U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

70–518 PDF 2011

PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM: UPDATING THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS

ACT AND OTHER FEDERAL RECORDKEEPING

STATUTES TO IMPROVE ELECTRONIC RECORDS

PRESERVATION

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MAY 3, 2011

Serial No. 112–45

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

(

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

http://www.house.gov/reform

(II)

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

DARRELL E. ISSA, California, Chairman

DAN BURTON, Indiana

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

JIM JORDAN, Ohio

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah

CONNIE MACK, Florida

TIM WALBERG, Michigan

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma

JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona

RAU ́ L R. LABRADOR, Idaho

PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee

JOE WALSH, Illinois

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina

DENNIS A. ROSS, Florida

FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Ranking

Minority Member

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

JIM COOPER, Tennessee

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa

PETER WELCH, Vermont

JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut

JACKIE SPEIER, California

LAWRENCE J. BRADY, Staff Director

JOHN D. CUADERES, Deputy Staff Director

ROBERT BORDEN, General Counsel

LINDA A. GOOD, Chief Clerk

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on May 3, 2011 ................................................................................. 1

Statement of:

Ferriero, David S., Archivist of the United States, National Archives

and Records Administration, accompanied by Gary M. Stern, General

Counsel, National Archives and Records Administration; and Brook

Colangelo, chief information officer, Office of Administration, Executive

Office of the President .................................................................................. 9

Colangelo, Brook ........................................................................................ 20

Ferriero, David S. ...................................................................................... 9

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Colangelo, Brook, chief information officer, Office of Administration, Executive Office of the President, prepared statement of .............................. 22

Connolly, Hon. Gerald E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Virginia, prepared statement of .............................................................. 55

Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Maryland:

Later dated May 2, 2011 ........................................................................... 38

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 7

Ferriero, David S., Archivist of the United States, National Archives

and Records Administration, prepared statement of ................................. 12

Gosar, Hon. Paul A., a Representative in Congress from the State of

Arizona, prepared statement of ................................................................... 64

Issa, Chairman Darrell E., a Representative in Congress from the State

of California, prepared statement of ........................................................... 3

(1)

PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM: UPDATING THE PRESIDENTIAL

RECORDS ACT AND OTHER FEDERAL RECORDKEEPING STATUTES TO IMPROVE

ELECTRONIC RECORDS PRESERVATION

TUESDAY, MAY 3, 2011

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in room

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Darrell E. Issa (chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Issa, McHenry, Jordan, Lankford,

Amash, Buerkle, Gosar, DesJarlais, Guinta, Farenthold,

Cummings, Maloney, Tierney, Clay, Connolly, and Murphy.

Staff present: Ali Ahmad, deputy press secretary; Robert Borden,

general counsel; Molly Boyl, parliamentarian; Steve Castor, chief

counsel, investigations; John Cuaderes, deputy staff director; Gwen

D’Luzansky, assistant clerk; Adam P. Fromm, director of Member

liaison and floor operations; Linda Good, chief clerk; Frederick Hill,

director of communications; Ryan Little, manager of floor operations; Justin LoFranco, press assistant; Mark D. Marin, senior

professional staff member; Ashok M. Pinto, deputy chief counsel,

investigations; Jonathan J. Skladany, senior investigative counsel;

Becca Watkins, deputy press secretary; John A. Zadrozny, counsel;

Krista Boyd, minority counsel; Ashley Etienne, minority director of

communications; Jennifer Hoffman, minority press secretary; Carla

Hultberg, minority chief clerk; Lucinda Lessley, minority policy director; Amy Miller, minority professional staff member; Brian

Quinn, minority counsel; Dave Rapallo, minority staff director; Suzanne Sachsman Grooms, minority chief counsel; and Mark Stephenson, minority senior policy advisor/legislative director.

Chairman ISSA. The committee will come to order.

Today we will hear testimony on the Presidential Records in the

New Millennium: Updating the Presidential Records Act and Other

Federal Recordkeeping Statutes to Improve Electronic Records

Preservation.

We exist to secure two fundamental principles: first, Americans

have a right to know that the money Washington takes from them

is well spent and, second, Americans deserve an efficient, effective

government that works for them. Our duty on the Oversight and

Government Reform Committee is to protect these rights. Our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to taxpayers,

2

because taxpayers have a right to know what they get from their

government. We will work tirelessly in partnership with citizen

watchdogs to deliver the facts to the American people and bring

genuine reform to the Federal bureaucracy. This is the mission of

the Government Oversight Committee.

Today’s hearing concerns the status of executive branch compliance with the letter and spirit of the Presidential Records Act. The

American people trust in the Presidential Records Act; they trust

in this over 30-year-old piece of legislation to preserve for all time

the records of each administration. Crafted in the aftermath of Watergate scandal, the act marked a major step forward in openness

and transparency for the White House. By mandating the careful

preservation of public accessibility of official records, the American

people would have an accurate historical record of decisionmaking.

The purpose of this act is clear, but history moves on, technology

moves on, and today we deal, without a doubt, with an administration who has to, by policy, attempt to implement modernization of

an act that never envisioned Facebook and Twitter. This is not a

new problem, but it is a growing problem. The Clinton administration first had the digital age, but ultimately seeing that email

versus paper mail is substantially the same and when printed is

identical made it relatively easy to comply with.

During the Bush administration, unfortunately, the move from

Lotus Notes to Microsoft Exchange made us acutely aware that the

quantity of digital information, if not lost but simply misstored,

could end up costing us tens of millions of dollars to recover. In

fact, the digital age is more complex and, if not handled correctly,

is both more subject to loss of critical records and cost to preserve

and recover them.

We on the committee have broad oversight and we try to do each

part of government as best we can. But we do have limited special

responsibilities. The Presidential Records Act falls to this committee. We take seriously that the decades that have gone by have

caused an act fully understood to be very difficult to implement.

We look forward to our witnesses helping us as we begin to craft

the types of legislative reforms that will codify good policy that has

been developed by multiple administrations and go beyond that to

make it clear to the American people that all transactions appropriate and equivalent to the original ones captured will be captured

in the digital age.

I now recognize the Ranking Member for his opening statement.

[The prepared statement of Chairman Darrell E. Issa follows:]

3

4

5

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, first of all, before I begin, I would like to commend everyone who worked so hard for so long to bring Osama bin

Laden to justice. I thank our military service members, our intelligence officials, our diplomatic corps, our law enforcement officials,

and our Nation’s leaders from both political parties. This was a

sustained, unrelenting effort over a decade, and it shows that when

America confronts its most daunting challenges, we can come together with a striking and inspiring unity of purpose.

The Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act are

landmark open government laws that are based on a fundamental

principle that Federal agencies must retain records of their official

business. These include records that have historical value, as well

as records that are important for administrative, informational,

and evidentiary reasons.

The electronic age has brought new opportunities for making

government work more effectively and efficiently on behalf of

American taxpayers. It has also brought new challenges for ensuring that the Federal records are maintained properly.

Previous administrations have experienced problems preserving

electronic records, particularly emails. During the Clinton administration, the email system experienced technical problems that resulted in lost emails. During the Bush administration, the White

House conceded that it lost hundreds of days of official emails, and

top officials routinely use their Republican National Committee

email accounts for official business.

To address these problems, the current system now automatically preserves all emails from White House email accounts. In addition, White House computers block access to private email accounts like Gmail and Hotmail. Finally, if White House employees

receive emails relating to official business on their personal accounts, they are directed to preserve those emails, either by forwarding them to their official accounts or by printing them.

As cutting-edge technologies continue to develop, they will create

additional opportunities and challenges. Government officials can

now communicate with each other and with the American public in

new and creative ways through Facebook, Twitter, and other social

media outlets. We want to encourage this kind of innovation. At

the same time, we must ensure that records of official communications are preserved.

