported 

about in the media over the past few months. Strong whistleblowers are essential. Further, ensuring the IC workforce understands and believes in the whistleblower program is paramount. 

Tell the Committee what you plan to do to address these issues 

we’re hearing about and how you’re going to work to reassure the 

workforce that the IC IG has a well-functioning program that they 

can trust? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Mr. Chairman, the intelligence community understands the importance of cultivating and protecting sources of information, and that includes whistleblowers. Whistleblowers play 

an important role in safeguarding the Federal Government against 

waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. 

In terms of what the IC IG can do as an office, it can do three 

things primarily: first, provide organizational support and encouragement for whistleblower programs for lawful, authorized disclosures; second, it can disseminate information and make sure that 

there’s appropriate training across the intelligence community to 

make the workforce aware of the authorized ways to make lawful 

disclosures and report unethical or illegal conduct; and third, it can 

enforce a safe program where whistleblowers do not have fear of 

retaliation and where they’re confident that the system will treat 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

26 

them fairly and impartially, so that we can secure national security 

and allow whistleblowers to make their complaints of unethical or 

illegal behavior without risking unauthorized disclosures. 

Chairman BURR. Great. 

Vice Chairman. 

Vice Chairman WARNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I’ll start with you, Mr. Klitenic. As you know, the SSCI is continuing its work to investigate the Russian interference in the 2016 

presidential election. Can you commit to ensuring that this Committee will be provided with all information requested pursuant to 

our ongoing Russia investigation? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Vice Chairman WARNER. Thank you. 

Let me also editorially comment that I very much appreciate 

what you talked to me about and reiterated in your public statement, that you’re going to be asked to render legal opinions from 

the relatively ivory tower of a certain office in Northern Virginia, 

but that those, your legal opinions, will have huge ramifications for 

people in the field and across the country and across the world. 

Do you want to add any more on that? That’s obviously one of 

the things you talked about in terms of your willingness to make 

sure that we adhere to the law in thinking through how you make 

those legal opinions. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes, thank you. As it relates to providing legal advice, I take it both professionally and personally. Some of the people who are running around all corners of the globe so we can sleep 

safely at night, some of those people are my friends. Some of them 

are former colleagues. Some of them are other associates. Again, 

from my perspective, I think it’s always important to keep in mind 

the context of the legal advice that you’re providing and knowing 

that it’s not simply an academic exercise. 

Vice Chairman WARNER. One of the things you also mentioned 

in your opening statement was you understood the statutory obligation to keep this Committee fully and currently informed. Do you 

want to drill down a little bit more on how you define ‘‘currently’’? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes, thank you. I view the duty to keep the Committee currently and fully informed—there’s obviously the 502 statutory requirement, but, quite frankly, as a working matter I view 

this Committee—and I’m saying this respectfully and in the context of understanding that you are United States Senators and, if 

confirmed, I would simply be agency counsel. But I view this Committee to be my friend. This Committee is not my foe. My foe, our 

foes, are the people out there across the globe who wish us ill. 

So my view as an attorney, when I’m provided with information 

that I believe this Committee should have, I will be viewing it from 

the perspective of how can I get this information to the Committee, 

as opposed to looking at it from the perspective of, okay, how can 

I keep this from the Committee? 

In terms of the timeliness of it, from my perspective notification 

has little to no value, more likely no value, if it is not timely. 

Vice Chairman WARNER. Thank you. 

Mr. Atkinson, my questions were similar to the Chairman’s, and 

I just want to reiterate—and I appreciate the fact that in your 

opening comments you did allude to the fact that there have not 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

27 

been as strong a working relationship between the current IG’s Office and this Committee. You made quite clear your intent to improve that and you said you felt that there were the appropriate 

people in the IG’s Office that were already there. 

If there are people that need to be removed, I’d like to hear 

whether you will take on that responsibility as well? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes, Senator. In terms of managing any organization, the key is getting the right people into the organization. That 

also involves getting any of the wrong people out of the organization and then, once the right people are in the organization, getting 

the right people in the right positions. 

So yes, to the extent there are wrong people in the IC IG, we will 

work to either improve their performance or, if necessary, remove 

them. 

Vice Chairman WARNER. Let me also reiterate so we make sure 

that everybody gets their time. You don’t have to respond to this. 

But let me also echo the Chairman’s comments in terms of the importance of the whistleblower program. I think there needs to be 

greater protections and, should you be confirmed, I look forward to 

working with you to make sure that those protections are increased 

and improved. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BURR. Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Mr. Chairman, first of all let me say I think both 

of these nominees come with a strong, strong background and obviously come with also very good recommendations. I’ve had the opportunity in a different setting to get my questions answered, 

which I appreciate. I feel very good about these two and at the 

present time I’m a strong supporter of them, so I’m going to pass 

on questions. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BURR. Thank you. 

Senator Feinstein. 

