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

52–315 2009

HEARING ON THE 2008 AUDIT REVIEW AND 

AGENCY SPENDING BY THE ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, APRIL 1, 2007 

Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration 

( 

Available on the Internet: 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/administration/index.html 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania, Chairman 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

Vice-Chairwoman 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

Ranking Minority Member 

KEVIN MCCARTHY, California 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

S. ELIZABETH BIRNBAUM, Staff Director 

VICTOR ARNOLD-BIK, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS

ZOE LOFGREN, California, Chairwoman 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

Vice-Chairman 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama 

KEVIN MCCARTHY, California 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

(1) 

2008 AUDIT REVIEW AND AGENCY SPENDING 

BY THE ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 1, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room 

1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Zoe Lofgren [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Lofgren, Gonzalez, Davis of California, 

McCarthy, and Harper. 

Staff Present: Thomas Hicks, Senior Election Counsel; Jennifer 

Daehn, Election Counsel; Janelle Hu, Election Counsel; Kyle Anderson, Press Director; Kristin McCowan, Chief Legislative Clerk; 

Daniel Favarulo, Election Legislative Assistant; Peter Schalestock, 

Minority Counsel; and Karin Moore, Minority Legislative Counsel. 

Ms. LOFGREN. As it is precisely 10:00, or close to it, the committee will come to order. 

Good morning and welcome. This is our first oversight hearing 

under H.Res. 40. And the hearing will focus on the 2008 audit review by the Inspector General of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. The audit found that the EAC was unable to provide sufficient accounting records to conduct an audit in compliance with the 

standards set forth by the Comptroller of the United States. 

Today we will discuss potential misallocation of resources, lack 

of internal controls on matters related to grant accounting and 

agency expenditures. Unfortunately, this most recent report is one 

in a string of reports about the EAC’s inability to operate as a fully 

functioning agency. The EAC’s first audit of financial statements in 

fiscal year 2008 could not be completed because the EAC was unable to provide sufficient accounting records to conduct an audit in 

accordance with the standards set forth by the comptroller general. 

Additional IG reports have also revealed that the EAC lacks adequate policies and procedures that govern the application award reporting, oversight, and closing of HAVA grant programs. The EAC 

also does not have a fund control to monitor expenditures to ensure 

compliance with congressional requirements. 

This lack of financial controls has resulted in travel being taken 

without prior authorization, activities that take the EAC out of 

compliance with the Federal travel regulations. 

Beyond the audit concerns, EAC has also engaged in questionable management of resources. The EAC has recently posted a job 

announcement for another executive position, which would push 

the senior staff count to 21 out of a total of 35 total full-time employees. And while I appreciate the EAC trying to hire staff, it 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

2 

seems it would make more sense to ensure that mid-level staff is 

in place to carry out the EAC’s programmatic responsibilities. 

The IG report warns that while hiring qualified administrative 

staff goes a long way towards improving EAC’s financial management function, the EAC should use caution to avoid staffing one 

program or function to the detriment of its other programs. 

The EAC has been before us several times and has listened to 

our concerns about the agency’s management practices and has 

taken some steps to correct these problems, and we do want to acknowledge that. The EAC has recently hired a chief financial officer and a chief operating officer to manage financial operations and 

install funding controls. The EAC has also restructured its grant 

division into two departments to improve program operations. 

Now, I am eager to hear what additional steps the EAC will be 

taking to increase the Commission’s accountability this morning. 

The EAC plays a critical role in funding and assisting States to improve election processes. It must continue to develop effective financial controls to implement these processes so that we know 

grants and agency funds are being accounted for and appropriately 

used. 

This hearing today, I hope, will not only lay out for us in greater 

detail the IG’s advice and findings, but also give us an opportunity 

from the EAC themselves to hear what their action plan and 

thoughts are. 

[The statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:] 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

3 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 7 here 52315A.001
4 

Ms. LOFGREN. At this point I would yield to the gentleman from 

Mississippi for any opening statement he may have. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Lofgren. I certainly want to thank the Chair for calling today’s EAC oversight 

hearing. As a new member on this panel, any chance to learn more 

about the organizations under this subcommittee’s jurisdiction is 

very helpful. And I look forward to hearing from our EAC commissioners as well as the inspector general and the executive director 

of the EAC. 

I have had the opportunity to review the findings of the EAC’s 

inspector general, and I am concerned with several areas of weakness that were uncovered by the IG’s office during the course of 

compiling its report. For example, I understand that the initial 

audit of the EAC’s financial records revealed such poor recordkeeping that a comprehensive financial analysis could not be completed. 

While some issues with recordkeeping are certainly expected the 

first time an organization’s financial records are audited, I am anxious to hear from our witnesses today regarding the state of the 

EAC’s financial statements and what can be done to bring them 

into compliance with acceptable accounting practices. 

In addition, I also understand that the IG’s findings revealed a 

notable disparity between the number of administrative positions 

at the EAC compared with the number of program positions. The 

IG’s report revealed that the EAC currently has 21 positions that 

are designated as executive, direction and administration, with 

only 14 positions in program, legal and communications areas. 

Perhaps our witnesses can shed some light on hiring practices at 

the EAC and who determines what types of roles are mission critical in light of the Commission’s priorities. For example, one of the 

key roles of the EAC is to certify voting machines for use in Federal elections. My understanding is that to date only one system 

has been certified, as a result of a backlog at the EAC. 

Election officials and vendors alike have expressed frustration at 

the slow pace of the certification. So I have to question why resources are being allocated towards executive and administrative 

expenses when it seems that there is a real need to engage in substantive program work in order to fulfill the mission. 

An organization that is heavily weighted towards executive and 

administrative personnel certainly may lend itself to bureaucracy. 

How is the EAC applying effective personnel practices in order to 

ensure that the organization is able to carry out its charters defined by HAVA, without getting bogged down in bureaucratic processes. 

Finally, I understand that the inspector general has provided the 

EAC with a list of recommended actions to address these and other 

gaps in internal operations. I would like to get an update from our 

witnesses on the current status of this list and how to address internal barriers in the organization that may prevent the EAC from 

implementing these recommendations. 

Again, I thank all of our witnesses for appearing before us today 

and look forward to hearing your testimony. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

5 

[The statement of Mr. Harper follows:] 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

6 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 11 here 52315A.002
7 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 12 here 52315A.003
8 

Ms. LOFGREN. And, Mrs. Davis, unless you are eager to, we will 

put your opening statement in the record and go directly to the inspector general, Mr. Curtis Crider. 

[The information follows:] 

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Crider is the Inspector General for the U.S. 

Election Assistance Commission and has held this position since 

2006. Mr. Crider has 32 years of auditing experience in the Federal 

Government and is a certified public accountant and internal auditor. 

Mr. Crider we do have your full report and, by unanimous consent, it will be made part of our official record. We would ask that 

your oral testimony consist of about 5 minutes, and then we will 

have time to ask you questions. So we are eager to hear from you 

now. 

STATEMENT OF CURTIS CRIDER, INSPECTOR GENERAL, U.S. 

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

Mr. CRIDER. Good morning. Thank you very much. Chairman 

Lofgren, Ranking Member McCarthy and members of the subcommittee, thank you for having me to testify today. 

I am pleased to be here this morning to discuss the activities of 

the Office of the Inspector General and to provide insight as to the 

effectiveness of financial controls in place and efficiency of programs operated by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. 

OIG strives to promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness in 

the EAC programs by conducting regular audits of recipients of 

grant funds distributed by the EAC and the financial audit of 

EAC’s operations and periodic reviews and audits of EAC operations. In addition, the OIG conducts investigations in response to 

allegations against the EAC, grant recipients, or third parties involved in the EAC programs. 

In today’s testimony I will focus on the OIG audits of HAVA fund 

recipients and the EAC. OIG has issued audits of 19 States and 

their spending of nearly $800 million. These audits result in questioning more than $11.7 million in costs and identified more than 

$10.7 million which the States must use for HAVA-related purposes. In total, the OIG has identified $22.4 million in audit findings at a cost of only $2 million to the Federal Government. In 

other words, our rate of return is 11 to 1. 

