Acknowledging the costs and consequences if we had to take a course of action. Secretary carter speaking now just very generally and not specifically, the two things that make it the successful implementation and agreement preferable from that point of view to a strike is the effects of a strike are temporary. And secondly, iran would, as i said earlier, respond to an American Military strike upon iran and one needs to a through what the set when steps are including the possibility that iran, at that point, would become irreconcilably committed to getting a Nuclear Weapon. I say that is predicated on the effective implementation of this agreement. Effectively implemented, the agreement stops iran for 15 years. Way beyond that. So we are comparing that situation, which is effective implementation complete implementation of this agreement to military options. There may not be effective upon mentation of this agreement. We have to recognize that there may not be any agreement and so forth. That is why we are under instructions from the president to preserve and indeed we are improving the military option. Temporary as it is, it needs to be there because that is our fallback if that is the only path left. Senator heinrich thats predicated on the effective implementation of this agreement. And the agreement stops iran from getting a Nuclear Weapon not just for ten years secretary moniz, i want to get to you. Can you talk a little from the point of view of a Nuclear Physicist about why is why it is so difficult, if you have a covert facility where enrichment occurs, why it is so hard to sort of cleanup the signs of having uranium or, for that matter, plutonium at a facility like that. Would an undeclared facility itself the a violation . Secretary moniz on the second part, absolutely. An undeclared facility would be a violation and, frankly, a stern response would be in order. With regard to the coverup there is not too much we can say here in public and by just to say that dealing with nuclear materials, whether it is enrichment or looking at the characteristics of uranium in an explosive situation, for example, it would tend to leave lots of vary small particles difficult to clean up. But beyond that, we could talk in a classified environment. Senator heinrich thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator is there a term called eestnet back provision in the agreement . senator kerry i dont think its specifically senator lee i think it would be helpful if you did not use that term much because it is an illusion. Ill have my question. The snap back is more focused on the United States than it is iran. As you know, mr. Secretary those of us who are involved in the bush administration, getting countries to economically isolate iran, we used a lot of leverage with countries saying you are either going to be in their market or hours. And that was effective. But he goes to this idea, if there is some kind of snap back, that was a slog. That wasnt a snap. It took used to get countries to divest out of the iranian economy. It will take years to do it again. But let me ask a hypothetical. It was a question in the closed hearing. A number of senators were not satisfied. This focus is a little bit on what senator ayotte said. Lets assume sanctions are lifted. We get the 60 billion the iranians are looking for 120 billion additional investments. No violations in the agreement. The economy is humming along. There is an act of terrorism. By the way the violations listed are annexed to this is a lot of american power, including the unilateral sanctions, including the Financial System so on an act of terrorism happens, they blow up a consulate. I think its likely that they are going to do that in the next 10 years. The congress is upset. The new president is upset. We impose sanctions. We reimpose annex 2 sanctions. This is our power. You talked about how this is power. We do have a lot of unilateral power with regard to sanctions. Then iran cites paragraph 26 of the agreement. And im going to read it. It says iran will treat such a reimposition of sanctions as grounds to cease performing its commitments. The deal is over. They are cranking. Their economy is cranking. And they can walk. They can legally walk from this agreement. So let me ask you this. If we ever impose socalled snap back sanctions, isnt the deal over . Where am i wrong on that question . Senator kerry senator, we would snap sanctions back once they violated the agreement. Secretary lew you asked two questions. The first set of questions you asked was about the snapback. Does it work . Yes, it works. If they violate the agreement our the u. N. Sanctions were structured so they could be put back in place. Senator and they can walk. secretary lew thats if they violate the nuclear agreement. Snare yo one is they violate the nuclear agreement. Scenario two is they blow up some facility, take an act of terrorism, we have the right to put these kinds of measures in place. They are not Nuclear Sanctions at that point. They are terrorism sanctions at that point. Senator iran has stated it will treat such reimposition of the sanctions in annex two as grounds to cease forming those commitments. How am i not reading that correctly . Secretary lew annex two illustrates, lists the nuclear chairman the senators time has expired. Senator carter im happy to pursue this in greater detail. We have not given away our ability to put these measures in s in place for nonnuclear purposes. Senator i think the iranians have a different view. Senator lee thank you, mr. Chairman. I have a number of questions regarding the military applications. Secretary kerry, why isnt this a treaty . And why is it not have advice and consent . Senator kerry there are many reasons why, not the least of which is we dont have diplomatic relations with iran. This is a situation with