The Obama administration has worked closely with the National

Archives to develop new policies relating to social media. To begin

with, it has limited access to these platforms to a small fraction of

White House employees. It has also worked with the National Archives to develop protocols to save official postings and samples of

public comments in a manner that is consistent with its protocols

for written correspondence.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, I always believe more can be done,

so the question for today’s hearing is whether we can improve the

Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act. The clear

answer from this side of the aisle is yes. On March 17, 2011, I introduced H.R. 1144, the Transparency and Openness in Government Act, a package of five bills that overwhelmingly passed the

House last Congress with broad bipartisan support, including your

6

own, Mr. Chairman, and every Democratic member of this committee joined me, as an original cosponsor of this legislation.

H.R. 1144 includes electronic message preservation act which

modernizes the Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records

Act to ensure that the White House and agency emails are preserved electronically. Right now the law requires only that these

records be saved; there is no requirement that they be saved electronically. This legislation had such bipartisan support last Congress that it passed the House by voice vote on March 17, 2010.

Since I introduced H.R. 1144 in March, a wide spectrum of open

government groups has endorsed it. On April 18, 2011, a coalition

of 17 organizations wrote to both of us seeking bipartisan support

and prompt action in the House. They also said H.R. 1144, the

Transparency and Openness in Government Act will enhance the

effectiveness of Federal advisory panels, provide more access to

Presidential records, secure electronic messages generated by administration officials, ensure donations to the Presidential libraries’

open of the public record, and give the Government Accountability

Office more teeth.

Mr. Chairman, although you declined to become an original cosponsor of this legislation back in March, I hope that you and I can

work together on this issue in a productive way. With that, I yield

back.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Elijah E. Cummings follows:]

7

8

9

Chairman ISSA. I thank the Ranking Member.

We now go to our witnesses.

The Honorable David S. Ferriero. I thank you for your testimony

today on behalf of the National Archives and Records Administration. Your work there is critical to our understanding of where reform is necessary.

Mr. Gary Stern, General Counsel to NARA, Office of Archivist.

And Mr. Brook Colangelo is the chief information officer of the

Executive Office of the President. I appreciate your being here

today. As you know, we also wanted the policy team, but I know

that you come with probably the most critical information for

today, so I am pleased to have you here.

Pursuant to the rules of the committee, could you all rise to take

the oath and raise your right hands?

[Witnesses sworn.]

Chairman ISSA. Let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative.

Mr. Ferriero, as you know, you have been here before, we do the

green, the yellow, the red. The important thing is that all of your

statements are on the record, and although you may go on script,

to the extent that you can add to what is already going in the

record, not simply repeat it, we would appreciate it. With that, you

are recognized for 5 minutes. Thank you.

STATEMENTS OF DAVID S. FERRIERO, ARCHIVIST OF THE

UNITED STATES, NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION, ACCOMPANIED BY GARY M. STERN, GENERAL COUNSEL, NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION; AND BROOK COLANGELO, CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION, EXECUTIVE

OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

STATEMENT OF DAVID S. FERRIERO

Mr. FERRIERO. Thank you and good morning, Chairman Issa and

Ranking Member Cummings. Thank you for calling the hearing

and for your continued attention to the management and preservation of government records. As you mentioned, General Counsel

Gary Stern accompanies me this morning and will be available to

answer questions from the committee.

I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss the work that

NARA does to implement the government recordkeeping laws, the

Presidential Records Act [PRA], and the Federal Records Act

[FRA]. The Archives have been responsible for setting governmentwide policy on how all Federal agencies manage their records since

the enactment of the FRA in 1950.

The FRA, however, does not apply to the President, the Vice

President, and those members of their staffs that advise and assist

them. Nor does it govern recordkeeping by Congress and the Supreme Court.

The Presidential Records Act of 1978 established public ownership of all Presidential and vice Presidential records, but it vested

all records management and authority entirely and exclusively

with the incumbent president and vice president. The legislative

10

history of the PRA states that the president is encouraged to implement sound records management practices.

Because the PRA presumes that all Presidential records must be

permanently preserved and transferred to the National Archives at

the end of the president’s administration, the act allows for comparatively straightforward records management policy; that is, the

White House saves all Presidential records, with the exception of

some publicly received bulk mail correspondence, where a sampling

is saved, and all Presidential records are transferred to NARA

when the president leaves office.

In 1994, the Clinton administration established the policy of preserving all White House email records with an electronic recordkeeping system. The George W. Bush administration continued this

policy. While both administrations experienced some problems, as

you mentioned, preserving their emails, which required restoration

projects, the overall concept of capturing and preserving electronic

Presidential records in their entirety became the accepted practice.

NARA staff has successfully transferred the electronic Presidential

records of these two administrations, along with all other records

into the National Archives.

Throughout the course of an administration, both I and my staff

provide guidance and advice on matters affecting White House

records management when invited to do so. In this administration,

NARA staff meet regularly with staff in the White House Office of

Administration and other Executive Office of the President components on electronic records issues and provide guidance as requested. For example, we have provided advice on the preservation

of Presidential record material generated by the White House and

posted on social media Web sites and we have provided sampling

methodology for archiving those types of records.

NARA has testified several times before this committee on the

continuing challenges that Federal agencies across the government

have in managing and preserving electronic records under FRA.

The FRA requires each agency to follow NARA’s guidance and implement a records management program. We have developed an extensive set of regulations and guidance on how agencies need to

manage their records.

At the beginning of this administration, President Obama issued

a Presidential Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government. NARA has subsequently emphasized that the backbone of a

transparent and open government is good records management.

To put it simply, the government cannot be open or accountable

if it does not preserve and cannot find its records. In February

2011, we issued our second annual Records Management Self-Assessment Report with respect to how agencies manage electronic

records. The report noted that records management programs at

many agencies are at risk.

In September 2010, NARA also produced a report on Federal

Web 2.0 Use and Record Value that noted the Web landscape is

evolving so rapidly that if we neglect to address these issues, we

risk losing the truly valuable materials created by the Federal Government. In that report we made several recommendations, which

are included in my written testimony.

11

One of the fundamental challenges that agencies have in managing electronic records under the FRA, and what distinguishes

them from records governed by the PRA, is the need to separate

permanent records from temporary records. Electronic records

management systems generally require significant user input to

file individual records, resulting in few agencies managing and preserving their email records electronically.

Rather, most agencies simply rely on print-to-paper as their official records management policy for email and many other electronically created records. While the FRA still provides a viable statutory framework for managing Federal records, we believe that

there could be ways to modernize the FRA to improve the management of electronic records.

Before closing, I do want to raise one critical but often overlooked

point. Ultimately, responsibility for records management will always rest, to some degree, with individual Federal employees, no

matter what systems are in place. That was true in an era of exclusively paper records and it remains true in an increasingly digital

age.

As the Archivist of the United States, I have made the management preservation and future access to electronic records my highest priorities. Indeed, as part of the transformation process that I

have initiated within NARA, we have set up our own records management laboratory to develop and test best practices. I am committed to working with Congress, the White House, and Federal

agencies to do all that we can to improve electronic records management and preservation.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for your

attention and I am happy to answer any questions that you have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ferriero follows:]

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Chairman ISSA. Thank you, Mr. Ferriero.

Mr. Stern, I understand you don’t have an opening statement. Do

you have any comments at this time?

Mr. STERN. No. I will just defer until questions.

Chairman ISSA. Thank you.

Mr. Colangelo, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF BROOK COLANGELO

Mr. COLANGELO. Good morning, Chairman Issa, Ranking Member Cummings, and distinguished members of this committee.

Thank you for inviting me to participate in today’s hearing on potential changes to the President Records Act and other records

laws.

I am pleased to appear before you to discuss information technology systems in place for the Executive Office of the President

and their impact on electronic records management. I have served

as the chief information officer of the Office of Administration since

January 2009. OA provides common administrative and support

services to the components of the Executive Office of the President,

including the White House Office, the National Security staff, and

Office of Management and Budget. As CIO, I oversee all unclassified enterprise technology systems and services.

From the first days of the administration, it was clear that the

EOP’s IT systems were struggling to maintain stable and secure

operations due to an aging IT infrastructure. Over 82 percent of

our assets were end-of-life and no longer supported by their manufacturer. Enterprise software was severely out of date and had not

been upgraded in years. The EOP had a single data center and no

viable plan for a secondary disaster recovery. These flaws led to

multiple email and network outages in the first 40 days of the administration.