The EAC management has agreed with most of our findings and 

upheld more than $20.9 million of the $22.4 million in audit exceptions. By and large, we have found that States are not misusing 

HAVA funds. When we have found problems they are in the areas 

such as lost interest, unsupported salaries and understated matching funds. 

My written testimony contains a more complete listing of our 

findings that we have issued in our audits. We have currently four 

ongoing audits of States that are using HAVA funds. They are 

California, Iowa, Rhode Island and Michigan. OIG has planned to 

audit several more States this year, but the number of States that 

we audit will depend upon the time, resources and circumstances 

and may require our investigation in other areas. 

OIG is also responsible for auditing and reviewing EAC’s programs. Over the past several years the OIG has issued eight rermajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

9 

ports regarding the EAC operations. The two most comprehensive 

reports are the 2008 Assessment of EAC’s Programs and Financial 

Operations, which we issued in February of 2008, and the Audit of 

EAC’s Fiscal Year 2008 Financial Statements, which was issued in 

November of 2008. All eight reports except for one, the Internet 

Usage Report, contain findings and recommendations for the EAC 

to improve its processes. 

In the Internet usage report, we found that employees did not 

use gambling, pornographic or other prohibited sites, and the EAC 

has sufficient controls to prevent unauthorized access to those 

sites. From the eight reports are 82 recommendations for improvement, of which 14 have been fully implemented. 

The EAC has made some progress toward implementing most of 

the other recommendations. Progress can be seen primarily in the 

areas of personnel reorganization and hiring persons to staff the 

administration division that have experience with Federal Government, procurement, and financial management. 

While hiring qualified administrative staff goes a long way to improving the EAC’s fiscal and financial management function, the 

EAC should use caution to avoid staffing one program or function 

to the detriment of its other programs. Based on its own reports, 

the EAC only last week adopted a strategic plan and has not yet 

adopted policies and procedures needed to underlie the operations 

for many of its programs. 

In fiscal year 2009 the EAC will again be subject to a financial 

audit. Without these needed policies and procedures, the EAC may 

have difficulty in meeting the benchmarks necessary to receive an 

unqualified opinion. 

In addition to the fiscal year 2009 financial statement audit, the 

OIG plans to review EAC’s Compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act, evaluated EAC’s purchase of shirts 

and jackets for its employees, and assessed EAC’s internal controls 

over time and attendance. 

It is the Office of Inspector General’s role to offer guidance and 

information through its audits, evaluation reviews and investigation that will help the EAC build and run programs that will instill 

public confidence by preventing fraud, waste and abuse. 

The Office of Inspector General will continue to work with the 

EAC and this subcommittee to help promote an efficient and effective government. I appreciate the opportunity this morning to provide this testimony regarding the OIG activities, and I will be 

happy to answer any questions. Thank you. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you very much Mr. Crider. 

[The statement of Mr. Crider follows:] 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

10 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 19 here 52315A.004
11 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 20 here 52315A.005
12 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 21 here 52315A.006
13 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 22 here 52315A.007
14 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 23 here 52315A.008
15 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 24 here 52315A.009
16 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 25 here 52315A.010
17 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 26 here 52315A.011
18 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 27 here 52315A.012
19 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 28 here 52315A.013
20 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 29 here 52315A.014
21 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 30 here 52315A.015
22 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 31 here 52315A.016
23 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 32 here 52315A.017
24 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 33 here 52315A.018
25 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 34 here 52315A.019
26 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 35 here 52315A.020
27 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 36 here 52315A.021
28 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 37 here 52315A.022
29 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 38 here 52315A.023
30 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 39 here 52315A.024
31 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 40 here 52315A.025
32 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 41 here 52315A.026
33 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 42 here 52315A.027
34 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 43 here 52315A.028
35 

Ms. LOFGREN. I would turn first to the gentleman from Mississippi to see what questions he may have. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you very much. I appreciate you being here 

today and testifying before us. And I guess the first question I 

would have is your analysis of where they are on the progress, 

based upon your last visit with them. 

Mr. CRIDER. I think everybody should understand that this was 

the first year the EAC was audited, had its financial statements 

audited. A disclaimer in the first year is not uncommon because of 

having to go back and establish the beginning balances. And some 

of the accounting issues that were identified go back a number of 

years, even before there was an EAC, when GSA was doing the accounting for it. And that is where some of the issues and some of 

the findings in the report are. 

The fact that EAC has hired a chief financial officer I think is 

very promising. I think that that will help a lot. But we are very 

concerned at this point that some of the accounting issues have not 

been resolved—and we are getting ready to start our audit hopefully next month—and that the underlying policies and procedures 

have not been adopted to this point. The EAC has—— 

Mr. HARPER. May I? I hate to interrupt you, but how long did 

they have to adopt those policies or recommendations? 

Mr. CRIDER. In February of 2008, we issued our first finding that 

they did not have policies and procedures. And so it has been a 

year now. I understand they have a draft of those policies and procedures, that they are working on those. But like I say, we are very 

concerned that we are already looking at—we are starting April 

here and we don’t have some of the underlying accounting issues 

resolved. And I think that there are some issues involving GSA 

that need to be looked at and resolved by the Commission in order 

to make this process go smoother in the future. 

Mr. HARPER. Prior to that first audit, had anyone contacted you 

from EAC to ask for assistance or say, ‘‘Look, we realize we have 

a problem; can you help direct us’’ prior to that audit time? 

Mr. CRIDER. We have had ongoing discussions about some of the 

things that we are missing, such as the A–123 evaluations and the 

internal control issues that needed to be addressed. But we did not 

have a formal report at that point. But we have had communication with the executive director. And they were aware of some of 

it, and they were trying to address some of the issues. 

But one of the problems with the EAC is it is a very small agency. It has to comply with just about all the other Federal requirements that are out there. And it is somewhat overwhelming for a 

small agency, sometimes, to have to do all this stuff. So they have 

to rely on, sometimes, outside parties to help them. And that I 

think has been one of the issues, is trying to get the right resources 

in place to get some of this stuff done. 

Mr. HARPER. And I certainly don’t want to put words in your 

mouth, but are you saying they are really at this time not on the 

path that you think they should be? 

Mr. CRIDER. They are getting there. But I think there is a lot of 

work to be done. Like I said, they just adopted their strategic plan 

last week. So there is going to be some problems with the financial 

statements this year. Like I said, we are hoping that—we are exrmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

36 

pecting to see some significant improvements; at least that is what 

we are hoping for. And we are willing to work with the EAC to try 

to make sure those improvements get done, so we would like to see 

some improvement. There is a lot of work to be done yet. 

Mr. HARPER. And I know that your office recently hired the 

former general counsel of the EAC. How do you deal with that person when it comes to reviewing or looking at anything involving 

the EAC? 

Mr. CRIDER. Whenever we hired Ms. Hodgkins as my general 

counsel, she prepared lists of all the items that she had worked on 

in terms of policy procedures and documents, and whether or not 

attorney-client privilege attached to those documents. And she will 

recuse herself from working on any of those matters. 

We have entered into a separate memorandum of understanding 

with another Federal agency, that if there are issues that we need 

outside counsel, that she cannot help us with, then we will go to 

the outside counsel. And we have also set up a separate secure filing system that, if we are working on things that she was involved 

with as part of the EAC, that she will not have access to any of 

that information. 

Mr. HARPER. Are you satisfied that that is working well? 

Mr. CRIDER. Yes, it is. I am satisfied with that. 

Mr. HARPER. If you had to identify the single biggest problem 

that you see that still exists with EAC, what would you say that 

was? 

Mr. CRIDER. The lack of the policies and procedures and lack of 

an internal control structure. 

Mr. HARPER. And your recommendations on how to fix that? 

Mr. CRIDER. Is that they need to get their policies and procedures in place. They need to establish their internal control structure and do the risk assessments that are required by A–123 to 

identify any weaknesses that they have, and address their accounting and their underlying accounting issues. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Madam Chair. With that I yield back 

the balance of my time. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. I would turn to my colleague from 

California Congresswoman Davis. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Crider. In 

your report you cited a lack of expertise on the part of the stated 

election officials as the reason for lapses in documentation. And I 

wonder, how do you feel the EAC could best train those officials? 