Senator FEINSTEIN. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Atkinson, the IC IG is not an easy position in my view. You 

can’t get sucked in. You have to be independent, and you have to 

be able to call them as you see them and run an office that’s going 

to be effective to the overall goal. Are you prepared to do this? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes, Senator. I think that my training as a prosecutor helps in terms of having a commitment to independence and 

integrity, as well as discipline, and understanding that there is a 

need to speak truth to power. The hardest part sometimes is finding the truth. The truth—as a prosecutor in a criminal case, it’s 

difficult. I expect it will be even more difficult dealing with secret 

organizations. 

So I certainly appreciate the challenge that is out there for me. 

But in terms of the independence and integrity required of the position, I think my training as a prosecutor will come in very handy. 

Senator FEINSTEIN. I think that’s probably true, and I thank you 

very much for those comments. 

Having an open, honest IG is really very important to the functioning of what is a highly secret intelligence-gathering organization. I know you can see that. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

28 

To both of you, I’m sorry, I didn’t have a chance to meet with 

you before. You tried and my schedule got overly complicated. But 

I would hope that we would have a chance to sit down, because 

there are a couple of things that I’d like to mention to both of you. 

One of them is the area in which I believe the IC did get out of 

control, and that was during the 1990s, particularly on the subject 

of interrogation and detention. This Committee over six years did 

a report. There is a 500-page summary of that report; and before 

you come to see me, I would ask that each of you read that summary, which has been published. Will you do so? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes, Senator. 

Senator FEINSTEIN. Thank you very much. 

I think that I’d like to ask the IC IG: What do you see as the 

most essential and effective tool of an Inspector General overseeing 

an intelligence agency? 

Mr. ATKINSON. I think it goes back to the people, Senator. I think 

you have to have the right people with the right skill set to try to 

handle the task that’s before it. The effectiveness of the intelligence 

community is in large part a function of its secretiveness, and so 

in terms of trying to find the truth or audit programs, investigate 

whistleblower complaints, inspect other agencies, you need the 

right people. 

There’s plenty of tools available in terms of subpoena power and 

the ability to come to this Committee and to this Congress to provide reports. But ultimately, in terms of the most powerful tools 

that the office will have, in my view it has to be the people. 

Senator FEINSTEIN. Mr. Klitenic, because of the position you’re 

going to be in as General Counsel and your background, you’re 

clearly qualified and I have no questions of you. But I would hope 

that you would feel free when there are issues to bring them before 

this Committee as well. 

I don’t think anybody does a service to stifle truth or not bring 

forward problems. I think you’ll find that the Committee is really 

a very good one. We pay attention. We put in a lot of time, and 

we care very deeply about the appropriate functioning of the agencies that you’re going to be in charge of. 

So thank you very much. 

Thank you. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman BURR. Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Klitenic, whom do you view as your client if you are confirmed as the General Counsel? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you, Senator. That frequently is the—sometimes that can be a difficult question for lawyers. The first question 

is: Who is the client? I think as it relates to being the General 

Counsel to the ODNI, the agency is the client, embodied by the 

leadership. So it would be the Director of National Intelligence. I 

would not be representing anyone in his or her personal capacity. 

Then ultimately my client—I would view my client to be the people 

of the United States. 

Senator COLLINS. That’s the right answer. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

29 

One of the greatest challenges for the intelligence community is 

that it’s very difficult for the public to separate out fact from fiction 

in certain press reports. If confirmed, you will be in an important 

position to be fully aware of what the IC is doing, while also being 

responsible for ensuring that its activities are lawfully conducted. 

There are two aspects of this problem. First, if you uncover misinformation about the lawfulness of the intelligence community’s 

activities as reported in the press, what would you do about that? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you, Senator. Yes, there definitely would be 

a tension. Obviously, one of the fundamental principles of the intelligence community is to protect sources and methods. So a challenge would be if there were an instance where, if you’re reading 

something in the paper that you know to be untrue or, let’s just 

say, a nation-state is putting out information about things that are 

happening in our own country that we know to be untrue, and if 

that information is classified that would present a challenge. 

So if that were to arise, that’s something that, if confirmed, I 

would take a serious look at, work with the people that I would 

need to consult with, and make sure that in correcting the information, if it needed to be corrected, it would be done in a way that 

again preserved sources and methods and other sensitive information. 

Senator COLLINS. Let’s take a situation where the opposite is the 

case and you uncover activity in the intelligence community that 

is not lawful. Obviously, you would report it to the ODNI. What is 

your obligation to report beyond the Justice Department and the 

ODNI with respect to the oversight committees of Congress, in particular our Committee? 