a multilateral agreement with many countries. You dont normally negotiate a treaty in that kind of context. So it is a political agreement. We believe the leverages and it the snapback of sanctions, the oversight, it is vary our full for irans compliance. Senator lee i would note theres nothing in article two section two that limits the definition of treaty. Nothing in your definition of the term treaty. It defines treaty as a formal agreement between states. I dont think that is an adequate answer. That we will move on. General dempsey, presumably one of the Weapons Systems that iran is likely to acquire and that russia has implicated has indicated can you describe what impact it would have on u. S. Military operations . General dempsey no question it would make application of the military option to reduce their Nuclear Capability more difficult but not impossible but more difficult. Senator lee thank you. Wendy sherman, the chief negotiator for the United States during these talks stated in february of last year of 2014 to the Senate ForeignRelations Committee that iranian Ballistic Missiles or indeed are going to be part of something that will have to be addressed as part of a copperheads of agreement. At the time was secretary sherman referring to lifting the u. N. Embargo on Ballistic Technology when she made this statement to the Foreign Relations committee . Or did the United States intend to include restrictions on Ballistic Missiles in this agreement . Secretary kerry it does include its under Chapter Seven and enforceable under the united nations. Article 41. And there are restrictions within this agreement and i would also comment on the earlier question that the defensive weapons are not covered by the embargo. So the is 300, for example, from russia, is not covered anyway. Senator lee this is a roguish state. It has made not only threats but taken aggressive actions towards the United States, made threats to wipe israel off the map. There are real reasons why we dont want them to get nuclear arms. In light of the fact that that is the biggest concern, we are willing to enter negotiations to lift sanctions and give iran a big economic benefit, why on earth did we not insist as a condition to getting any deal at all that iran, for the love of god, cease and desist from its terrorist ambition, cease and desist from making comments like it was to wipe israel off the map, cease and desist from undertaking and funding acts of terrorism against the United States and her allies . Secretary kerry as was mentioned earlier, it would be great and ideal if one could negotiate that. Im not sure how long it would take. And given the imperatives we had with the iranian 19,000 centrifuges and fissile material it will to 10 to 12 bombs already, there asking of the fuel cycle and their near imminent finishing of the iraq reactor which would have produced weapons grade plutonium at the rate of two weapons a year, we felt we had this had to keep this targeted to the greatest threat of all, which is the potential of having a Nuclear Weapon. And if indeed they are meaning to translate their slogans into policy then getting rid of the Nuclear Weapon is everybodys first imperative here. So that is what we focused on. We knew you could get tangled up our definition one mans freedom fire Freedom Fighter is another mans terrorist. You can be fighting forever on definitions of who is protecting home and you wont it anywhere. You literally will not get there. That is why we separated those activities. That does not reduce our commitment as we have defined again and again to push back on every one of those activities. But its easier to push back against an that doesnt have a Nuclear Weapon than one that does. I just have one, yes, one question. Ive read and i just want to go over this and any reaction you may have, Fareed Zakari wrote, iran get their how is this in Americas National interest or israels are saudi arabias or anybodys in that area . It is not a plausible scenario. In 2005, three european powers rejected the nuclear deal with iran with two years of negotiation. So i would ask, if this does collapse, does this put them on an accelerated with their intentions being shown already does this put them on an accelerated path . Center secretary kerry well we believe so. The president believes it, you are our intel believes it. Our Intel Community has made it very clear to us that theres no return to negotiations with this ayatollah. And that they will then believe we have given them the reason that they have to develop a Nuclear Weapon. Senator manchin secretary, between november 2012 and 2013 even when we had the noose around their neck, they still produced 6,000 more centrifuges. Their determination is to do it no matter how much we have been strangled. Secretary moniz that is quite correct. Absolutely. They declared they would go to hundreds of thousands of versus the current 20,000. Senator manchin and you believe in the heart of hearts and your one question has now expired. Senator graham general dempsey do you believe the iranians have been trying to build a bomb or a Nuclear Power program for peaceful purposes all these years . General density i believe they have a militarization aspiration. Senator graham who is the commander in chief of the Iranian Armed forces, secretary carter . Who calls the shots . Secretary carter the Supreme Leader. Senator graham who decides if iran goes to war russian mark the Supreme Leader, right . Who decides if they try to break out, the Supreme Leader . General dempsey yes. Senator graham does the people leaders religious views compel him over time to destroy israel and attack america . Secretary carter i dont know. I dont know the man. Senator graham i can tell you, i do. I read what he says. I know the man. I know what he wants. And if you dont know that, this is not