We have devoted significant time and resources to modernizing

the EOP IT systems in order to enhance stability, ensure security,

and provide robust electronic records management. Among other

initiatives, we have replaced network switches, overhauled our

Internet connection, patched network gear, migrated to Exchange

2007, moved to BlackBerry Enterprise Server 5.0, increased and

upgraded our storage area network, expanded our cybersecurity

tools, and began to stand up a disaster recovery data center.

Amid these efforts, we have worked proactively to improve electronic records management while adapting to emerging technologies. Although past White Houses have struggled with email

preservation, starting from the first day of this administration,

email has been preserved through an automated archiving system

that was procured by the Bush White House. We are now taking

steps to upgrade or replace this system before it becomes outdated.

We have also upgraded our email and BlackBerry servers to improve the reliability, and we are the first administration to begin

archiving SMS text and pin-to-pin messages on EOP BlackBerry

devices.

Although we have explored an enterprise solution for archiving

records created on social networks, due to a lack of a suitable enterprise solution, EOP components currently use a combination of

automated and manual methods to archive these records. Finally,

21

we have installed a new content management system on the White

House Web site that archives every change to the site.

These initiatives have improved electronic records management

on the EOP IT systems. Additionally, we have made it easier for

staff to work on those systems. We have deployed secure mobile

workstations, enabling staff to work on EOP systems while traveling or at home. Staff also have secure Web-based access to EOP

desktop and applications, enabling them to work in a records managed environment from any computer.

We also restrict EOP network access to Web sites that could pose

risks to records management or security. This includes sites like

Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Facebook, Twitter, along with instant messaging sites like AOL Instant Messenger from the EOP network. A

limited number of staff have access to approved social networking

sites for official business, but cannot access Web mail sites like

Gmail or Instant Messaging. Staff who receive access and are subject to the President Records Act receive supplemental briefing on

their records management obligations. We also restrict the ability

of EOP personnel to connect personal devices to the EOP network.

These proactive IT measures are reinforced by EOP policies. Employees are instructed to conduct all work on EOP systems, including electronic communications, except in emergency circumstances

when they cannot access the EOP systems and must accomplish

time-sensitive work. Staff receive guidance that the PRA applies to

work-related electronic communications on personal accounts and

are instructed to take appropriate steps to preserve any records on

their personal accounts such as forwarding those communications

to their EOP account or copying their EOP account on outgoing

emails.

Through these proactive measures, we hope to improve the EOP

electronic records management and address the challenges presented by emerging technologies. I hope this background information and my written testimony aids the committee’s consideration

of potential changes to the President Records Act and other Federal

recordkeeping law.

Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to answer any questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Colangelo follows:]

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. I recognize myself for 5 minutes at

this time.

Mr. Colangelo, are any of these carried into the White House?

Mr. COLANGELO. IPads, sir?

Chairman ISSA. Yes.

Mr. COLANGELO. We have not deployed iPads for enterprise use.

Chairman ISSA. Are any of these carried into the White House?

Have you ever seen one of these into the White House?

Mr. COLANGELO. Yes.

Chairman ISSA. So people carry a product which circumvents

your entire system by going to the AT&T network on a daily basis

in the White House, isn’t that true? Nothing stops someone from

using this or other wi-fi connected not to any wi-fi in the White

House, but to AT&T, Verizon, Sprint systems, and they communicate freely from the White House to Gmail or any other account,

isn’t that true?

Mr. COLANGELO. Mr. Chairman, we have strong policy, along

with enterprise technology, that captures our records on the EOP

network.

Chairman ISSA. I heard you. Answer my question, please. If I

take an app product into the White House, as I did last night for

dinner, I have full communication capability; you don’t block any

Verizon, Sprint, AT&T, or T-Mobile. The fact is that people every

day bring their private property into the White House and can

Gmail, Hotmail and the like from within the White House, correct?

Mr. COLANGELO. Individuals are not restricted on what they

bring into the White House on personal devices on the person.

Chairman ISSA. So someone, if they chose to, could be emailing

back and forth to the DNC from the White House, and you would

not have the ability to capture that, is that correct?

Mr. COLANGELO. We provide training and policy to staff.

Chairman ISSA. Please. I am asking only the technical questions

because you don’t make policy. I ask for the policy person; I was

denied that person. So let’s stick to straightforward. I am not after

the President, I am not after the administration; I am after the

changes in technology and whether or not we are equipped to deal

with them.

Today there are hundreds of products in the old Executive Office,

in the Treasury Building, and in the White House proper being

used to communicate, whether you like it or not, to private emails.

They’re simply connected, is that correct?

Mr. COLANGELO. That is correct, sir.

Chairman ISSA. OK. We are not making an issue out of it; that

is the reality of the last decade of changes. And hopefully our work

here is not about the current occupant of the White House, but

about an act that has survived multiple presidents with everchanging challenges.

Mr. Ferriero, if someone were to produce a book 5 years from

now and they had their Gmail records, their Microsoft Word documents, all of which were produced on private computers using the

Cloud while they were sitting inside the White House or working

as covered persons for the Office of the President, would you believe you’re entitled to that source material under the Presidential

Records Act?

35

Mr. FERRIERO. If that content was work for that administration,

then, yes, that’s a Presidential record.

Chairman ISSA. And don’t most kiss-and-tell books that come out

after a president is gone usually, but not always after, don’t they

basically talk about meetings, experiences and so on, and ultimately aren’t they most often from information that is either written, typed, or in some other way captured during the time they are

either employees of the White House or physically in the White

House. That is just the reality of what we see post-president.

Mr. FERRIERO. Exactly. In fact, some of the heaviest users of our

Presidential libraries’ collections are former members of the administration.

Chairman ISSA. They have to supplement what they took with

them. How do you propose, in a digital age, that we deal with those

correspondence that occur? Ultimately, the President is both the

head of the Armed Forces, the head of the administration, and the

head of his party. How do we appropriately capture that which we

should capture, not capture that which we shouldn’t, by statute

rather than policy?

Mr. FERRIERO. Well, as I said, the way the law is written, the

control, unlike the Federal Records Act, the control of that content

rests with the President and the Vice President. So the position

that we have is guidance, is to provide guidance, and Mr. Stern

meets with his colleagues from the White House on a regular basis

to provide that kind of guidance and to understand how technology

is being used in the White House.

Chairman ISSA. Are all of you comfortable that a ‘‘I will decide

which one of my Gmails fits that based on my training’’ is sufficient?

Mr. STERN. Well, it is our view that both statutes, even though

they are old and were written in a time of principally paper

records, are all-encompassing; they include language about included, but not limited to, all formats and all. So any official communications involving their work are presumptively Presidential

records regardless of what system they are used on. It is also our

clear understanding from this administration and prior administrations that the policy is you must use the government systems.

Chairman ISSA. Policy but not the statute. And as we already

heard, they do use non-government systems; otherwise, there

wouldn’t be a policy that when you send and receive on your Gmail,

you forward it into the official system. By definition, you can’t have

it both ways; you can’t say the policy is that you only use official

and then the policy is on those many, many, many, many occasions

in which you don’t use the official, please forward for the record.

Clearly, the policy is not getting the job done completely.

Mr. STERN. And I guess the question is does that occur often, or

our understanding is it can occur in emergency situations and the

like, and whether it occurs on a regular basis, we are not aware

of that.

Mr. FERRIERO. But let me answer your question.

Chairman ISSA. Please.

Mr. FERRIERO. Your question was are you comfortable. No, I am

not. Any time there is human intervention, then I am not comfortable.

36

Chairman ISSA. Thank you.

Mr. Cummings.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much.

We can agree that Federal employees should not use personal

email to conduct official business, I think. Is that right, gentlemen?

Mr. FERRIERO. They can if they forward that communication to

their official email.

Mr. CUMMINGS. OK. However, there are many times when using

personal email might be necessary. For example, in the event of a

natural disaster or a terrorist attack, communicating on official

email may be impossible, would you agree?

Mr. FERRIERO. Agree.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Colangelo, in your testimony you describe

several instances where the White House system experienced email

outages, is that correct?