What role do they really play and how do you see that they could 

be better suited? 

Mr. CRIDER. I would characterize it maybe a little bit differently. 

I am sorry if we maybe led you down the wrong path. But they are 

very qualified out in the States in terms of their function, their operations and what they do. What they lacked experience was, this 

is the first time many of them have gotten Federal money, and that 

they did not have a full understanding. And HAVA is a very unusually written law. There is a lot of vagueness in HAVA. But the 

State people are very very qualified to do their job. 

Like I say, this is the first time they have received Federal 

money, and there was a lack of policy and procedures on the part 

of the EAC in guidance that had been put out from the first couple 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

37 

of years. And the EAC has started several things the last couple 

of years in terms of trying to help with that. 

They now have established an advisory policy where if a State 

has a question on something, they can submit a question to the 

EAC and try to get the issue up front before it becomes a problem. 

We have done some outreach with the EAC when there are NAS 

meetings. We will go out as a part of the EAC and try to help provide training as to what our audits are and how we go about doing 

our audit. And the EAC as a part of that presentation will then do 

what are the recordkeeping requirements; what the are the requirements that you need to make sure that you are adhering to, 

and things like that. So they are starting to move forward. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. You cited the fact that this is a small 

agency. Do they have the capacity to fully do that and really responding? 

Mr. CRIDER. They are responding. And sometimes it does take a 

while. And I do think that is a function of resources. And some of 

these issues are very complicated, that they do require a lot of research and a lot of analysis before they can be resolved. But I do 

think that additional resources in that area would be helpful. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. You also mentioned that the inspector 

general, your audits have been based on looking at States that 

really had spent the most money that were audited. And I am just 

wondering, are there other factors really at play in terms of what 

you should be focusing on? 

Mr. CRIDER. Well, we also take a look at the single audit reports 

that were issued by the State auditors and by the CPA firms that 

did this, and we see if there are any issues that are identified 

there. We have gotten several requests from States to come in and 

do audits; or, if the EAC has specific concerns, they relay those to 

us. So it all comes into play. But the biggest issue right now is how 

much money has been spent. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. And in terms of doing your own investigations, you contract out a number of those, as I understand it. 

Mr. CRIDER. Yes, we do. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Would it be better if you had the capacity yourselves to do more of those, and what kind of inconsistencies 

do you find in the contracting investigation? 

Mr. CRIDER. In terms of the contracting investigations, we contract with another inspector general’s office to conduct those investigations. We have only had two of those since I have been with 

the EAC since 2006. 

I do not have enough work at this point for a full-time investigator. So that is one of the reasons why we are using outside investigators. If we start getting more investigative requests and more 

issues start coming up, then we will go back and take a look at the 

workload and say, okay, do I have enough work at this point for 

an investigator. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. But you are satisfied that that has 

worked out? 

Mr. CRIDER. It has worked out very well because the agencies 

that we work with have been very good about giving us competent, 

capable investigators. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

38 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. I would recognize my other colleague 

from California, Mr. McCarthy. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I appreciate you coming before us again, and I remember the last 

time you were here. The one thing I recall back when I was actually a staffer and worked part within this committee, when Republicans took control in 1994, for the first time we did an audit inside 

this House. And one thing that we found, because no audit had 

ever been done prior, you actually didn’t have the material needed 

to do it. So it took a couple of years to get there. 

And knowing where we were with the EAC, I guess maybe going 

down the same line as my colleague Mr. Harper did, if I could 

dwell a little more on the improvements, knowing that within the 

first audit there is so much you got to get—much like Congress 

when they never had the accountability before—that you are bringing it in now. It takes a year or 2 to get to make sure you have 

the basis to account. But have you seen the improvement needed? 

Mr. CRIDER. We are seeing some improvement. As I said earlier, 

there is a lot of improvement still needed. The CFO was just appointed here in February of 2009, so they have not had an opportunity to go in and do everything they need to do in terms of trying 

to get ready for the audit. So there is still a lot of work to be done. 

There is a lot of internal control reviews that need to be done. 

There is a lot of account analysis that needs to be done. And just 

working with our service provider in terms of just getting the basis 

for our financial statements so that we can have them in time and 

try to get this whole process done. We do expect to see some significant improvements this year. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Well, maybe if I could step back. So when it gets 

finished—and I am looking from this end—should I have much 

higher expectations that a year was long enough to get this all improved, even though the CFO just hired? 

Mr. CRIDER. There will be improvements now. Whether or not 

there will—I am not going to sit here and say that everything will 

be fine, because it is not going to be. But we do expect to see improvements. And I believe the CFO has committed to trying to get 

some of the internal control issues resolved. 

But the other thing you need to remember is that the auditors 

were not able to complete their audit last year. So as we start this 

time and as we do more testing, as we start—— 

Mr. MCCARTHY. They may not have found all the problems. They 

may not be aware of some. 

Mr. CRIDER. Right. They may not be aware of some of them. But 

I do believe the CFO will be there to provide us the data that we 

need to conduct the audit. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Well, should I be able to expect, or this committee be able to expect, this time you will be able to find all the 

problems that are there? 

Mr. CRIDER. We are hoping. That is the best I can say at this 

point. Because until the audit is over, I cannot sit here and tell 

you. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Shouldn’t that be an expectation of ours, 

though? 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

39 

Mr. CRIDER. It should be an expectation. It is my expectation 

that we have all the issues identified this year. Whether or not we 

get there or not, I don’t know. Like I said, that is my expectation. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. And like most audits you read before, when you 

put the page back where you have the discrepancies or concerns, 

will there be a timeline of what you have in there that you think 

these should be able to be accomplished by as well? 

Mr. CRIDER. As part of the audit recommendations is that the 

agency gives us an implementation plan where they lay out when 

they think they are going to be able to get things done by. And that 

is what we track them on. So we say to the agency, you have a 

problem in this area. If they agree with us, they will say, okay, this 

is our implementation plan. And they will establish benchmarks as 

to when they expect to get the stuff done, and that is how we track 

it. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Now, do they give you the benchmark or the 

timeline, or do you work with them to decide the timeline? 

Mr. CRIDER. It varies. Most of the time we will go with their 

timeline. If we think it is not reasonable, we may go back to them 

and say, this is not reasonable and this is going to cause you a 

problem next year. But generally speaking, it is the agencies when 

they think they can get them implemented in terms of getting the 

problem fixed. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back the 

balance of my time. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. Mr. Crider, clearly we need to, I guess, 

speed up some of this action, and I am glad that we have the commissioners here to talk to us next about their plans. 

If I can summarize in plain language, it sounds like really what 

you are saying is we lack internal controls, we are not really where 

we need to be in terms of auditable material, and yet you haven’t 

found any evidence that there has been misspending or corruption 

or anything of that nature. We just want to make sure that we 

have the controls in place so, on an ongoing basis, we will always 

know that is the case. Would that be a fair statement? 

Mr. CRIDER. That would be a fair statement. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Good. Thank you very, very much. 

And we will keep the record open for 5 days for people who want 

to follow up with questions. And if we do have additional questions 

we would ask that you—well, Mr. Gonzalez has walked in. I don’t 

know whether you had a question for the inspector general. We are 

just about to let him go. If you do, we will hold him further. No, 

he is waving off. 

We may have additional questions for you, and if we do we would 

ask that you answer them promptly. And we do appreciate your 

testimony today. 

[The information follows:] 

Ms. LOFGREN. And now we will call up our second panel. We 

have today Commissioner Gineen Beach. Ms. Beach currently 

serves as the Chair of the Election Assistance Commission, was appointed by President Bush in October of 2008. Prior to her appointment Ms. Beach was an election counsel with this committee, as 

well as an election law advisor to former Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich. 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

40 

Gracia Hillman is currently serving as the Vice Chair of the 

Election Assistance Commission and has served on the Commission 

since her appointment in 2003. Ms. Hillman’s prior work experience includes having served as Executive Director of the League of 

Women Voters in the United States, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation and the National Coalition on Black Voter Participation. 