Mr. KLITENIC. I would view that I—that we, the ODNI, if confirmed, would have the obligation to report it to the Committee. I 

believe that the Section 502 notification requirements also talk 

about intelligence failures, so perhaps there would be an argument 

that this would be a form of failure. But again, it would be done 

in a way to protect sources and methods. I would view this Committee to be an ally of mine and I would just want to make sure 

that you have access to the same information to which I have access. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

Mr. Atkinson, you have heard many of us talk about the importance of whistleblowers, and I just want to follow up on a question 

that the Ranking Member asked you since I joined in the letter of 

the Vice Chairman and the Co-Chairs of the Senate Whistleblower 

Protection Caucus requesting that the GAO conduct an audit of 

whistleblower programs and activities conducted by the offices of 

the inspector general within the IC. 

It’s important that you know that we sent this letter because we 

began to perceive discrepancies in the way that each IG approached whistleblower protection and we wanted an independent 

look at what recommendations could be made to ensure that whistleblowers are willing to come forward. 

So, first I encourage you, if you’re confirmed, as I believe you will 

be, to use this GAO audit as an opportunity for you to learn about 

the state of whistleblower complaints within the IC. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

30 

But my question is this: Do you commit to ensuring that the IC 

Inspector General remains a place where whistleblowers feel confident that they can come forward, disclose allegations of waste, 

fraud, abuse, mismanagement, illegal activity, and they can be confident that their concerns will not fall on deaf ears? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes, absolutely, Senator. I look forward to reading 

the GAO report. I welcome GAO’s assistance if confirmed, given the 

subject matter expertise they bring to it and the force multiplier 

that they can be, particularly in auditing. 

In terms of the whistleblower protection, I talked about a commitment to integrity and that to me is what is essential so that 

whistleblowers have trust in the process. That does two things. 

One, it makes sure that the disclosures go to the right people; and 

second, it really takes away an excuse that some people have used 

that: I would have made an authorized disclosure, but I didn’t 

know how to do it, or I didn’t have faith in the process. So yes, absolutely, if confirmed, the commitment to integrity will be to make 

the whistleblower program effective and objective and impartial. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

Chairman BURR. Senator King. 

Senator KING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Klitenic, I love your characterization of the Committee as 

your friend. I hope a year from now you hold to that. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes, sir. 

Senator KING. That idea. 

I consider your two positions two of the most important in the 

United States Government, for the following reason. It’s an anomaly in a free society to have secret agencies that don’t operate in 

the ordinary open air of controversy and reporting and interest 

groups and all of those kinds of things. Our system—we’re always 

talking about checks and balances of the courts and the Congress, 

but there are lots of other checks and balances. One of them is public disclosure and transparency, and yet we understand the necessity for secrecy and for defending our national security. 

Therefore, one of the checks and balances that’s invisible is the 

rule of law. You gentlemen more than any others in these agencies 

have the responsibility for upholding the rule of law. Like my colleague from Maine, I was going to ask, who is your client? Your 

client is the Constitution, it seems to me. Your client is the people 

of the United States. It’s not a particular director, it’s not a particular president, it’s not a particular agent. It is the—this is in the 

essence of the checks and balances that otherwise just aren’t there 

for these agencies. 

The natural tendency of an agency that operates outside of the 

public view in some cases is to abuse its authority. I would urge 

you—again, I’m echoing my colleague Senator Feinstein—to read 

that summary of the torture report, because what comes through 

is not people who were evil and who were setting out to do harm. 

They were people who were genuinely concerned about the future 

of the country, but they did things that they should not have done; 

and the lawyers did things that they should not have done. And 

that’s where it becomes hard. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

31 

So I hope you will read that report. It’s a stunning piece of work 

and I think it will help guide your work, because it’ll make you realize how hard these decisions are. 

Now, what actions would you take, Mr. Atkinson, if a senior IC 

official said: Let’s not go into this investigation, let’s not do this 

audit; there’s a lot of heavy-duty national security here and it could 

result in a serious compromise of something that we’re trying to accomplish on behalf of the country? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Well, I’d do a couple things. First, I would talk 

with that senior official to try to understand the reasoning behind 

the request. If I thought that the investigation or review was necessary or in the best interests of the United States, I would pursue 

it. If other senior officials within the intelligence community still 

were advising me to stop, I would continue to talk to them and try 

to convince them that in my view, in my independent view, this review or assessment was necessary and in the best interests of the 

United States. 

I would take that—I would have that discussion all the way up 

to the Director of National Intelligence if necessary. By statute, he 

does have the authority to prevent an investigation or an examination if he deems that that’s necessary or vital to United States national security. 

I would also talk to this Committee if that situation arose to that 

level, to keep you informed about those events. 

Senator KING. If you were prevented by the Director or by some 

other official from pursuing an investigation that you thought was 

important, significant, and represented a potential abuse of the 

agency, would you consider resignation? 

Mr. ATKINSON. The answer is yes, but in context. The Congress 

has given the Director of National Intelligence the authority, the 

statutory authority, to prevent the Inspector General from conducting a review if the Director determines that that’s in the vital 

interest of the United States. And there’s a process in place where 

he then has to inform the Committee, the Congress, the oversight 

committees, of his decision. And I as the Inspector General would 

also have an opportunity to come to the Committee and talk to you 

about the decision that was made and my own views. 