Mr. COLANGELO. That is correct.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Certainly, it should be made clear to employees

that it is their responsibility to forward any records created on

their personal email to their official email.

Mr. Colangelo and Mr. Ferriero, we don’t want employees to just

stop performing their duties in the White House or agency email

system if it goes down, do we? We don’t want that to happen if the

agency system goes down, in other words, for them to stop doing

business.

Mr. FERRIERO. Exactly.

Mr. CUMMINGS. So under that circumstance you want to make

sure that they preserve whatever records they had.

Currently, the White House blocks access to personal email on

White House computers. Employees are prohibited from even connecting personal electronic devices to the EOP network, is that correct?

Mr. COLANGELO. That is correct.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Yet, some still promote the false notion that

White House employees are sitting around all day on their personal

iPhones, accessing these personal email accounts to evade the Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act.

Mr. Colangelo, what more could be done? I suppose Federal agencies could ban employees from carrying personal cell phones at

work. They could do that, couldn’t they?

Mr. COLANGELO. That is more of a policy question, Congressman;

I am a technologist.

Mr. CUMMINGS. And do we really want to create such an extreme

big brother mentality like this?

Mr. Ferriero, what else could we do?

Mr. FERRIERO. The evolving guidance that we are working on in

this particular administration is a good indication of how the system should work in a healthy environment. As I said, the control

is with the White House and the quality of the product depends

upon the relationship with the administration.

Mr. CUMMINGS. But you are not stopping the use of personal

email. In other words, do you think it is a good idea to require all

Federal employees to stop using any personal email as a condition

of Federal employment?

37

Mr. FERRIERO. There are instances as you describe when that is

the only solution, and, as far as I am concerned, that should be the

guidance; you use your personal connections when you don’t have

access otherwise.

Mr. CUMMINGS. OK.

Mr. FERRIERO. And you ensure that record then gets transferred

to your official email.

Mr. CUMMINGS. So obviouisly there are extreme and ridiculous

proposals designed to make a point. At its most basic level, compliance with recordkeeping laws comes down to employees making decisions, is that right?

Mr. FERRIERO. That is the human element I was talking about.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Yes. And, Mr. Ferriero, isn’t there inherently

some level of discretion that must be allowed to ensure that employees can comply with the law while also doing their jobs, is that

right?

Mr. FERRIERO. That is right.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Now, last year you applauded our legislation, the

legislation that I spoke of about in my opening statement, did you

not?

Mr. FERRIERO. I did.

Mr. CUMMINGS. And you supported it with great enthusiasm, did

you not?

Mr. FERRIERO. I did.

Mr. CUMMINGS. And why is that?

Mr. FERRIERO. Because it points us in the right direction in

terms of how we deal with our electronic records, and it also raises

the consciousness of Congress about the importance of records,

which is a real problem that I have inherited as Archivist of the

United States.

Mr. CUMMINGS. So would you agree with me that would be a

giant step in the right direction?

Mr. FERRIERO. It points us in the right direction, I agree.

Mr. CUMMINGS. And is there anything that you would like to see

added to that legislation?

Mr. FERRIERO. One of the things that worries me most is the retention issue. The way the Federal Records Act is currently written, we are still in a 1950’s paper mode, where many agencies have

a 30-year retention policy for their records. Thirty years in an electronic environment is incredibly dangerous.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I failed in my opening statement

to ask that the letter that I mentioned with regard to what I sent

to you a while back, in March, with regard to our legislation and

the Transparency Act and then the letter I sent to you yesterday

just be a part of the record. I ask unanimous consent.

Chairman ISSA. The first one, without objection, so ordered. The

one yesterday was on this subject?

Mr. CUMMINGS. Yes, yes. Just asking for a markup.

Chairman ISSA. Oh, of course. Then without objection, so ordered.

[The information referred to follows:]

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Chairman ISSA. Mr. Ferriero, you said things are so dangerous,

and I don’t think the Ranking Member got to hear what was so

dangerous about 30 years in an electronic age.

Mr. FERRIERO. As you know, because of changes in technology,

30 years to be retained in an agency is a very long time. Different

information technology systems being used, different records management systems being used, great risk of loss of records in 30

years.

Chairman ISSA. In other words, we can’t read DOS 3.3 so well

today. OK, thank you.

The gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. DesJarlais.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We started in on this discussion just now on the 30-year problem

in document preservation, and I think maybe we should explore

that further. Mr. Stern, certainly feel free to jump in.

Does the NARA favor elimination of the current 30-year presumption?

Mr. FERRIERO. Yes.

Mr. STERN. And I would just add the 30-year issue is about when

they transfer permanent records into the National Archives. For

agencies only a tiny fraction of all the records they create are permanent for transfer into the Archives, and our concern is, on permanent records, we want to ensure we get them as early as possible so that we don’t have a problem of format obsolescence.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Often on Presidential recordkeeping is it common that on the second term they are more aggressive getting

these archived? Is it your presumption that we should start earlier

in a president’s term?

Mr. STERN. The advantage of, in any Presidential term, even two

terms, that is only 8 years at the longest, so that is relatively recent enough that we are able to get all the records in a reasonable

good format. But we work with the new administration on day one

and, from our perspective, we are planning a transition the first

day the President is in office in terms of working and coordinating

to ensure that all records, particularly electronic records, would be

in the right shape and format so they can be transferred to us

when the President leaves office.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. OK.

Mr. Ferriero, which and how many Federal agencies currently

take advantage of pre-accessioning and turn over their documents

before they are required to do so?

Mr. FERRIERO. Pre-accessioning?

Mr. DESJARLAIS. The early turnover of documents.

Mr. FERRIERO. Only about half a dozen.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Half a dozen? And you would like to see that?

Mr. FERRIERO. Actually, as the Archivist, I would be really interested in getting in at the creation so that we have better control.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. What part of the Federal Records Act would

have to be updated to eliminate the current 30-year presumption?

Mr. FERRIERO. I believe it is Section 2107, 2108 have language

with respect to the agency retention up to 30 years.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. OK. Would the NARA prefer a default preservation rule that requires periodic turnover; quarterly, semiannually,

annually, of agency electronic documents?

48

Mr. FERRIERO. We are exploring various models.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Mr. Stern, would the NARA be able to handle

a shift to periodic submission of agency electronic documents at

current funding and personnel levels?

Mr. STERN. Yes, we think we will. In terms of the issues of preaccessioning, we would just get copies for storage in its original format; the agencies would still have legal custody and be responsible

for access, use, all of those issues until there is the formal legal

transfer, which still could take place many years down the line. We

just want to ensure we get a copy set that we can preserve in that

original format.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Mr. Ferriero, shifting gears a little bit, the Federal Records Act appears to split the responsibility for managing

Federal records between the NARA and GSA. Is this by design or

a remnant of the old GSA authorizing statute?

Mr. FERRIERO. This is a remnant.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. OK.

Mr. FERRIERO. In 1985 the agency separated from GSA and that

still is in the law.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Are there any practical functional problems as

a result of the fact that the Federal Records Act talks of GSA as

having a role in the Federal record management?

Mr. FERRIERO. Not really.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. OK.

Mr. FERRIERO. And they have never exercised any, at least in my

experience they have never exercised any authority over records.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. And do you have any idea what GSA’s perspective is regarding possible clarification of duties?

Mr. FERRIERO. I am sure they would be amenable.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. They would favor it?

Mr. FERRIERO. I would guess.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. All right.

Mr. Stern, what parts of the Federal Records Act would have to

be updated to clarify NARA’s exclusive custodial role?

Mr. STERN. I believe that is in Chapter 29 is where they talk

about the responsibilities of the Archivist and the Administrator of

GSA. So that would be a place to look to clarify that issue.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. And Mr. Colangelo, I wasn’t meaning to ignore

you; I was afraid I might mispronounce your name as well. But I

am out of time and I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman ISSA. You gave me back 12 seconds.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Well, I hate to do that.

Chairman ISSA. That is all right. We will let it happen this one

time.

The gentlelady from New York, Mrs. Maloney.

I am sorry, I got my paper just as I announced the wrong order.

So now I have the right order starting with yourself.