a good deal. Could we win a war with iran . Is it your testimony that saudi arabia is oh k with this deal and they are committed to you they dont feel compelled to get a bomb because of this deal. Secretary carter no, my testimonicy cant speak for saudi arabia. Senator graham well, you have spoken for saudi arabia all over the American Media reassuring everybody in this committee theyre okay. You think they were lying to you . Or do you think zooish of course not. Of course not. Whos your counterpart, mr. Monisz . What is his name . Secretary moneysmoniz mr. Sullahe. Senator graham have you read what he said on july 22nd, according to middle east Media Research institute . About the side deal. On said we have. We reject the concept. What kind of arrangement has he made to make him feel so positive . Secretary moniz first of all, i had not red it. Secretary graham im going to give it to you. You dont have to answer. Would it be surprising to you hes telling the iranian people dont worry about this side deal, were going to get a good outcome. I assume hes saying we reached an arrangement were okay with. Thats what im assuming. Secretary moniz i would read it differently just from hearing secretary graham we dont know what he means. Apparently we dont know what the ayatollah wants. I know what he means. He means hes reached an agreement where they acquire a Nuclear Weapon on the somebody stops them. Secretary no, not everybody believes it. Senator graham name one Political Party in israel. People who are actually governing the country. Name one Political Party in israel that is for this deal. Secretary kerry i didnt hear you say Political Party. Senator graham im sorry. every Political Party in israel is opposed to this deal so when you speak about israel and this deal, its not beebe, its everybody. Secretary its exley not everybody. The alan, former head of shinbet not a Political Party. Senator graham senator cruz thank you for being here. General sul man any, the heads of the al quds forces has more blood on his hands than any living terrorist. Secretary kerry said to the families of those men and women who gave their lives who were killed by general solomonic, we should apologize. Secretary carter, i understand that the joint Personnel Recovery agency has the classified list of roughly 500 american soldiers who were murdered by iranian iuds. I would ask secretary carter, so that we can deal with secretary what secretary kerry suggested, that the Department Released that list to every member in this committee declassify that list and release it directly to the Service Members families. Senator kerry senator, i never said the word apology. I never mentioned apologize. I said we should thank them for their Extraordinary Service. I never said the word apologize. Please do not the store my words. Senator cruz secretary kerry, its duly noted you dont apologize to the family members of the Service Members who were killed by secretary kerry thats not what i said. Senator cruz do you apologize or not . I dont want to put words in your mouth. Secretary kerry i thanked them for their Extraordinary Service and i would remind them that the United States of america will never take the sanctions off qasam so the money. Senator cruz moniz, the single greatest threat to the United States, if iran acquires a Nuclear Weapon is that of an electromagnetic pulse. A Nuclear Weapon detonated in the atmosphere over these turn seaboard that could kill tens of millions of americans. On july 23, in testimony before congress, you told the United States senate you hadnt read the congressionally mandated commission on emts and you did not know what an emt was. Secretary moniz i said i did not know the 2008 report recommendations. I said i was quite familiar with the issue and we know about emps from nuclear air burst secretary cruise secretary, let me read the testimony verbatim so i dont mischaracterize. Senator johnson, let me read what you said. Senator johnson, are you familiar with the emps commission 2008 report . No, i am not, sir. Youre not . Do you know do you know what an emp is . You will have to explain it to me please. Secretary moniz thats a report. If you read further in the testimony, you will see my explicit statement. Of course i know about the issue. I happen to know something Nuclear Weapons, emp is senator cruz do you agree that an emp detonated killed tens secretary moniz its obviously a very potent weapon. Senator cruz could kill tens of millions of americans, would you agree on that . Secretary moniz that would depend on the specifics senator cruz youre refusing to answer the question. Secretary carter, is it correct iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the world . Secretary carter i was asked before and i believe thats true, yes. Senator cruz do you have any doubt whatsoever if in excess of 100 billion goes to iran that some of that money will go to jihadists will who will use it to kill americans. Secretary carter i cant say that. I can say their maligned activities about which were extremely concerned are quite well funded today and its senator cruz i just have a second left. Secretary carter the rest of their conduct makes it important they also do not have a Nuclear Weapon. Senator cruz finally, because a i only have a second left. Secretary kerry, you told senator lee this is not a treaty because we dont have diplomatic relations. That is directly contrary to the testimony you gave yesterday to the house. When you were asked when you were asked, why is this not considered a treaty . I will read your answer verbatim. Secretary kerry well, i know i apologize. The senators time has expired. I promised the witnesses that i would get them out as every member that wanted to was able to ask questions. I want to tell the witnesses i appreciate their patients. I know it has been a vary long