So I would consider it, but I think the process is in place that 

people who—can disagree without necessarily having to resign. But 

if I felt strongly enough and it really went to a core principle, yes, 

I would consider resigning. That would be part of my thought process. 

Senator KING. I think the hard part here is that these are not 

going to be easy black-and-white questions. They’re not going to be 

presented—it’s always—and again I go back to the torture report. 

It’s always going to be people thought there’s going to be a second 

attack and we have to prevent it and we have to move aside some 

of these rules and regulations in order to do so. That’s the context 

in which these decisions have to be made and that’s why they’re 

so difficult. 

Mr. Klitenic, your thoughts on this issue? 

Mr. KLITENIC. I guess what I would say, Senator, is as an attorney it’s not unusual to be facing a situation where you’re trying to 

advise someone on the law or the parameters of the law, and then 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

32 

also not unusual to occasionally get pushback. The way I am hardwired, I probably am more of a fighter than a quitter, but if I were 

ever—if I exhausted all my remedies and there was nowhere else 

to go but to resign, then that is an action I would seriously consider. 

Senator KING. Well, I appreciate both of your willingness to undertake this important responsibility. I’ve been impressed in our 

discussions and with your answers here today, and I look forward 

to supporting your nominations when they come to the floor. I just 

hope you will continually remember and realize what a solemn and 

heavy responsibility this is in this particular setting. Not that the 

IG of the Department of Agriculture isn’t important, but there are 

lots of other people watching the Department of Agriculture. There 

are very few other people watching the agencies that you are working with, that are crucial to our national security. 

Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you. 

Chairman BURR. Senator Manchin. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank both of you for attending and being here and willing to 

serve, which I appreciate very much, and for your families that are 

supporting you. I also appreciate our discussions we had in the office when you both came in. It was very good and very enlightening. 

I would like to hear, with your previous experience at the Department of Justice, can you tell the Members of this Committee 

your views on the pending reauthorization of the 702 FISA, Section 

702 of FISA? If you could, either one? Mr. Atkinson, you can start 

if you will. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Well, as a member of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice, I know that the Department 

feels very strongly about reauthorizing Section 702. 

Mr. KLITENIC. It’s my understanding it’s an incredibly important 

tool in the toolkit of the intelligence community and the law enforcement community. It’s also my understanding it may be the 

most important tool. So obviously, from my perspective, at this 

point I am an outsider, but I would strongly support it. 

Senator MANCHIN. Do you have concerns of the invasion of privacy for the American citizens? Do any of you have that concern? 

Have you looked into it that much or have you been brought up to 

speed on it? 

Mr. KLITENIC. I guess what I would say is that, as it relates to 

702, that provision, that Act, that section of the Act, has been—I 

would defer to the courts, and the courts have reviewed it and my 

understanding is and my reading of it is that each court that has 

reviewed the 702 program has found it to be constitutional. 

Now, as with everything, you always want to—again, in my earlier comments they were sincere about providing for the national 

defense and the national security, but also protecting our civil 

rights and civil liberties. I don’t think that’s just a throwaway line. 

But as it relates to the 702 program, I would defer to the courts, 

and again they have upheld the constitutionality of it. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

33 

Senator MANCHIN. Mr. Atkinson, you’ll serve as the chair of the 

Intelligence Community Inspector Generals Forum. How do you 

plan to implement the necessary oversight that comes with your office without becoming too intrusive to the other organizations’ inspector general activities? 

Mr. ATKINSON. That is a real challenge to this office, Senator. It’s 

actually one of the things, though, that was most appealing to me 

about it, is there’s no other inspector general that serves in that 

sort of chair role and has the ability to coordinate other inspector 

generals such as the IC IG does as the chair of the IC IG Forum. 

I think the challenge is balancing out the autonomy of action 

that the individual IGs need to have to fulfil their duties and responsibilities with the unity of effort that we all need to have collectively so that we maximize our efficiency and effectiveness. I 

think that part of that in terms of ways to maximize the efficiency 

and effectiveness of the group, it goes to relationships, meeting 

with the folks on a regular basis, both at the IG level as well as 

at the committee levels for the investigators, the auditors, and the 

inspectors. I look forward to meeting with all of the IC IG Forum 

members as soon as possible if I’m confirmed. 

Senator MANCHIN. Mr. Klitenic, how do you view your break 

from government, your departure there and then coming back? Do 

you feel that it was a positive or a negative as you prepare to assume your new duties? 

Mr. KLITENIC. I would view it as a positive. Being in the private 

sector has given me a perspective that I wouldn’t have if I had 

spent the balance of these years in government service. I do very 

much miss government service, but there is something about working closely with industry and seeing it from that perspective, and 

it relates to a whole variety of issues, relating to, for example, the 

protection of our Nation’s critical infrastructure, 85 percent of 

which is in private hands. So seeing some of the challenges that 

industry experiences when working with the government, I would 

view that to be helpful. 