We have Commissioner Donetta Davidson. Commissioner Davidson has served on the Election Assistance Commission since 2005 

and she served as Chair in 2007. Prior to her work with the EAC 

Ms. Davidson served as the Arapahoe County Clerk and then Colorado Secretary of State, where she was President of the National 

Association of Secretaries of State and President of the National 

Association of State Election Directors. Ms. Davidson also served 

on the Federal Election Commission Advisory Panel and the Board 

of Directors of the Help America Vote Foundation. 

And finally we have Mr. Thomas Wilkey. He is the Executive Director of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission where he has 

served since 2005. Prior to his work with the EAC, Mr. Wilkey was 

the former Director of the New York Board of Elections and Founder of the National Association of State Election Directors. 

As you know, your full statements are, by unanimous consent, 

made part of our official record. We ask that your testimony to us 

be about 5 minutes. And that will give us time to ask questions. 

STATEMENTS OF HON. GINEEN BRESSO-BEACH, CHAIRWOMAN, U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION; HON. 

GRACIA HILLMAN, VICE CHAIRWOMAN, U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION; HON. DONETTA DAVIDSON, COMMISSIONER, U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION; AND 

THOMAS WILKEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

Ms. LOFGREN. And, Ms. Beach, may we begin with you? 

STATEMENT OF GINEEN BRESSO-BEACH 

Ms. BEACH. Thank you. Good morning, Chairwoman Lofgren, 

Ranking Member McCarthy, and distinguished members of the 

subcommittee. Thank you for inviting us to be with you this morning. 

As you know, the Commission’s mission is to assist in the effective administration of Federal elections. To achieve our mission, 

the EAC focuses on the following program areas: one, overseeing 

and administering the Federal voluntary voting system and testing 

certification program; two, conducting research that assists election 

officials in making improvements; three, developing clearinghouse 

materials to provide assistance to voters, election officials and the 

general public; four, managing HAVA funds; and five, administering the national voter registration form. 

In addition to the program work, we continue to strengthen internal operations. Last year the inspector general audited EAC’s 

internal operations and provided us with 26 recommendations. 

These recommendations have led to a road map to make improvements. And you will hear about those activities in detail from the 

Executive Director, Tom Wilkey. 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

41 

Moving forward, while EAC must fulfill our financial management and reporting obligations, we must also provide resources to 

core program areas in need, like our voting system division. 

Vice-Chair Hillman and Commissioner Davidson will describe in 

their testimony our efforts to devote considerable resources to the 

testing and certification of voting systems. 

As the Chair of the EAC, my dual focus will be devoting all available resources to conducting core activities, as described in the 

Help America Vote Act, and maximizing the use of our limited resources to meet all our objectives. We urge everyone to hold us accountable for our activities. 

To that end, the EAC recently adopted a strategic plan, and it 

is available on our Web site, which clearly outlines our guiding 

principles. Among them are bipartisanship, transparency, professionalism, accountability, integrity, fiscal responsibility and efficiency. 

The EAC has much work ahead of it and some of it will not be 

easy. We have got to make sure our internal structure is sound and 

complies with all Federal requirements. At the same time, we have 

to give staff the support they need to meet all of our HAVA requirements. 

I am confident we are on the right track and the right path to 

internal compliance and success in meeting all our HAVA requirements. And thank you. I look forward to your questions. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Beach follows:] 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

42 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 62 here 52315A.029
43 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 63 here 52315A.030
44 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 64 here 52315A.031
45 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 65 here 52315A.032
46 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 66 here 52315A.033
47 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 67 here 52315A.034
48 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 68 here 52315A.035
49 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 69 here 52315A.036
50 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 70 here 52315A.037
51 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 71 here 52315A.038
52 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 72 here 52315A.039
53 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 73 here 52315A.040
54 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 74 here 52315A.041
55 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 75 here 52315A.042
56 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 76 here 52315A.043
57 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 77 here 52315A.044
58 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 78 here 52315A.045
59 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 79 here 52315A.046
60 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 80 here 52315A.047
61 

Ms. LOFGREN. Ms. Hillman. 

STATEMENT OF GRACIA HILLMAN 

Ms. HILLMAN. Good morning, Chairwoman Lofgren, Ranking 

Member McCarthy, and members of the subcommittee. For the 

record, my name is Gracia Hillman. 

Madam Chair, with the passage of the Help America Vote Act, 

Congress set benchmarks and requirements for EAC to help improve the administration of Federal elections. The public expects 

improvement and EAC is committed to meet its obligations. 

My remarks today will highlight EAC’s voting system testing and 

certification program. The Federal testing and certification of voting systems is one of the most important components of HAVA. It 

is also the first time that the Federal Government has undertaken 

this initiative, which started in 2004 from ground zero, with very 

limited resources. Our progress to develop and implement the program has been steady. 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology is our very 

valuable partner in this initiative. And we appreciate that Congress has recognized the need for increased funding to support the 

development and implementation of the program. 

Today EAC testing and certification is a $2 million program with 

four full-time staff and four technical reviewers. This program has 

grown since 2006 when it had a budget of $700,000 and one staff 

person. And that does not include the moneys we paid to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. By the end of this 

year we expect to have six full-time staff, plus the technical reviewers. 

We are mindful that this very small program has a very huge 

impact on elections in America. Madam Chair, it is important to 

remember that we are in a period of significant transition from the 

voting system technology of 2002 to the systems that are being 

tested today. The testing and certification process is complex. Some 

have been frustrated with the process and complained that it took 

too long to develop or is too complicated. Developing a new Federal 

program of this magnitude takes time. I am pleased to say that the 

program is operational and the process is working. 

Federal involvement and its obligation to transparency have created a dramatic change in the accreditation of laboratories and the 

testing and certification of voting systems. This change has created 

a culture shift that results in increased accountability to the public. 

Under HAVA NIST provides EAC with lists of laboratories that are 

qualified to test voting systems. EAC worked with NIST to make 

certain that all documents concerning laboratory accreditation are 

timely posted on the Institute’s Web site. 

Additionally, all voting system test plans and reports that are 

submitted to EAC from the labs are posted on our Web site. These 

postings include correspondence and related documents. 

Perhaps more importantly, Madam Chair, is that all of EAC’s 

constituent partners have played important roles in the development of our testing and certification programs. The public has a 

full view of these programs through EAC’s clearinghouse. We have 

dozens of documents on our Web site and we regularly post new 

information. EAC is committed to being an active partner with our 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

62 

constituencies and a facilitator of information sharing and best 

practices. 

The growth of our programs has not happened in a vacuum. In 

2008 the General Accountability Office issued reports on EAC’s lab 

accreditation and testing and certification programs. EAC did not 

have the resources to undertake such reviews on its own, so we 

found GAO’s recommendations to be very useful. 

For example, EAC has enhanced its requirements concerning the 

financial stability of labs in accordance with GAO’s guidance. The 

EAC program manuals for lab accreditation and testing are the 

rule books for how these programs operate. To enhance these programs, EAC has standard operating procedures. We are currently 

refining these procedures to incorporate several GAO recommendations. The result will be improved consistency of our technical reviews and approvals of recommendations from the testing labs. 

Madam Chair, and members of the committee, in my entire career I have encountered many challenging opportunities. Nothing 

has been more challenging than starting something new in Federal 

Government. In 5 short years, EAC’s programs have evolved from 

concept to operational reality. This has not been an easy undertaking, but the benefits are measurable and rewarding. American 

voters deserve to know that their votes will be accurately and timely counted as cast. 

Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee today 

and I look forward to your questions. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Davidson, we would be pleased to hear from you. 

STATEMENT OF DONETTA DAVIDSON 

Ms. DAVIDSON. Thank you, Chairwoman Lofgren, and Ranking 

Member McCarthy and members of the subcommittee. My name is 

Donetta Davidson. My colleagues discussed where we have been. I 

am going to discuss and talk to you about where we are going. 

The cornerstone of the EAC’s work is to support the voting system testing and certification program. I want to focus on three 

areas today: one, the voluntary voting system guidelines; two, accountability and transparency; and three, our partners with the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology. 

Last year the public comment period for the next iteration of the 

VVSG ended. After reviewing 3,200 comments together with NIST, 

we realized that some of these recommendations for standards 

could not wait. We concluded that the program would benefit by revising the current VVSG now, while continuing also to move forward in developing the next iteration. 