Mrs. MALONEY. I thank the chairman for calling this meeting on

this important topic.

A lot of what we are talking about today involves the preserving

of Federal records, but preserving Federal records is really, in my

opinion, not enough. I would say that it is equally as important to

make these records available to the press and available to the general public.

49

Now, the American people have a right to know what their government is doing, what meetings are taking place, what they are

working on, and one of the ways that they are able to figure this

out is by having the press really report on the records on what the

government is doing. I would like to point out that the Obama administration has taken many very important steps to open up government and to allow the public to see what is taking place. It is

probably the most transparent government in the history of our

country, and I would like to give one specific example and ask for

your comment on this.

In December 2009, the White House began making all visitor access logs available on the White House Web site so the public

knows who is wooing whom, who is going to the meetings; what are

they working on; who has access. So I would like to ask Mr.

Ferriero or Mr. Stern to comment on how important a step was this

for the White House to make the visitor logs available to the general public, to the press to write about it. This is the first time in

history this has been opened up to the American people. How important a step is this?

Mr. FERRIERO. I will start. I think it is incredibly important, but

it also needs to be coupled with other heads of agencies releasing

their calendars and their schedules also, and we haven’t made as

much progress there.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Stern, do you have a comment?

Mr. STERN. Well, with respect to those records, those records are

preserved as Presidential records and they are all transferred to

the National Archives when the President leaves office, so we have

White House entry records going all the way back, even before

there was an electronic system, even before to entry records in the

Roosevelt White House. So it is certainly our mission as the National Archives to open records as quickly as we can when they

come to us, and we always encourage the rest of the government

to be as open as they can too.

Mrs. MALONEY. But this is the first time it has been opened to

the general public before it went to Archives or put on a Web site.

Mr. STERN. I believe on a systematic basis, that is my understanding, yes.

Mrs. MALONEY. I would also like to point out that this administration has probably been more effective than any other in the history of our country and has made use of the social media, such as

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blogging, and these applications bring

great innovation and allow people to have access to what our government is doing and what the activities are, but they also bring

very special challenges for the archiving of this information because of the tremendous volume that is generated every single day.

So I would like to ask you, Mr. Ferriero, the National Archives

has a blog, Facebook page, Twitter, and YouTube accounts. How do

you preserve the records generated on this social media? How do

you preserve it now?

Mr. FERRIERO. It is an exciting time to be the Archivist because

of the rapid changes in technology and also because of, as you mention, the volume of content that is now being generated. We have

developed guidelines for the agencies to consider their use of social

media; it is on our Web site and we have raised a series of quesVerDate 17-JUN-2003 13:44 Oct 28, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\70518.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
50

tions with them to analyze the content of their postings on social

media to make decisions about whether they are records or not. If

they are records, then they need to be captured just as under the

guidance of the Federal Records Act, and we have provided guidance on the capture of that content also.

Mrs. MALONEY. Would you say the benefits of using social media

and these various tools to communicate with the general public

outweigh the challenges posed to archiving it?

Mr. FERRIERO. Yes, definitely. This administration is committed

to involving the American public in the workings of government in

a way that it has never been involved before, and this is the way

it is happening.

Mrs. MALONEY. I would like to close, since both of you have mentioned the importance of having the agencies involved and that the

performance of the agencies in managing electronic records are

equally as important, and I would just like to point out that we

have a bill before Congress, the Message Preservation Act, that

calls upon the agencies to electronically save this information and

to save their emails electronically, and I urge my colleagues on

both sides of the aisle to join me and many others in pushing for

the passage of this bill.

Thank you very much. My time has expired.

Mr. DESJARLAIS [presiding]. The gentleman from North Carolina

is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Ferriero, thank you for being here. I certainly appreciate

your leadership and your time, and certainly I appreciated it with

Chairman Clay last Congress, having oversight in our subcommittee of NARA, and appreciate the hard work that you do.

Also appreciate the fact that you have a North Carolina connection.

I wanted to ask you about the print-to-paper policy. Could you

discuss the drawbacks to this idea that rather than keeping a digital record, which seems more efficient, easier to search, easier to

maintain, I would guess it would be easier to maintain, compared

to this idea that you simply print something off and put in a file?

Mr. FERRIERO. I already have 10 billion pieces of paper; I don’t

need any more paper. It is embarrassing that in the year 2011 our

guidance is print and save. We should be capturing this electronically. I have 44 facilities around the country. The storage costs for

paper are enormous.

Mr. MCHENRY. In what ways can we improve this?

Mr. FERRIERO. The guidance in the EMPA is to acknowledge, as

we have in the Presidential Records Act, acknowledge electronic

communication as record. That will help.

Mr. MCHENRY. What part of the Federal Records Act would have

to be updated in order to insist that we have electronic records?

Mr. STERN. You would have to look at the specific provisions, but

we are familiar with the legislation, the EMPA, and that would

amend I believe it is through Chapter 29, and there may be other

provisions that warrant looking at in terms of mandating electronic

preservation of at least electronic messages, as that statute does,

and our view is that we support the goals of that effort.

Mr. MCHENRY. Now, Dr. Ferriero, we have discussed this before

in a larger, broader context. You inherited a lot of difficulties come

51

in as Archivist, and I have asked you this at every hearing that

you have been before the committee, so you probably know where

I am going with this, but in terms of how employees rank their

happiness with their job and fulfillment with their job, NARA has

had some challenges.

You discussed 44 facilities. It is a pretty large institution you are

running. But in comparison to other Federal employees’ work satisfaction hasn’t been the highest at NARA and that has led, in my

opinion, to some data losses based off of people not getting full fulfillment out of their job, haven’t taken the pride in preserving some

of these documents. Now, I know you have a very credible staff,

you have great folks that work at NARA, but what have you done

to improve this in the year and a half now, 18 months you have

been on the job?

Mr. FERRIERO. You are right, we are tied for last place in the

Employee Viewpoint Survey, tied with HUD, and it is not where

I want us to be. We have, in the past 8 months, gone through a

major reorganization, transformation of the agency, created basically a new organization, driving out repetitive kinds of operations

and streamlining and making it more efficient, but most importantly putting our user community in the center of what we are

doing and engaging the staff in this process. And the engagement

of the staff through social media internally has really had an impact on how people feel about being part of one large agency.

I visited now 32 of our 44 facilities, so I have had an opportunity

to meet firsthand with the staff to talk to them. First question:

What is it like to work here? Tell me the stories. With and without

supervisors. So I have gotten a really good picture of what works

and what doesn’t work, and we are serious about turning that

around to make it the best agency in the government.

Mr. MCHENRY. Very good. Very good. Thank you for your testimony today and thank you all for your service to our government.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from

Missouri, Mr. Clay, for 5 minutes.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Archivist Ferriero, it is very good to see you again. I would like

to take a moment to say that you are doing an outstanding job

leading the National Archives. Your reorganization, your transformation of the agency will, I believe, result in vastly improved

services to all the stakeholders and customers that you serve. This

is especially true regarding open government and electronic records

management.

I would like to ask you about regulations. As you know, the

House, last year, passed the Electronic Message Preservation Act

[EMPA]. Under this legislation, you would be required to issue regulations to agencies and the White House on the preservation of

electronic messages. This Congress, Ranking Member Cummings

has introduced H.R. 1144, the Transparency and Openness in Government Act, which includes the language of EMPA. H.R. 1144 also

includes the Presidential Records Act amendments, which overwhelmingly passed the House the last Congress.

Archivist Ferriero, would these improvements, along with the existing statutes, provide you with the tools that you need in order

to help agencies comply with Federal recordkeeping statutes and

52

can you elaborate on how exactly these improvements would be

helpful.

Mr. FERRIERO. We are very supportive of the direction of H.R.

1144. As I said, and I don’t want to keep repeating myself, my biggest concern is about retention, how long electronic records are retained in the agencies. If we can deal with that, I will be happy.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you. So you agree that we need to get rid of

the paper.

Mr. FERRIERO. I agree. I love paper, but——

Mr. CLAY. You have driven that point home this morning about

paper; it does become cumbersome and there are ways to transfer

that data over to electronic means in this day and age.