Another added benefit—I can’t quantify this, but I am not coming from any particular member of the IC and to that extent I 

would view—I’m not beholden to any particular agency, and I 

would just view my role to again to continue to play things straight 

and provide counsel on issues that come before me. 

Senator MANCHIN. This will be one for both of you. If asked by 

the President, would you render your professional assessment regardless if that assessment is counter to what the Administration 

has been espousing or what the President may feel? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes, Senator. 

Senator MANCHIN. I think what we’re all talking about, no matter who the President, he or she may be, truth to power is something that we have to have professionals such as yourself be willing 

to speak up and protect the citizens in this great country of ours 

and the Constitution we all hold so near and dear. 

Thank you both. I look forward to supporting both of you. Thank 

you. 

Mr. ATKINSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

34 

Chairman BURR. Senator Lankford. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Gentlemen, thank you again for going through this laborious 

process. Very few Americans understand just how painful and long 

and difficult this process and how many documents you had to turn 

over, how many interviews you had to have to even get to this 

desk. Then there is still the process to get through the long filibusters on the floor of the Senate, as last year the Senate faced literally a record number of nominees that were delayed. 

So there are still more delays to come to actually go through the 

process. So I want to say to you: Thank you for stepping up and 

going through this very long, difficult process, because our Nation 

needs people to both be good counsel for the intelligence community 

and to be good inspectors general for that community. So thank 

you for stepping up to be able to do that. 

A lot of folks that are some pretty remarkable professionals are 

going to count on your advice and they’re going to look towards 

your insight on that. So buckle up. We’re ready for you to be able 

to get into that spot. 

Let me ask you several questions on this. Mr. Atkinson, let me 

ask specifically for you: The IC role of the Inspector General is exceptionally difficult in this setting, because most everything that 

we handle is secret and classified and is compartmentalized. But 

the Inspector General has a very unique role to be able to step in 

and not only check for efficiency—are we spending the right money 

in the right places; are there recommendations to be able to do 

that; do we have the right personnel in the right spot? That takes 

a lot of relationships and a lot of tenacity to go after the information that’s needed. 

But the American people need individuals on this dais to provide 

oversight and they definitely need an Inspector General to be able 

to do that as well. What’s your plan to be able to engage, to be able 

to make sure we have good recommendations, but also you have 

the information you need to do it? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Well, as I said in my opening statement, Senator, 

I think it begins with people, getting the right people in the office 

to be able to perform the difficult tasks that we have to perform, 

whether it’s inspections, audits, or investigations. 

It also—as you talked about relationships, it also has to deal 

with getting relationships with the other intelligence community 

inspectors general, the individual elements, working with them to 

maximize their efficiency and effectiveness, so that together as a 

group we multiply our forces rather than dividing them. So that’s 

what I would look forward to doing if confirmed, is working with 

the IC IG Forum to maximize all of the resources that we have 

available to tackle these very serious challenges that you’ve mentioned. 

Senator LANKFORD. What will you need to be the eyes and ears 

of the American people, to provide—on the multiple layers of oversight on 702 specifically, what will you need that you don’t know 

if you have access to now, to be able to make sure that’s there? 702 

already has oversight from DOJ. It has oversight from the inspectors general. It has oversight within the Department. It has oversight by this Committee. There is a Civil Liberties Board that we 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

35 

have added to it to provide another layer of oversight into it. So 

there’s already multiple layers of oversight on that. 

Is there anything that you know of that you don’t have access to 

to provide the oversight that’s needed for that in your responsibility? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Senator, I don’t know the answer to that. I’m not 

an expert on 702. I’m familiar with the statute as a prosecutor and 

being in the National Security Division of the Department of Justice. But I don’t know all the challenges associated with it. I look 

forward, if confirmed, to learning about them and working with 

this Committee and with the other IC IG Forum members to understand if there are additional tools that we need to help the Committee perform its functions. 

Senator LANKFORD. This Committee would have an expectation 

that if there are things you do not have access to, that you need 

access to for oversight, that you would come back to us. 

Mr. ATKINSON. That’s my expectation as well, Senator, that I 

would come back. 

Senator LANKFORD. Terrific. 

Let me ask you about a hard question on this dealing with leaks 

and classified information leaks or individuals that are leaking 

that information. The FBI has told us it’s one of the most difficult 

areas to be able to prosecute. I want to know from you, what do 

you need to do to be able to help us not have leaks of information, 

both from a document or from someone telling information that is 

classified, and how do we clamp down on that? 

Mr. ATKINSON. I think there’s a lot in that question. But the 

whistleblower protection program is essential and, as Senator King 

talked about, secrecy—the United States intelligence community is 

largely effective because of its secretiveness, but secrecy is a grant 

of trust, it’s not a grant of power. So the whistleblowers play an 

important role in making sure that the trust given to the intelligence community is not abused or mismanaged. 