Updating the 2005 VVSG now will result in greater consistency, 

more rigorous testing and more efficiency overall. This process will 

be completely transparent and include public comment starting 

this summer. We will notify everyone when the public comment begins. 

Second, EAC’s voting systems. We test voting systems to determine how they meet the guidelines. Separate and apart from that, 

we also proceed to watch how the systems perform on election day. 

Therefore, the quality monitoring program is an important program that provides an additional layer of accountability and transrmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

63 

parency. It is EAC’s big stick. This program enables EAC to independently ensure fielded voting systems are continuing to comply 

with requirements. 

Manufacturers are required to submit any anomaly reports, and 

failure to do so may result in suspension or decertification. Election 

officials can also submit voting equipment performance issues to 

the voting system clearinghouse at the EAC. And it is available for 

everybody to view. 

Finally, a critical resource for the EAC is a partnership with NIST. Thanks to the support Congress gave this year, we have $4 

million for NIST to assist us. Activities that are funded will include 

initial and follow-up reviews of our voting system test laboratories 

and the development of test suites. The first of these test suites are 

currently available for the public to comment on, and we look forward to all the input that comes in. 

NIST is also conducting research for the EAC which will help us 

and help provide States with voting processes for overseas and 

military. We will identify best practices and security concerns for 

using fax, e-mail and Internet Web sites for both delivery and returned ballots. We anticipate the delivery of these reports by the 

end of the year. I encourage everybody to visit our Web site and 

read the thousands of pages we have already posted, including everything from the draft test plans to current letters that go to our 

registered manufacturers. 

EAC remains committed to devoting considerable resources to 

our voting system testing and certification program. Our program 

director is in the process of hiring two new employees, and they 

also recently contracted with Mark Skall who just retired from 

NIST to serve as one of our technical reviewers. While we have 

hired a number of financial staff recently, it is important to remember we are very dedicated to our programs as well. 

Thank you, and now I will turn it over to Mr. Wilkey, our executive director. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you very much. 

And if you would begin, Mr. Wilkey. 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS WILKEY 

Mr. WILKEY. Good morning, Chair Lofgren, Ranking Member 

McCarthy, and subcommittee members. Thank you for inviting us 

to be with you today. 

Over the last few years, our inspector general presented several 

assessments of the internal operations of the Commission, and they 

included 52 recommendations, of which 14 are closed. Make no mistake, some of the recommendations were tough. However, it was 

helpful to have for the very first time a complete list of the requirements we have to meet. 

We have a road map to compliance, and I appreciate the constructive criticism provided by our inspector general. Striking a 

balance between meeting the goals of HAVA and getting our internal structure in order has been a challenge. In the beginning our 

focus was on distributing the $3.1 billion of HAVA funds to the 

States, including setting up a process to audit and monitor these 

funds. Other HAVA-mandated activities included issuing the 2005 

voluntary voting system guidelines, working on the next iteration 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

64 

of guidelines, establishing the first Federal Government voting system testing and certification program, completing 80 percent of the 

mandated research as required by the Help America Vote Act, and 

issuing guidance and best practices. 

Thanks to the hard work and dedication of our staff we got the 

job done. And for the past year, thanks to your support and to the 

other committees in Congress, we have had the resources to continue meeting the goals of HAVA and strengthen internal operations. 

Since the recommendations were issued, the EAC has hired a 

chief operating officer, chief financial officer, an accounting director, a grants manager and a contracting officer; contracted with a 

certified public accounting firm to assist with financial management, including a corrective action plan; submitted our first performance-based budget for the 2010 budget to the Office of Management and Budget; began updating documentation of financial 

management processes, procedures and systems; adopted, after a 

long and comprehensive review, a strategic plan on March 27, 

2009; and established a roles and responsibilities policy for the 

commissioners and the executive director. And we continue to work 

on the assessment of internal controls. 

These are just a few of the activities completed and ongoing. The 

full list is available in our written testimony and in our update to 

the inspector general for his semiannual report to the Congress. 

Starting a new Federal agency is not easy. And I hope that our 

experience will provide insight to other commissions who may face 

similar circumstances in the future. I am proud of the accomplishments of the EAC staff. The internal improvements we make will 

help support their efforts to meet the requirements of HAVA and 

to improve the administration of Federal elections. 

Thank you and I look forward to your questions. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you very much, and thanks to all the witnesses for your testimony. 

I would turn now to my colleague from California, Mr. McCarthy, 

for any questions he may have. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

To the executive director, Mr. Wilkey. I noticed in the last testimony, Mr. Crider, that he actually hired the EAC former general 

counsel to work in his office. So how long has the position of the 

EAC general counsel been vacant? 

Mr. WILKEY. I believe, Congressman McCarthy, the position has 

been vacant since last fall. We had an initial outreach to candidates, interviewed candidates and made an offer, and the Commission then decided not to fill the position with that particular 

candidate. We are going back out for another recruitment effort. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Maybe if I can follow up a little on what you just 

said. Because when I look at the Civil Rights Commission—and I 

ask unanimous consent to include in the record an excerpt from 

their minutes. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Without objection. 

[The information follows:] 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

65 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset graphics 92 here 52315A.048
66 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset graphics 93 here 52315A.049
67 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset graphics 94 here 52315A.050
68 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset graphics 95 here 52315A.051
69 

Mr. MCCARTHY. The staff director of the Commission on Civil 

Rights announced at a public meeting that the agency general 

counsel was leaving January 2nd. So is this the person you are referring to that you made an offer in writing? 

Mr. WILKEY. Yes, Congressman. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Was the offer accepted? 

Mr. WILKEY. We had initially made an offer, and then there were 

some problems with the first offer in the letter. He never did accept, to my knowledge, the second offer. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Well, why would the Commission in their minutes say he had accepted the offer and he was leaving the position? 

Mr. WILKEY. He did accept the first offer, yes. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. So you sent a letter, he accepted the offer, and 

it was rescinded somehow, some way. 

Mr. WILKEY. The next step after offering the position was to have 

it ratified by a tally vote of the Commission. And when that occurred the vote, the tally vote, ended up in a 2–2 tie. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Is that a public meeting? 

Mr. WILKEY. No. Because it was a personnel matter, the position 

was debated in a personnel session and the offer was made and a 

tally vote was taken. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. In the letter of the offer, do you state in there 

that it will be upon the vote of the Commission whether the job 

will be accepted? Because how can you make an offer without the 

vote taking place? 

Mr. WILKEY. I don’t have the letter in front of me, Congressman. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Could you get me a copy of that letter? 

Mr. WILKEY. I would certainly be happy to, Congressman. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. I am just a little concerned here. You make an 

offer to an individual, they accept. They tell another agency it is— 

then behind closed doors, somehow the offer is rescinded. Was 

there some new discovery about this of why? 

Mr. WILKEY. Congressman, since it was a personnel matter, it 

was discussed at great length by the commissioners. Certainly the 

results of the tally vote we have provided on our Web site. The notations on the result of that tally vote are also a part of the record. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Do you think that will hurt you? Knowing you 

don’t have a legal counsel, I am just questioning is there any obligation, since you put something in writing offering a person a job— 

and I haven’t seen the letter so I don’t know if you say it is contingent on a different vote somewhere else, and you don’t have the 

legal counsel to even back you up within the offer—one, does that 

create hardship in the future to fill the position? I noticed just 

today you have listed the new position again, but I am also wondering from a legal perspective if the Commission is somewhere legally bound because of the letter of the offer they sent in the first 

place? Have you had any outside counsel to advise you of this during this time? 

Mr. WILKEY. We did have some background information from the 

counsel at the Office of Personnel Management and we had, of 

course, counsel available to us. We presently have a deputy counsel 

and another associate counsel on staff, and that individual advised 

the members also. 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

70 

Mr. MCCARTHY. And what was their legal advice to the members? 

Mr. WILKEY. I did not—I am not exactly sure what that advice 

was, because that advice went directly to them. I believe that we 

followed all of the requirements that we had to make. And it was 

unfortunate, but when the tally vote was taken the commissioners 

took another approach. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Is this how you handle all job offers? You send 

a letter out, they accept, and then you come back to a vote? 