Let me ask Mr. Colangelo what is the current state of the White

House email archiving system, is it up to task?

Mr. COLANGELO. Congressman, yes, the email archiving is fully

operational and is ingesting all email, to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. CLAY. This is more of a comment than a question, but during

the previous administration this committee discovered something

very disturbing. This was after we learned that the previous White

House was unable to properly manage the emails in their system

and many were lost. On top of that, dozens of senior White House

officials conducted official business using their Republican National

Committee email accounts instead of their official government accounts. Countless records, perhaps millions, that should have been

preserved under Federal statute were lost.

Mr. Colangelo, do we have to worry about those same problems

in this White House?

Mr. COLANGELO. Congressman, what we have done since 2009 is

worked with the technology that the Bush administration procured,

which is a commercial off-the-shelf product, a proven technology to

archive records. So the EOP email systems are being archived. Additionally to that, we have also stabilized our systems and enhanced mobility so that we offer users many choices to access the

EOP system when they need to do their EOP work either from a

laptop or a secure Web-based system, so that they have the opportunity to do EOP work anytime.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for your response and all of the witnesses’

responses.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Mr. DESJARLAIS. The Chair thanks the gentleman.

The Chair will now recognize the gentlelady from New York, Ms.

Buerkle, for 5 minutes.

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our

panelists for being here this morning.

My question has to do with the split between the responsibility

for managing Federal records with regards to NARA and GSA. If

you could, what we are looking at right now appears to split the

responsibility. Is that by design or is that something that was it

just so happened that way?

Mr. STERN. Yes, the National Archives used to be part of GSA,

and in 1985 we were split and became an independent agency from

GSA, but when they revised the statute at that time, they left some

responsibilities for economy and efficiency and such with GSA in

coordination with the Archivist of the United States. Our experiVerDate 17-JUN-2003 13:44 Oct 28, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\KATIES\DOCS\70518.TXT KATIE PsN: KATIE
53

ence in the last 25-plus years is that GSA has really lost interest

and hasn’t played any functional role in dealing with management

and preservation of records, so I think it is not unreasonable to

consider whether they need to have a role in the statute. And as

the Archivist testified earlier this morning, we don’t think GSA will

likely have any resistance either.

Ms. BUERKLE. I apologize, I have been advised that this has already been covered before I got here, so I apologize for that.

Let’s go to the whole email question and the preservation of

those. Do you have, Mr. Ferriero, any recommendations regarding

potential additional rules for ensuring that the transfer of the Presidential administration electronic documents will be finished within

a 60-day timeframe? How can we make sure that happens?

Mr. FERRIERO. I am not sure the 60 days, where that comes

from. The transfer actually happens at the end of the administration, so everything is retained in the White House until the administration changes. In fact, during the inauguration ceremony Archive staff is in the White House.

Chairman ISSA [presiding]. Would the gentlelady yield?

Ms. BUERKLE. Sure.

Chairman ISSA. To the gentlelady’s question, would you prefer

that there be transfers during the administration so that, in fact,

if there are any questions, you find out about them while they are

still using the same software and the same personnel are still

there?

Mr. FERRIERO. That is a good question. As I said, we have these

regular meetings with our colleagues in the White House about

how they are managing their records. I hadn’t really thought about

capturing them sooner. It is certainly an attitude I have on the

other side, on the Federal records scenario.

Ms. BUERKLE. I believe that this issue is raised because, in the

instance where, obviously with President Clinton and President

Bush, those were two terms, but in the event that there was a single term president, the turnaround within the 60 days, I think that

is where that question came from.

Mr. FERRIERO. I see.

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. I yield back.

Chairman ISSA. Would the gentlelady further yield?

Ms. BUERKLE. Sure.

Chairman ISSA. Mr. Ferriero, you earlier talked in terms of what

could be captured, what couldn’t be captured. Obviously, the Ranking Member and I have an agreement that in times of an emergency in which the system is down, you come as you are, bring

what you have, and do what you must.

But assuming that there are covered persons, and we would have

to define covered persons not to be just anybody, but covered persons that have personal emails and personal Facebooks, do you believe the statute should give an absolute right for those covered

persons’ documents, if you will, to be reviewed by a third party to

ensure that there is compliance with the law?

I am not talking about, you know, if you will, preempting people’s personal rights, but if you are a covered person and you have

access and you may or may not have used it, is that discretion

54

something you would like see reviewable at least by the Office of

the Presidency itself?

Mr. FERRIERO. Certainly by the Office of the Presidency, yes. And

I could, after more thought, extend that. My concern, as I have

said, has to do with any time there is the human element involved,

when someone has to make a decision and remember to transfer

those to their official email system. The beauty of the White House

email system now is it automatically captures it.

Chairman ISSA. It is 100 percent even if it is just you emailing

your wife to say you will be late, like so many people do at the

White House everyday.

Mr. COLANGELO. Correct. It preserves all inbound and outbound

communication.

Chairman ISSA. So I guess my followup, Mr. Colangelo, is since

you capture 100 percent of all communication on the Exchange system at the White House, and since that includes private conversations that do occur, I mean, people do email home ET, I am

phoning home, I won’t be home at any reasonable time tonight,

they just killed bin Laden, if that happens, you capture it, it is

there.

Thirty years from now people will be able to see what somebody

said that evening to their family on why they weren’t going to be

home until after midnight. Shouldn’t we, in reverse, also have that

ability to collect data from covered persons the other direction in

some organized way, in your opinion?

Mr. COLANGELO. From a technology standpoint, Mr. Chairman, I

am not necessarily sure how we would collect data from personal

accounts.

Chairman ISSA. The time has expired. I yield back.

At this time we recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr.

Connolly, for 5 minutes.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Chairman,

I would ask, without objection, my opening statement be entered

into the record.

Chairman ISSA. Without objection, so ordered.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Gerald E. Connolly follows:]

55

56

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the Chair.

Mr. Ferriero, NARA’s 2010 Records Management Self-Assessment Report identifies several difficulties in managing electronic

records: technological complications and preservation, proper disposition, the volume, propriety in cutting-edge technologies to create records, and decentralized environment in which they reside.

What mechanisms are currently in place to encourage collaboration

between records management and IT professionals as needed?

Mr. FERRIERO. That is a terrific question. I have been the Archivist for 18 months and——

Mr. CONNOLLY. Did you hear that, Mr. Chairman? It was a terrific question.

Mr. FERRIERO [continuing]. And one of the first partnerships I

created was with the CIO. The CIO sits at the head of the CIO

council. We have a records management council also, and I discovered that the records managers and the information officers have

never worked together, talked, met together. So the situation is

that we have the IT folks off developing systems, all of which have

records implications, not talking to their records managers. So we

convened the first-ever joint meeting of the two to start this relationship of records managers being at the table with their CIOs as

new systems are being developed.

The situation is even more complicated for me because, in the

wonderful world of the Federal job family, there is no such thing

as a records manager. So we are working now with OPM to create

a family of jobs around information management that will address

the problem. So the result is in many agencies and subagencies the

assignment for records management falls to the most junior person

in the agency; not a full-time job, high turnover, not very well

trained, and we get what we get from that situation.

Mr. CONNOLLY. A recent report by the American Council for

Technology Industry on government best practices for social media

recordkeeping identified the need to develop communications between social media team and records management as best practice

No. 1. The report also said until best practices and tools emerge to

assist in the records management of social media records, agencies

were tending toward retaining all social media content so that

those portions of the records are protected.

Given the overwhelming volume of data this could encompass, I

would be interested in your thoughts about what is the best practice going forward? What are the challenges of the save everything

approach to management?

Mr. FERRIERO. The issue that I described about the CIOs and

records managers is similar to records managers and Web managers. So we have recently brought together the Federal Web managers and the records managers to talk about this very issue of

what needs to be captured and how it needs to be captured. I referred earlier to some guidance that NARA has provided for helping those folks responsible for the social media to ask a series of

questions about the content to determine whether it is record or

not record.

Mr. CONNOLLY. You make reference to NARA and I think there

was some indication that these best practices would be put on the

Web site. Any idea of time line for that?