So you want to do what you can, everything possible, to make 

sure that when hard-working government employees or contractors 

identify waste, fraud, or abuse, that there are avenues available to 

them and they have trust in those avenues, that they will disclose 

that type of unethical or illegal conduct. You want to make sure 

as part of that program that they don’t have a fear of reprisal. So 

they need to trust the process and they need to be protected. 

So as a prosecutor, I understand deterrence and I understand 

that investigations have to be timely, they have to be thorough, 

and they have to be effective. If you find a whistleblower that’s 

been retaliated against, there need to be consequences. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you. Thank you both. 

Chairman BURR. Senator Wyden. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Chairman, I know I’m senior by technicality. With your leave, Mr. Chairman—I think I see you over 

there—could Senator Harris go first and then I follow her? 

Chairman BURR. Absolutely. 

Senator Harris. 

Senator HARRIS. Thank you, Senator Wyden. 

Mr. Klitenic, I appreciate your comments about the nobility of 

public service, and you so clearly care about the men and women 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

36 

of the IC and I really do appreciate that. So thank you for those 

comments and the spirit behind them. 

During the 2016 presidential election, then-candidate Donald 

Trump said, I quote: ‘‘I would bring back waterboarding and I’d 

bring it back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.’’ End quote. 

In your opinion, is waterboarding illegal? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you, Senator. The short answer is, as it relates to today, the enhanced interrogation techniques, the law is 

through the Defense Authorization Act, the techniques that are authorized are found in the Army Field Manual. So as an attorney, 

I would go to the Army Field Manual and see if that was a technique that is approved. 

Senator HARRIS. Have you consulted the Army Field Manual? 

Mr. KLITENIC. I have. 

Senator HARRIS. And in your opinion, based on that review, is 

waterboarding illegal? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you. I have not seen anything in the Army 

Field Manual that would persuade me that waterboarding is permitted under the Army Field Manual. 

Senator HARRIS. Can you guarantee this Committee that you 

would so advise the members of the IC if you were confirmed in 

this position? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes, that’s definitely an issue I would—that would 

get my attention. 

Senator HARRIS. And that you would express—— 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. Yes, Senator, yes. 

Senator HARRIS. Thank you. 

Do you believe it is appropriate for the FBI to search information 

on Americans’ communications without a warrant when that information was collected through an authority such as Section 702 of 

FISA and does not permit the targeting of U.S. persons, which we 

know it does not? 

Mr. KLITENIC. My understanding again of the 702 program—and 

I think we’re now getting into queries—my understanding is that’s 

been reviewed by the courts. It has been reviewed by the courts 

and was found to be—— 

[Room lights blink.] 

Senator HARRIS. There’s a light flashing. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. I’m hopefully not accountable for a power outage. Things do happen on my watch, but hopefully this is not attributable to me, Senator. 

But my understanding is that that aspect of the program has 

been reviewed by the courts and has been found to be constitutional. 

Senator HARRIS. And the IC has consistently declined to produce 

an estimate of the number of Americans who have been impacted 

by Section 702 in terms of their privacy. Do you see any legal barriers to generating that estimate? 

Mr. KLITENIC. That is an issue, Senator, I would have to look at. 

I do not have a security clearance and so all I can tell you is, if 

confirmed, that’s an issue I would certainly explore and spend time 

on. 

Senator HARRIS. If confirmed to this position, can you commit to 

the Committee that you will take a look at that and return to us 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

37 

with your perspective on whether there is a legal barrier to providing that estimate to this Committee? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. Again, the answer is I do not have a clearance and so if I commit something to the Committee I want to 

make sure I can stand by it. But it is something I would look at, 

and I would also look to see if there were any legal impediments 

as well. 

Senator HARRIS. And come back and report? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Yes. Yes, Senator. 

Senator HARRIS. If the IC lacks the technical expertise or resources to generate such an estimate and you do determine that it 

is legally permissible for them to offer that estimate to this Committee, as has been requested, do you see any legal barriers to 

bringing in outside experts like academic researchers to help generate such an estimate? 

Mr. KLITENIC. The honest and short answer is I don’t know the 

answer to that question. But that is something I would certainly 

look at. 

Senator HARRIS. And will you, again, report back to this Committee, if confirmed, about your perspective on bringing in outside 

experts to help generate the information that gives us an estimate 

of how many Americans have been impacted by 702 queries? 

Mr. KLITENIC. I would look and see if there were—if it was appropriate and lawful to have experts review the issue. Again, I 

don’t have a clearance, so I don’t want to commit something to you 

that for some reason I would be precluded from reporting back on. 

But if it were legally permissible for me to report back to you on 

it, I absolutely would. 