Mr. WILKEY. The only two times that a tally vote is taken by the 

Commission on a personnel matter is with two positions; the position I currently hold and the position of general counsel. Those are 

the two statutory positions that are appointed by the Commission. 

All of the other remaining personnel, I do the recruitment and I 

make those appointments. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Well, Madam Chair, the only thing I would ask 

in the end, that we follow up on this. If we could receive, one, the 

letter of the offer that went forward. Is the tally vote inside public? 

Ms. LOFGREN. I think the testimony is that it is, yes. 

Mr. MCCARTHY. Okay. So if we can receive that, that would be 

helpful, and if we could follow up on this. 

Mr. WILKEY. Absolutely Congressman. 

[The information follows beginning on page 79] 

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Wilkey has indicated that he will provide that 

information. 

I will turn now to Mr. Gonzalez for questions he may have. 

Mr. GONZALEZ. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Lofgren. 

There is so much to cover. But I think, not to say it is a distraction, 

but it is of concern regarding expenditures and accountability within the Commission and, of course, the grant moneys that go out. 

And so I would like to concentrate more on the moneys that go 

out to the recipients and how that is followed. And I know that in 

the written statement, it does state that during the process collecting HAVA expenditure information from the States, the EAC 

recognized that States needed clear direction and resources. That 

you teamed up to provide additional—that you teamed up with the 

inspector general to provide additional training and added more resources on the EAC Web site. 

Internally, though, as far as personnel, not just a Web site. If 

they call in, or whatever the guidance that they seek—and I am 

talking about the recipients of our Federal dollars—who do you 

have in the way of personnel, the numbers of individuals that you 

have? It is my understanding that you have fewer people available 

than you did, let’s say, just even a year ago to assist the grant recipients. And I will just open that to the Chairwoman first. 

Ms. BEACH. Well, in the grants department and with the restructuring, we are hiring a grants manager that will—the grants manager has been hired and started on Monday. So we do have another 

personnel there dedicated to that program. 

Mr. GONZALEZ. Is it you have a greater number of people in, let’s 

say, this particular aspect of the programs than you did a year ago, 

fewer number? My understanding is that you don’t have an actual 

person or the number of people you had previously to assist the 

grant recipients. And I don’t know if that is true or not. You are 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

71 

going bring someone on board. Where will that put you relative to, 

let’s say, where you were just a year ago? 

Ms. HILLMAN. Congressman Gonzalez, if I might. We do not have 

fewer people on staff to handle questions and provide technical assistance to grant recipients. We have the same number as we had 

a year ago. The addition of a grants person addresses some of the 

concerns that were raised by the inspector general and others with 

respect to being able to do a higher level of review. So we are increasing our internal process and accountability. But with respect 

to people available to the States and to our program grant recipients, we have the same number. 

Mr. GONZALEZ. And the reason I ask that, obviously there is so 

much work to be done. And it has been a long process, and we all 

have our differences, but you have your mission and your goals. 

The last thing we need is anything that is internal in nature regarding expenditures by the Commission internally, indefinitely. 

The last thing we would need is someone out at the local State 

level that is a recipient, that in good faith attempts to administer 

the money, but makes a mistake. Because I don’t think that you 

have someone that intentionally goes out there to misuse or misapply the moneys, but they are looking to you for guidance. 

One last question, and we can go many places, and we will be 

revisiting specific endeavors of the Commission throughout the 

year. But when I’m back home, and I don’t know of other members, 

when I talk to my election officials or elected officials that understand that after Bush v. Gore, you know, we created the Help 

America Vote Act and such, and the Commission; and they really 

want to know what we have accomplished in all of these years. In 

light of, let’s say, this is April, and we still don’t have a United 

States Senator from Minnesota, we had election results last night 

in New York—— 

Ms. LOFGREN. Well, you can’t blame the Commission for that. 

Mr. GONZALEZ. What I am saying is, they really just want to 

know what work have we done that would have assisted these jurisdictions from avoiding the controversies we have today. I know 

you can always look to the courts and take that further step and 

take it out of our jurisdiction, but truly I think people are trying 

to get a handle on, what is it that we are doing up here to give 

guidance and assistance to these jurisdictions so that maybe we 

won’t have these problems? 

And I would just ask, in Minnesota’s case, is there anything that 

we have done, is there anything that we can do to avoid situations 

that have developed recently? 

Ms. HILLMAN. The Election Assistance Commission has published 

a number of best practices, shared practices under our management guidelines covering everything from chain of custody of voting 

systems, to production of ballots, to training of coworkers, to assist. 

As you know, many of the [inaudible] Are operating under State 

law. So EAC can provide guidance, best practices, and information 

to help the States do an assessment of what they can do. 

With respect to recounts, EAC has undertaken the required 

study of that, but unfortunately, our study was not published before Minnesota. I mean, in elections, you can’t guess when is going 

to be the next challenging issue. But hopefully between lessons 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

72 

learned from Minnesota and the information coming out of our vote 

recount study, States will be able to learn, should they ever encounter a similar situation. 

Mr. GONZALEZ. Thank you. My time has expired. I yield back. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. 

Mr. Harper. 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Mr. Wilkey, on this offer that was extended on general counsel 

and accepted, was the revisit on the terms, was that just talking 

about some of the details; is that what that involved? 

Mr. WILKEY. Congressman, I can’t recall, but I know that we 

issued two letters. The second letter, whether it was an issue with 

the start date or some other detail that was missing from the first 

letter, not having the information in front of me, I am not sure; but 

I certainly would be happy to provide you with all of that information. 

[The information follows:] 

Mr. HARPER. Certainly on that first offer and acceptance, at that 

point, you thought you had your next general counsel and he 

thought he had a job; is that fair to say? 

Mr. WILKEY. Well, certainly in his case he thought he did. 

Whether the information regarding the tally vote was properly 

given to him or whether he understood it is another matter. But 

the second step—after the offer, of course—was to do a tally vote 

of the four commissioners. 

Mr. HARPER. But it was your recommendation that he become 

your general counsel, or it wouldn’t have come up for a tally vote, 

I assume. 

Mr. WILKEY. It certainly was not in my purview to recommend. 

That particular employee is a direct appointment of the four commissioners. As I indicated previously, the only two positions in the 

Agency that are directly filled by the commissioners is the position 

that I hold and the position of general counsel. 

Mr. HARPER. But as the executive director, they are certainly 

going to want your input in this process. 

Who calls down the applicants to bring it up for a tally vote? Is 

that you, or a group, or somebody else? 

Mr. WILKEY. Certainly we all participated. I participated with 

the commissioners. 

Because of the way that the statute is structured, while the position is appointed by the Commission, the individual reports to me 

as their supervisor. So certainly they did ask for my opinion in the 

process, and I gave that opinion. It was a matter of our discussions 

behind closed doors as a personnel matter, and I did that. 

Mr. HARPER. And was your opinion a thumbs-up or a thumbsdown, without giving details? 

Mr. WILKEY. Without giving details, I believe it was a thumbs 

up. 

Mr. HARPER. Okay. And in your opinion, he was qualified for this 

position, he had experience in another agency or area—— 

Mr. WILKEY. Well, I will also include that there were two individuals that came down to the last two. That was debated by the Commission, and I actually gave thumbs-up to both of them. The quesrmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

73 

tion to me was, Would you be comfortable working with these individuals, and I said ‘‘yes’’ to both of them. 

Mr. HARPER. Would you provide us with copies of all correspondence and e-mails regarding that hire? 

Mr. WILKEY. I would be happy to do so, Congressman. 

Mr. HARPER. Including any internal notes. 

Mr. WILKEY. Absolutely. 

[The information follows:] 

Mr. HARPER. Now, why was he not approved, in your opinion? 

Mr. WILKEY. I don’t know. I believe that the tally votes, once you 

see the notations on the tally votes, that will speak for itself. And, 

of course, we will be happy to provide that to you and to the committee. 

Mr. HARPER. Well, I just have to ask this question: Was it because he was a Republican? 

Mr. WILKEY. I don’t believe so. I can’t answer that. Again, the 

notations were part of the tally vote, and they have to speak for 

themselves. 

Mr. HARPER. And you will provide that information to us. 