57

Mr. FERRIERO. The guidance is up, the report is up. In terms of

best practices, that is coming. When?

Mr. CONNOLLY. What is that?

Mr. FERRIERO. Within a year.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Without a year. Hopefully sooner.

Mr. FERRIERO. Yes, I agree.

Mr. CONNOLLY. My time is almost running out but, Mr.

Colangelo, is it really reasonable to expect employees in the White

House not to, from time to time, have to use Gmail or to use their

iPads to communicate with spouses, friends, family, whatever? I

mean, that is not something that is normally enforced in the normal workplace.

Mr. COLANGELO. That is correct. That communication also takes

the stress off of our system, so it reduces the work system as only

for work systems, and it keeps the clear separation between personal and government issue equipment.

Mr. CONNOLLY. So people are allowed to use their work computers for Gmail?

Mr. COLANGELO. No. I am sorry. On their government equipment

they are not allowed to access social media or Web-based email

sites, it is blocked from a technical standpoint on our network.

Mr. CONNOLLY. So it is a much stricter standard than exists in

most workplaces.

Mr. COLANGELO. That is correct.

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank you.

My time is up, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman ISSA. Thank you.

The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized, Mr. Lankford.

Mr. LANKFORD. I would like to yield back my time to the chairman at this point.

Chairman ISSA. Oh, OK. Well, I will take the time for a few minutes. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Ferriero, you oversee, from a FOIA standpoint, a tremendous

amount of information, even though you work with the libraries

where many of the assets reside. Ultimately, a Freedom of Information Act request on any president covered under your records, your

many archives, belongs to you, isn’t that correct?

Mr. FERRIERO. That is right.

Chairman ISSA. How many people do you have, roughly, doing

FOIA within your jurisdiction? Directly and indirectly, because obviously librarians at the various libraries assist.

Mr. STERN. We do submit a report to the Department of Justice

that has that number. I am afraid I don’t remember specifically.

Chairman ISSA. It is in the many hundreds, though.

Mr. STERN. Yes. At the Presidential libraries where FOIA applies, which is Reagan forward, there is probably about roughly 50

archivists doing FOIA review and processing, and then there is at

least that number dealing with Federal archival records here in

Washington and in our regional archives.

Chairman ISSA. But if I can followup, the desire to FOIA 30-yearold material generally from the government is pretty minimal,

right? In other words, agencies control for 30 years their documents; you control them when they are too old for anyone to ask.

58

Mr. STERN. Well, the original model of the archives was you

wanted the records to get to an age where they are no longer needed by the agency and where the restrictions pretty much are lifted.

So in the old model, after 30 years, when they transferred records

to us, we could presume that the records were virtually open in

their entirety, unless there was classified information or personal

privacy information. So the ideal is, when they come to us, we can

just make them open; you wouldn’t need to make a FOIA request

because you could just come to the research room and we could provide them.

Chairman ISSA. Following up on that, because this really is a

major reform committee on both pieces of legislation question.

Today, if President Obama were to decide not to run for a second

term, which I understand he has already made that decision, you

are only 2 years away from receiving 4 years of information.

So you have this variable that goes from 4 years to 8 years; presumably it will be 8 years for this administration like it was for

the previous two. But when I look at the Department of Homeland

Security, you have decades before, under completely different cabinet officers, those records are going to be available.

In a sense, in your opinion, and, Mr. Ferriero, I think I will bring

this one to you, in a sense, doesn’t an administration’s sunset and

an even hand of a nonpartisan entity become the more logical custodian at the end of an administration of, for example, Department

of Homeland Security from the Bush administration? Right now

Secretary Napolitano hires 400 people to decide whether or not

Bush era records are publicly available or not.

Does that seem like an area of modernization that we should

hold hearings on and decide whether or not to take the entire presidency as a period of time in order to refresh broadly? And that is

why I asked about your own history, because you are making FOIA

decisions on President W. Bush today, while in fact you are not

making decisions on any of his people and his administration. Instead, the succeeding administration of the opposite party is making those decisions. Complex question. What would you say?

Mr. FERRIERO. But it is an interesting thought.

Mr. STERN. Well, I would just add, under the Presidential

Records Act, when we receive the records from an administration,

there is a 5-year period where there is no public access. So, in fact,

right now there is still no access under FOIA——

Chairman ISSA. Without joint consent.

Mr. STERN. Well——

Chairman ISSA. An administration can choose to release. There

have been releases after an administration has gone sunset, but

they have been in concert.

Mr. STERN. Before the 5-years, a very tiny amount. So generally

it is not until 5 years after the administration leaves office that we

start opening records to FOIA requests on a systematic basis.

Chairman ISSA. But that is still 15-plus years sooner than you

will the cabinet officers’ records.

Mr. STERN. So the notion that if we were to get more records earlier and have to process them, I think it would have to be accompanied by rather massive addition of staff and resources to deal

with the processing element of it, and part of the old model is they

59

are the agencies’ records, the agencies can decide on the restrictions and on access, and they have greater resources than we

would have if we take in massive amounts of agency records in addition to Presidential records.

Chairman ISSA. Well, even my borrowed time is now expiring,

but I would let you know what I am thinking, and the Ranking

Member. It has become my at least straw person belief that in fact

FOIA should broadly not belong to the administration; that it

should be handed off in its greatest portion to individuals who report to someone who wants public information public, private information private, and who is apolitical.

That general belief doesn’t change the fact that the Department

of Defense, what is going on today, must be determined by the Department of Defense and its current cabinet officer. But the sooner

that transfer were to occur, the more likely the public would have

a fair right to know not in any way determine either by the vindictiveness of the next administration or the graciousness of covering

up by the next administration, both of which, quite frankly, the

record shows there has been a certain amount of that has gone on

under both parties.

I recognize the Ranking Member for his second round.

Mr. CUMMINGS. I was just listening to the chairman’s proposal.

One of you said that everything seems to boil down to discretion,

even a proposal like that, determining which records are supposed

to be released under FOIA.

But let me go back to you, Mr. Ferriero. You, in answering one

of the chairman’s questions, he was talking about those personal

emails where somebody says I have to stay late because something

has gone on in the White House, just a little note to their wife or

husband, whatever. You are not trying to preserve those kind of

records, are you?

Mr. FERRIERO. They are. They are captured.

Mr. CUMMINGS. But that is not the kind of stuff that you really

are that interested in.

Mr. FERRIERO. Well, it is interesting because I learned a lot

when we were working on the Elena Kagan confirmation hearing

and we had to deliver a lot of content from the Clinton White

House, 65,000 email messages that Elena Kagan had some role in,

and very often those messages were a combination of personal and

business, and it is hard to separate out, unless you are going message by message and determining what is personal and what is not

personal. So the procedure, policy in the White House now of capturing everything works for me.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Colangelo, in the beginning of your testimony you talked about how you had to come in and equipment apparently was outdated and there were some problems. We needed

to just bring, I guess, our software up so that it could do the job

we needed it to do. And I am wondering where are we now with

that and how do you make sure—I was just telling the chairman

a few minutes ago that he and I came along a while back, and we

can still remember when people were using carbon paper and typewriters, and now all technology changes, seems like, every 5 or 6

days, if not every day.

60

So how do you keep up with that? How do you make sure you

stay on the cutting edge and at the same time make sure that it

is a balanced approach so you are not just getting equipment that

is going to be outdated tomorrow? And I ask that so I am just trying to figure out the efficiency and effectiveness of maintaining

these records. Do you follow me? Believe it or not, I have some 8-

tracks in my basement and nothing to play them on. So I am just

wondering.

Mr. COLANGELO. Thank you, Mr. Cummings. Congressman, what

we did in the beginning of the administration was really invest in

stabilizing our core. We averaged somewhere in the 70 percent

uptime in the first 40 days of the administration; now we are over

99 percent operational uptime. We had to replace a lot of key systems because they were in need of upgrade.

How we do this now, going forward, is we have a continual investment in our infrastructure so that it is not an uphill battle, it

is a constant level flow, that we are constantly upgrading new systems, as I mentioned in my testimony, where we are looking at upgrading our archiving system before it becomes out of date. So let’s

beat that before it gets to that end-of-life state.