Senator HARRIS. I appreciate it. And I should premise all of these 

questions by stating that I agree completely with your testimony 

that 702 provides a very important tool to our intelligence community and it is something that should be preserved, but of course 

with striking a balance with the protections and privacy protections that Americans deserve to receive in terms of their private information. 

I’m especially concerned with the issue where the IC appears to 

lack a uniform and written policy to ensure that Americans receive 

appropriate notice of Section 702 surveillance. Can you commit to 

promulgating such a policy if confirmed in this position? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Senator, that’s something I would have to look 

closer into. As I sit here today, I can’t speak to the notification requirements of 702. But again, I do promise, if confirmed, I would 

look very closely at that and then report my findings to the Committee. 

Senator HARRIS. I want to emphasize that the concern specifically is that there is not a uniform written policy within the IC. 

So I’d appreciate you looking into that if confirmed, and thank you. 

Thank you. 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you. 

Chairman BURR. Senator Wyden. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Atkinson, I appreciated our discussion in the office. I feel 

strongly that the current acting leadership of the IC Inspector General’s Office has seriously damaged its whistleblower mission. We 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

38 

talked about your cleaning house. Tell me how you’re going to do 

it? 

Mr. ATKINSON. We did talk about cleaning house, and let me say 

this about that. As I said in my opening statement, the whistleblower protection program, like any other part of the office, is dependent on having the right people in the office. As we talked 

about in your office, my first priority is to get the right people in 

the office, get any of the wrong people out of the office, and then 

get the right person or people running the whistleblower protection 

program within the IC IG. 

Senator WYDEN. So how are you going to protect whistleblowers 

from reprisals? I think whistleblowers want to know they’re going 

to be encouraged. They want to know their complaints are going to 

be followed up expeditiously, but they’re especially interested in 

having the leadership at the top make it clear how they’re going 

to be protected from reprisals. 

So this is really part of the new day, cleaning house. How are 

you going to protect whistleblowers from reprisal? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Similar to the way we protect witnesses in criminal cases. We’re going to take their case, treat it very seriously, 

treat it impartially, follow the facts, wherever they lead, protect the 

witnesses to the extent permitted by law, do what we can to—— 

Senator WYDEN. What’s your understanding of what the law offers? Because they’re going to say: Okay, you’re saying I’m going 

to be protected to the extent of the law; what does that really 

mean? Give me an example of what you’re talking about? 

Mr. ATKINSON. That they will not be reprised against, they will 

not suffer demotion or any sort of pay cut or any negative job factor 

because of their willingness to come forward and make an authorized disclosure. 

Senator WYDEN. And you will make it clear you see that part of 

your new day, that they’re not going to face pay cuts, they’re not 

going to face demotions? That’s the message you want to send? 

Mr. ATKINSON. That is the message I want to send. As a prosecutor, I see the unauthorized disclosures and I see the harm that 

they do, and I understand how critically important it is for people 

to have trust in the authorized disclosures. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Klitenic, let me ask you a question about 

the law. If an intelligence operation is inconsistent with the 

public’s understanding of the law, that is a prescription for trouble, 

and we have faced that in the past with the Patriot Act, where people would go to a coffee shop and they’d read the Patriot Act and 

they wouldn’t hear about how it has been contorted into something 

where you’d collect millions of phone records on law-abiding people, 

which was the reason that we passed a reform bill. 

I talked to you about secret law. It’s a doctrine that we really developed here, that says: Look, if there’s a secret interpretation 

that’s different than what people read in the coffee shop, that’s 

what we ought to be concerned about. So tell me what you would 

do to declassify secret law? As you know, I made the distinction between sources and methods, which have to be classified, but the 

law, which always ought to be public. 

What are you going to do to declassify secret law? 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

39 

Mr. KLITENIC. Thank you, Senator. As we discussed, there will 

be instances where there will be legal opinions or there may be 

FISA Court opinions that within them necessarily contain information that is classified, and that classified information may be classified because it is to protect sources and methods. 

Also when we met, we also talked about my belief in transparency. I think transparency is important for any number of different reasons. One of the fundamental reasons why I think transparency is so important is because I think as the American people 

learn more about what the intelligence community is doing on their 

behalf they would have even greater confidence in the community. 

As it relates to declassifying certain portions of legal opinions or 

FISA Court opinions, again that’s something I would, as I told you 

in our meeting, I would very much commit to taking a hard look 

at. For me that is something—— 

Senator WYDEN. Would you make that a priority? Because secret 

law has been a problem for years and it remains one to this day. 

I want to see somebody come in there and say: Look, we’ve got a 

job to do; sources and methods are sacred; you don’t mess with 

them, because if you do people die. But the public has a right to 

know what the law is. 

I’d really like to see somebody in your position, consistent with 

protecting this country’s security, say this is going to be a priority. 

Will you do that? 

Mr. KLITENIC. Senator, I’m very comfortable telling you that, yes, 

I would make that a priority. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BURR. Senator King. 