Mr. WILKEY. Absolutely, sir. 

[The information follows:] 

Mr. HARPER. Now, obviously, being the rookie on the committee 

and learning this process—first of all, I know your job is not easy, 

and you have an important responsibility. 

I was on the Election Task Force as the token Republican in Mississippi in 2001 and had a great experience as we went through 

that process. But I would say that when I see things, use of taxpayer money, even if it’s for something that is seemingly insignificant as T-shirts, I would say that that is not an appropriate use 

of taxpayer money in my opinion; and I hope we wouldn’t do that 

in the future, and that we would look at that information. 

But thank you for your time. I appreciate it. 

Mr. WILKEY. Thank you, Congressman. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. 

Congresswoman Davis. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Thank you all. 

I wanted to go back to Mr. Crider’s statement, and initially to 

the commissioners, to give you an opportunity to speak to the fact 

that there was some concern that a lot of the hires were more or 

less top-heavy positions and not some of the midlevel positions that 

would have helped with the certification process in the different 

States. And I just wanted to give you an opportunity to respond to 

that. 

Is that an assessment that—justifies why some of those hires 

were more at the top-level positions? 

Mr. WILKEY. Congresswoman, we only saw the testimony of the 

inspector general this morning, and we may have some differences 

of opinion on how individuals were categorized. Certainly, as I indicated in my testimony and in my remarks earlier, we had a great 

deal of work to do in the area of our financial administration. 

I agree with our inspector general and his comment that, while 

we are small, we still had to meet the very same requirements as 

the big agencies in the Federal Government. And certainly they 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

74 

had a lot more individuals to be able to handle that. And so that 

was eye opening to us. 

We have met that head on. We have brought in some very talented individuals so that, hopefully, when our audit comes up 

again this year, you will see a dramatic difference in how it looks 

between the 2 years. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Thank you. I think recognizing that it 

is important to establish morale at a small agency and to really get 

up and running, that’s somewhat understandable. 

Just going back to my colleague, and as I understand it—it is a 

small issue, but I think sometimes it is kind of symbolic. Again, let 

me just give you an opportunity, if you would like, to explain the 

T-shirt issue in terms of the number of people that you had on staff 

and the cost. Is there something in this that we are not getting 

that really you would like to just explain briefly so that people go 

away with a different impression? 

Mr. WILKEY. Certainly, Congresswoman. 

When that issue was first raised with me and the idea was 

raised with me, I certainly had some concerns myself. However, we 

wanted to do something for a noncash employee incentive. And so 

I directed our chief operating officer, our contracting officer, and 

our human resources specialist to reach out, to research the various regulations and rules, particularly with regards to the Office 

of Personnel Management, to get their take on it. They informed 

us that it had been done, certainly, in other agencies as provided 

for under the statutes and under the regulations; and it gave our 

employees some pride in our agency. 

We do a lot of outreach. We have meetings of our various boards. 

And I think our employees enjoyed having the opportunity to wear 

something that had a symbol of our agency. 

Would we do it again? Given the concern that has been raised, 

Congresswoman, I doubt that it would happen again. But we certainly took great care. And I certainly reached out to someone, for 

example—our contracting officer, who has been in the Federal Government for many years, has an unlimited warrant, level three, as 

a matter of fact—and he gave me what I thought was a reasonable 

response and allowed us to move forward. 

And whether we would do it again, I think is questionable, Congresswoman. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Thank you. Does anybody else want to 

respond? 

Okay. One of the roles that you play is working with the States. 

And we are also looking here at fraud—not fraud and abuse, but 

really how people can be more efficient and lean. 

Are you able to intervene if you are aware of some practices that 

really aren’t working for people? I mean, can you play that kind of 

activist role, or are you really in the role of responding to requests 

and interests that the States have? 

Mr. WILKEY. Congresswoman, I know that Commissioner 

Hillman mentioned in her testimony earlier something that we are 

very, very proud of, and that is our management guidelines and 

our quick-start guides. They have been overwhelmingly received by 

election administrators all over the country. There are some 16 or 

17 of them now on a wide range of election administration issues, 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

75 

from counting absentee ballots—which they are probably going to 

need in New York in the next few days—to other activities, including UOCAVA, poll worker training, and a number of others. These 

go directly into the hands of local election administrators, some 

7,000 of them. 

That is what we feel, in addition to working with our colleagues 

at the State level, something that we can do to get information directly into the hands of local election administrators. And they 

have been well received. 

So we try to make efforts such as that. Certainly, in the audit 

area, we do so also. It is my responsibility, once the IG gives us 

an audit—— 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. If I could just interrupt, do you see 

yourselves in a role as well in terms of—not making policy necessarily, but providing some advice, even to the extent of Internet 

voting for military, or overseas voting? Is that an area that you expect to weigh in on at some point? 

Ms. DAVIDSON. Right now, currently we have the first study that 

was given to us by the National Institute of Standards of Technology on Internet. It included several things—fax, anything that 

was really moving the ballots out faster. 

And they are in their second phase now of providing us with best 

practices and security issues for fax and Web-based and Internet. 

So we expect that to come out. And from there, then we will be giving guidelines, or really best practices, to everybody. 

Obviously, we take what States are doing currently and study— 

and that is what NIST is doing currently, really reviewing what 

the States are doing and how they have moved forward. 

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair, for the additional time. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. 

I turn to the gentleman from Alabama. 

Mr. DAVIS of Alabama. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

I will probably not take the full 5 minutes, but I wanted to just 

ask one question in particular of the three commissioners who are 

here. 

Let me try to get some self-assessment from the Commission 

about whether you were surprised by the findings of this audit. 

Was this news to you or, based on your own work on the Commission, did you see some of these findings coming? 

I will start with vice chairman, former chairwoman, Ms. 

Hillman. 

Ms. HILLMAN. The recommendations and findings of the inspector general, the substance of those were very helpful. 

When EAC was established in 2003, there was no place we could 

go to know the full breadth of what we had to do to establish EAC 

as a Federal agency in compliance with Federal requirements. And 

so we were building the house and the foundation at the same 

time, with our responsibilities to get requirements payments to the 

States, to do the HAVA-mandated study, to figure out how to staff 

the Commission, and also to be mindful that there were things that 

we were going to have to do. 

So I would say that, for the most part, there were no surprises 

to me. The frustration was, how could we possibly come up to speed 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

76 

in such a short period of time, and finally having to accept that we 

couldn’t, that we were just going to have to do the very best that 

we could to sort of prioritize the items. 

And we are well on our way; we are light years away from where 

we were 2 years ago. 

And I would say that it is constructive. And I would think for 

Congress, I think that the General Services Administration can 

play a very valuable role to small commissions if they could only 

staff and resource themselves to do it. 

I think there was an assumption on Congress’ part that we 

would get that kind of technical assistance from a place like GSA 

or OPM, or even the Office of Management and Budget. And I will 

say that the Office of Management and Budget was probably the 

most helpful of the three agencies. What I am afraid of is—I call 

it the ‘‘bottomless pit,’’ are there more items we don’t know about— 

and I think the inspector general will address that in the next 

audit. It may reveal some things that we don’t yet know we are 

supposed to have in place as a Federal agency. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Ms. Beach, would you or Ms. Davidson like to 

briefly weigh in on that same question, the extent to which you 

were surprised by the findings of the audit? 

Ms. BEACH. Well, I will say when I first became aware of the 

audit, I was actually counsel to this very committee, so—— 

Mr. DAVIS of Alabama. I knew I recognized you from somewhere. 

Ms. BEACH. So I certainly was surprised. 

But now in this new role and recognizing the challenges that a 

new agency has, and having now the road map and being aware 

of what we can do, I think we are on a good way and a good path 

to fulfilling all our obligations and working towards our goals. 

Mr. DAVIS of Alabama. Let me raise one other thing that may be 

a little bit less dramatic, but it jumped out at me, the fact that apparently the Commission is having some trouble filling midlevel 

staff positions. And if I am reading this correctly, there is a significant number of full-time positions that have not been filled. 

Am I reading that right? 

Ms. HILLMAN. I don’t think so. I am going to defer to the executive director. There are some new positions with this budget, once 

we got out of the continuing resolution, that are now being filled. 