And now we constantly look at new technology before integrating

it into the EOP enterprise to ensure that it does follow the compliance and records management and helps meet the business need.

So it is constantly meeting that business need and also making

sure that we are compliant with that.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would just again ask

that we schedule a date as soon as possible for the marking up of

1144. Mr. Ferriero, I think, has agreed that this is a giant step in

the right direction. It is really noncontroversial and I think it is

something that we all could be proud of and could in a bipartisan

way. Again I ask that and, with that, I yield back.

Chairman ISSA. I thank the gentleman.

I will just do a very short second round myself.

Mr. Ferriero, the challenge you face would appear to be that each

administration delivers you records in a certain way. The Clinton

administration, as I understand it, delivered you Lotus Notes as a

system.

Famously, from this committee’s standpoint, the next president

tried to take Lotus Notes and transfer it to Microsoft Office Suite,

including Exchange, and then discovered, among other things, that

they are image backups and were not capturing. So we have seen

these transitions.

What is it we can do for you broadly, as the Archivist, either

through mandating that the systems that are delivered to you be

in an open format or an interoperable format or in some format

that at least allows you to port them in the future that would help

you? As we look at updating these things, there is sort of the question of paper was understood. You could specify 81⁄2 by 14 bond

paper with 10 courier. But those days are gone. And if I had DOS

3.3 WordPerfect followed by we won’t even go through SuperCalc

and all the other programs that are long forgotten, they would deliver me an amazing nightmare. You have that, don’t you?

Mr. FERRIERO. I do have that nightmare, and it makes paper

look very good today. The electronic records archive that we are

61

creating, in fact, is designed to accommodate those changes in technology as well as changes in attachment. It has neutralized formats

basically to make it possible for us to migrate the digits through

time so that they are available in perpetuity.

On the other hand, being much more involved at the creation

point, as I talked about earlier, is important to us so that we can

establish standards around email creation and electronic record

creation and capture.

Chairman ISSA. So, in closing, if, in our modernization legislation, we mandated that all agencies give you sufficient comfort

with their preservation on an annual basis so that either the material could be transferred or changes could be made so that the next

year you are not getting 2 years of information that is going to be

very expensive to change, that would be helpful. Second, if in fact

we design for transfer at the front-end, then you could save and the

American people could save a huge amount of money, isn’t that correct?

Mr. FERRIERO. I agree.

Chairman ISSA. Well, that will be among other things in our legislation.

I will close. Mr. Colangelo, you talked about the good and the

bad of the Bush administration. Is there a way that we could ensure that the funding and the capability of each administration

were more best practices as a matter of course, or is it simply that

President Bush did a great job of capturing email archives and creating the Naz and the Volt and so on, while toward the end refreshing servers was not a priority and you inherited them over 3

years old? Those kinds of good and bad, should we have a role or

are you satisfied that each administration does the best they can

and hands off?

Mr. COLANGELO. From a technology standpoint, I think it is important to invest in infrastructure so that there is a continual flat

line there versus the up and down.

Chairman ISSA. OK.

I might note, by the way, that the White House has almost always been at least one generation of the Exchange system ahead

of the House.

With that, I thank all of you.

Oh, I apologize. Now I would recognize Mr. Lankford for a second

round.

Mr. LANKFORD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Colangelo, I just had a couple questions for you. Reading

through your notes, and I apologize for slipping in a little bit late

here. Tell me a little bit about the Facebook tracking and Twitter.

I know certain sites or certain locations have that, have access;

others are blocked from that. How is that being tracked? I see some

conflict in how we are able to handle that with the technology.

Mr. COLANGELO. Thank you, Congressman. So, from a technology

standpoint, we have an enterprise-wide gateway that blocks all

staff from accessing these, and then when a component staff member makes a request for this, it is reviewed by their counsel and

then if it is appropriate for the business use, they are allowed access through a certain policy and they have access to an approved

number of sites.

62

We have looked for an enterprise-wide preservation system.

Technology hasn’t matured enough currently, but we are continuing to look and hoping that it will come around. What happens

now is records are preserved by a component-by-component basis.

And I know today actually the White House released a blog post

on WhiteHouse.gov describing their process for capturing records

on some of these sites.

So, for example, on Twitter they use an RSS, Real Simple Syndication, that emails back into the email archive system, and

Facebook uses screen captures. And then for different sites there

are APIs that capture this and then sometimes it is just electronic

capturing of a screen.

Mr. LANKFORD. But the email system that you use specifically

with Facebook or the message-to-message with Twitter, how are

those captured?

Mr. COLANGELO. For every individual that is provided access into

the social networking sites, they are provided additional guidance

and training from legal counsel on their Presidential Record Act obligations.

Mr. LANKFORD. Right. But you are saying currently they are not

capturing, so the other Gmail and those things are blocked for that,

but the actual email out of Facebook, they are just given guidance

saying don’t do it on that one, but they are not actually tracked,

they are not recorded, they are not anything. So a personal message, for instance, on another email, don’t forget to grab milk on

the way home, would be captured through the traditional email

system, but a message that is going through Facebook, through the

email system on that, for those computers, would not be captured

in any way.

Mr. COLANGELO. Personal email is blocked, again, from all——

Mr. LANKFORD. Right. I mean, if they did it through the traditional system.

Mr. COLANGELO. On the individual users, it is managed on a

component-by-component basis for those who have access to those

suites. As I mentioned, we don’t have an enterprise preservation

system currently available.

Mr. LANKFORD. OK. Is that an issue for us, that there is basically

email that is going through our system that basically they are just

told not to do anything on that should be related to official business, that would just be personal on that, or what are the parameters that are given to them to say you have access to Facebook,

but please don’t in these areas?

Mr. COLANGELO. I know that the guidance is pretty detailed. I

don’t have that access, so I haven’t gone through the training, so

I can’t actually speak to that.

Mr. LANKFORD. OK. Do you consider that to be an issue for us

at this point, that we do have a series of email communications

that are hanging out there that we are not archiving, or do you

think that—how can we know on that one way or the other?

Mr. COLANGELO. From a numbers perspective, it is roughly 2 percent, as I noted in my written testimony, so 2 percent of the EOP

population that have this access on the government systems. And

these users are special users in and of themselves.

63

Mr. LANKFORD. That is part of the issue. It is not just that there

is 2 percent, it is who are the 2 percent I guess would make a significant difference.

Mr. COLANGELO. Sure. And the users are largely the White

House new media team, the folks that manage the President

Obama’s Facebook and the other Facebook accounts out there. And

then I know it is also for some lawyers for assessing of candidates,

as it is a common corporate practice as well to look at social networking.

Mr. LANKFORD. Is that something that we would consider valuable in a preservation status?

Mr. Ferriero, is that something that you would think, somewhere

down the road, people would want to be able to look at?

Mr. COLANGELO. It is the business of the White House. Those are

Presidential records.

Mr. LANKFORD. I think we need to find a solution to that. That

is one of those things that is hanging out. I understand the technology change and how things are shifting. There is nothing offthe-shelf on that, but it may be something that we need to address

in the coming days.

Obviously, this President, as is par for our culture as a whole,

is very interested in being able to use social media sites, and I

think it is very appropriate. The inappropriate side is we have a

large volume of a lot of interaction with constituents and with people and with the White House that is not being tracked and is not

being monitored.

Mr. COLANGELO. We continue to look into this technology. We are

hoping that the industry evolves.

Mr. LANKFORD. I would just suggest that is something we need

to address in the coming days, to be able to establish whether it

is a relationship with the social sites or some way to be able to establish that technology-wise.

And with that I yield back.

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. And I thank the gentleman for his

interest, and with your history of tracking, what, 21,000 young people every year going through your camps, I suspect that you know

more about how to keep track of the hardest things to keep track

of in the world.

With that, I want to thank all of our witnesses. You have been

very generous with your time. I appreciate your input; it will help

us as we go forward. Clearly, some of you will be back again as we

try to implement good policy after so many years of a law sustaining that.

With that, we stand adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:02 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

[The prepared statement of Hon. Paul A. Gosar and additional

information submitted for the hearing record follow:]

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

Æ