Senator KING. A brief follow-up on a different topic. Mr. Atkinson, part of your role as IG, of course, isn’t always about high policy; it’s about fiscal responsibility, prudent expenditures, and those 

kinds of things. There is a huge force multiplier out there that’s 

available to you called the GAO. Unfortunately, in the past the intelligence community has resisted utilizing the resources of the 

GAO, even though they have clearances and those kinds of things. 

In fact, two years ago or three years ago Senator Coburn and I had 

to literally get an Act of Congress to get the IC to use the GAO 

to analyze utilization of facilities. 

Do you view the GAO as an asset to your work and will you commit that you will utilize them as a resource in the analysis that 

you do of things like fiscal prudence, efficiency, utilization of resources, staffing, and those kinds of things? 

Mr. ATKINSON. Yes, absolutely, Senator. I think that one of the 

challenges for the IC IG as I understand it is on the auditing side 

of the house and getting qualified, cleared auditors within the IC 

IG to look at the intelligence community’s programs and activities. 

So it makes perfect sense to make use of GAO, since they have subject matter experts, in auditing. 

So yes, I see them as a force multiplier and I would use them 

as much as possible. 

Senator KING. Good. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BURR. Thank you, Senator King. 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

40 

Seeing no other Members wishing to ask questions, let me thank 

both of you on behalf of the Committee. Let me thank you for your 

service in the past, for your willingness to serve in the capacity 

you’re here nominated by the President, and thank you for your 

honest testimony and candid testimony today. 

I’ll end where I started: The Committee takes oversight extremely serious. The two roles that you’ll be in are absolutely crucial to our ability to implement that oversight properly and effectively. 

We’re grateful to you. We look forward to the process as your 

nominations move out of Committee and to the floor. But as of this 

time, enjoy the next little bit with your families, who are here to 

support you. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:48 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(41) 

Supplemental Material 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

42 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 56 here 29479.056
43 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 57 here 29479.057
44 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 58 here 29479.058
45 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 59 here 29479.059
46 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 60 here 29479.060
47 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 61 here 29479.061
48 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 62 here 29479.062
49 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 63 here 29479.063
50 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 64 here 29479.064
51 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 65 here 29479.065
52 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 66 here 29479.066
53 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 67 here 29479.067
54 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 68 here 29479.068
55 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 69 here 29479.069
56 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 70 here 29479.070
57 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 71 here 29479.071
58 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 72 here 29479.072
59 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 73 here 29479.073
60 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 74 here 29479.074
61 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 75 here 29479.075
62 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 76 here 29479.076
63 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 77 here 29479.077
64 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 78 here 29479.078
65 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 79 here 29479.079
66 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 80 here 29479.080
67 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 81 here 29479.081
68 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 82 here 29479.082
69 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 83 here 29479.083
70 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 84 here 29479.084
71 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 85 here 29479.085
72 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 86 here 29479.086
73 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 87 here 29479.087
74 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 88 here 29479.088
75 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 89 here 29479.089
76 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 90 here 29479.090
77 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 91 here 29479.091
78 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 92 here 29479.092
79 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 93 here 29479.093
80 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 94 here 29479.094
81 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 95 here 29479.095
82 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 96 here 29479.096
83 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 97 here 29479.097
84 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 98 here 29479.098
85 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 99 here 29479.099
86 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 100 here 29479.100
87 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 101 here 29479.101
88 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 102 here 29479.102
89 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 103 here 29479.103
90 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 104 here 29479.104
91 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 105 here 29479.105
92 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 5 here 29479.005
93 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 6 here 29479.006
94 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 7 here 29479.007
95 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 8 here 29479.008
96 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 9 here 29479.009
97 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 10 here 29479.010
98 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 11 here 29479.011
99 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 12 here 29479.012
100 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 13 here 29479.013
101 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 14 here 29479.014
102 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 15 here 29479.015
103 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 16 here 29479.016
104 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 17 here 29479.017
105 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 18 here 29479.018
106 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 19 here 29479.019
107 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 20 here 29479.020
108 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 21 here 29479.021
109 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 22 here 29479.022
110 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 23 here 29479.023
111 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 24 here 29479.024
112 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 25 here 29479.025
113 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 26 here 29479.026
114 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 27 here 29479.027
115 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 28 here 29479.028
116 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 29 here 29479.029
117 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 30 here 29479.030
118 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 31 here 29479.031
119 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 32 here 29479.032
120 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 33 here 29479.033
121 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 34 here 29479.034
122 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 35 here 29479.035
123 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 36 here 29479.036
124 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 37 here 29479.037
125 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 38 here 29479.038
126 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 39 here 29479.039
127 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 40 here 29479.040
128 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 41 here 29479.041
129 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 42 here 29479.042
130 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 43 here 29479.043
131 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 44 here 29479.044
132 

Æ 

LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 45 here 29479.045