But I wouldn’t say that we are having problems filling the positions. 

Mr. DAVIS of Alabama. Mr. Wilkey, you are nodding your head. 

Mr. WILKEY. Congressman, no, at this time, we haven’t. 

We had, initially, problems filling our CFO position. There is a 

lot of competition for CFOs, and we found that out. Because there 

is a cap on the salary, while we had a number of very good candidates, they were not willing to take the salary that we were willing to offer. 

Mr. DAVIS of Alabama. Let me interrupt you just enough to point 

out the sentence—and maybe the confusion is this is not from the 

report; it is something that is referenced in the document I have. 

It says, ‘‘Some advocates remain concerned that not enough midlevel staff have been employed to carry out EAC’s problematic responsibilities.’’ 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

77 

Does that resonate with you at all, Mr. Wilkey, the concerns 

about not having enough midlevel staff to do some of the basic operating work of the Commission? 

Mr. WILKEY. No, I don’t agree. No one has suffered. We filled 

some very, very important positions on our financial end, based 

upon the results of our audits and our conversations with OPM and 

OMB, who fully supported us in this. 

I took the step to have OPM, for example, come in and evaluate 

every single job in our Agency, to do an assessment and an evaluation of the salary level and so on to see if they were appropriate 

for that job title. 

We will continue. And my goal is that we have reached the capacity in a number of areas; however, as we move forward, additional employees will be in our certification and testing program. 

And we are making great strides. We are bringing two additional 

people in. 

We are working with a university in the State of Georgia, who 

has the responsibility for the voting system testing and testing program in the State of Georgia and has some terrific graduate students. We are working with that university. We continue to bring 

graduate students in to work with us. They are our future. 

As a matter of fact, Congressman, I am working with a university in your home State, Auburn University, which was the first 

university in the Nation to have a graduate program in election administration. And I am continuing to work with them and providing opportunities at the ground level. 

So I assure you, Congressman, as well as the members of the 

committee, that our program activities will continue to be met, and 

we will continue to make resources available to all of our program 

units as we move along. 

Mr. DAVIS of Alabama. Thank you. 

Ms. LOFGREN. I will just follow up with a couple of questions. 

We realize that you started from scratch and that you have made 

an effort to move forward. But at this point, I think out of the 29 

recommendations in the assessment from February of 2008, I think 

only 9 have been done, at least that’s the report that we got—if 

that’s not correct, tell me. And whatever the number is, I would 

like to know whether you expect that all of them will be done; and 

if not, what assistance do you need to get them all done. 

Mr. WILKEY. Madam Chairman, as we were completing our assessment and giving further information to the inspector general 

for his semiannual report, we sought the assistance of some outside 

help to look at it, people who have been in this arena for many 

years. And we came upon the fact that there were some 30 of those 

recommendations that were really duplicate recommendations, and 

so we sought to consolidate those. So the reports that you will be 

getting now will focus in on where we are. 

We certainly have a road map to get there. There are issues that 

will be coming up that we will close within the next couple of 

months—I see on my list here, some by June 30, some by the 31st 

of July, then again in August and September. I asked staff last 

night, knowing that we would be here and that we had just recently come across this discrepancy, to give me an updated listing 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

78 

of where we are in terms of those recommendations and our blueprint for doing that. And I certainly would offer this for the record. 

Ms. LOFGREN. We would be happy to receive that and review it. 

[The information follows:] 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

79 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 121 here 52315A.052
80 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 122 here 52315A.053
81 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 123 here 52315A.054
82 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 124 here 52315A.055
83 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 125 here 52315A.056
84 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert offset folio 126 here 52315A.057
85 

Ms. HILLMAN. Madam Chair, if I might just also add that some 

of the recommendations couldn’t be implemented until others had 

been done. For example, we needed the chief financial officer in 

place for other kinds of policies to be developed. 

So I would expect, once the core staff coming out of the inspector 

general’s recommendations are in place, we will see the evolution 

of some of the others. And we should be—we will be in a very different place by the end of the year. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Well, that is good to hear. And I realize that, although some of these recommendations may not have the stature 

of the testing program, which is key, and all these other things, we 

just have to get them done so that people can have confidence. And 

I know that you recognize that. 

I just have one final question, and it really relates to the research department. As you will recall, was it last year that the general counsel’s office and the research department were criticized or 

accused of altering research? I am not saying that was true, untrue, false, or indifferent. But there was a recommendation that 

there be a peer review process so that, you know, that could never 

come up again. 

Has that assessment been done? Has it been approved? Is it in 

place now? 

Mr. WILKEY. Congresswoman, we have taken the steps that 

every single document, in particular our research documents, are 

vetted by our Standards Board and our Board of Advisors. As you 

know, under HAVA, we have a 110-member Standards Board and 

37-member advisory board. And now all of our research activities 

will be presented to them for review, either directly at their meetings, or we are using a virtual Web site to get—— 

Ms. LOFGREN. Well, the recommendation was that there be some 

formal peer review process. Are you suggesting that this kind of 

Commission oversight is the formal review process? 

Mr. WILKEY. This is part of the review process. 

I can tell you that, for example, in our management guidelines 

program, we are careful to bring in a working group of State and 

local election officials, depending on what subject it is and if they 

have expertise in that area, to work with us as part of a peer review. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Well, maybe what I can do is ask you to send us 

your peer review assessment process. 

Mr. WILKEY. Absolutely. 

[The information follows:] 

Ms. LOFGREN. And then we will take a look at it and see—maybe 

we can have a dialogue on whether we have a meeting of the minds 

on whether that process was really what we thought it was going 

to be, and have some further discussions if we have questions. 

And on that note, I would note that we have a lot of work to do. 

We do thank you for your service. I am thinking, this is the spring. 

Towards fall we ought to have a follow-up here to see where we are 

on these audit issues, as well as some of the other items you are 

working on, but specifically the IG’s recommendations, in the hope 

that we can check off a bunch of boxes. 

So, with that, if there aren’t further questions, we thank you for 

your testimony. The record will be held open for 5 days. If members 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

86 

have additional questions, we will forward them to you and ask you 

to respond as promptly as possible. 

Thank you very much. This hearing is adjourned. 

[The information follows:] 

[Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING

87 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 131 52315A.058
88 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 132 52315A.059
89 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 133 52315A.060
90 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 134 52315A.061
91 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 135 52315A.062
92 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 136 52315A.063
93 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 137 52315A.064
94 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 138 52315A.065
95 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 139 52315A.066
96 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 140 52315A.067
97 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 141 52315A.068
98 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 142 52315A.069
99 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 143 52315A.070
100 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 144 52315A.071
101 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 145 52315A.072
102 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 146 52315A.073
103 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 147 52315A.074
104 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 148 52315A.075
105 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 149 52315A.076
106 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 150 52315A.077
107 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 151 52315A.078
108 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 152 52315A.079
109 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 153 52315A.080
110 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 154 52315A.081
111 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 155 52315A.082
112 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 156 52315A.083
113 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 157 52315A.084
114 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 158 52315A.085
115 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 159 52315A.086
116 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 160 52315A.087
117 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 161 52315A.088
118 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 162 52315A.089
119 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 163 52315A.090
120 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 164 52315A.091
121 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 165 52315A.092
122 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 166 52315A.093
123 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 167 52315A.094
124 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 168 52315A.095
125 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 169 52315A.096
126 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 170 52315A.097
127 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 171 52315A.098
128 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 172 52315A.099
129 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 173 52315A.100
130 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 174 52315A.101
131 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 175 52315A.102
132 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 176 52315A.103
133 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 177 52315A.104
134 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 178 52315A.105
135 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 179 52315A.106
136 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 180 52315A.107
137 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 181 52315A.108
138 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 182 52315A.109
139 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 183 52315A.110
140 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 184 52315A.111
141 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 185 52315A.112
142 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 186 52315A.113
143 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 187 52315A.114
144 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 188 52315A.115
145 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 189 52315A.116
146 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 190 52315A.117
147 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 191 52315A.118
148 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 192 52315A.119
149 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 193 52315A.120
150 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 194 52315A.121
151 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 195 52315A.122
152 

rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with HEARING


Insert graphic folio 196/250 52315A.123