morning for them. I also know they appreciate the gravity of this issue and the importance of allowing every member of the committee to at least ask questions and be informed by your testimony. Senator manchin mr. Chairman, could we keep the record open in case there are senators that have written questions . Senator mccain im sure senator manchin will have a written question for you, as will senator nelson. So, i want to thank the witnesses and this is a very important. I think the witnesses. We are adjourned. Announcer tomorrow, more from Martin Dempsey when hes needs to the when he speaks. That is live at 8 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan 2. Tonight on cspan, the new head of the tsa discusses Aviation Security. Later, Martin Dempsey, defense secretary ashton carter, and three other cabinet secretaries testify about the Iran Nuclear Agreement in a hearing of the Senate Armed Services committee. Announcer when first Lady Ida Mckinley arrived at the white house, she was in poor health suffering from epilepsy. At white house events, her husband would sit next to her. When he saw she was having a seizure, he would cover her face with a large handkerchief until the episode past. Episode ida mckinley this sunday night at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspans original series first ladies, influence and image looking at the public and private lives of the women who filled the position of first lady and their influence on the presidency. On cspan3. The newly confirmed administrator of the Transportation Security Administration testified on capitol hill today about Aviation Security and the operations of the t. S. A. Peter neffenger is a retired coast guard admiral who took over as the head of the t. S. A. Earlier this month. This hearing of the House Homeland Security committee is an hour and 20 minutes. Chairman mccaul the committee on Homeland Security will come to order. The committee is meeting today to provide members with an opportunity to hear from the newly confirmed transportation security administrator, peter neffenger, on his plans for leading the t. S. A. We expect to explore a range of issues related to the operations of the t. S. A. And i now recognize myself for an opening statement. Two weeks ago a terrorist attack in the american heartland inspired by a hateful ideology killed five american soldiers on u. S. Soil. Just a day after we marked up the extremism bill out of this committee. 14 years after 911, not only are we still under threat from islamist terrorists, but they have gone on the offensive globally and expanded their footprint. Radicalization is on the rise. And the war is being brought to our doorsteps at a terrifying speed. We have long known that our aviation sector is a crown jewel of terrorist targets. So as we stare down these real and growing threats, congress and the American People need confidence in our defenses. And in the past few months, t. S. A. Has given us concern rather than confidence. Terrorists have to be right only once. And we have to be right 100 of the time as millions of travelers from all over the world pass through our nations airports, the American People must know and trust that the procedures and policies put in place make us safer. In june, we learned through leaked reports from the department of Homeland Securitys office of Inspector General that t. S. A. s passenger screening was wrong 96 of the time. And that 73 aviation workers had potential ties to terrorism. These findings shatter public confidence. A reported 96 failure rate to detect explosives is completely unacceptable. Acting administrator neffenger has an opportunity i believe, to turn this ship around. And as an admiral i think he has that capability as well. In our discussions that weve had over the past few days, hes displayed candor and an open mind in his approach to this critical position. In my opinion, t. S. A. Needs to do three things in order to move forward to a new chapter. One, restore public confidence. Two, enhance riskbased security and three, better leverage with the private sector. Weve seen a large expansion of riskbased security initiatives since 2011. However, we still need to do more. T. S. A. s Precheck Program has been in place for four years. However, currently only 4 of travelers are members of this program. T. S. A. Needs to increase this population so that it can focus its efforts on more thoroughly screening those passengers who are unknown and pose a higher risk. I would like to explore how t. S. A. Can better leverage the private sector. The private sector plays a Critical Role in securing our nations aviation system. T. S. A. Does not and cannot full its mission alone. The private sector is necessary as a necessary partner that t. S. A. Needs to continue to rely on in order to successfully fulfill its mission. T. S. A. And the department need to look to the future and give the private sector a road map and a vision of what screening will look like five, 10, and even 15 years from now. And the admiral and i had some very good discussions on that point. This can help Companies DevelopTechnology Meet these needs. We cannot expect private companies to invest tens of millions of dollars if we cannot provide them with any certainty or a vision on a return on their investment. Additionally, t. S. A. Needs to make necessary reforms in order to enhance the Screening Partnership program. These partnerships allow airports to hire private screeners instead of government employees. This program has been in place since 2004. And yet t. S. A. Is still unable to do an accurate, cost comparison that takes into account the full cost of a federal employee compared to a private sector employee doing the same job. This capital allows t. S. A. To argue that private screeners do not save the taxpayer money. Although this is not a fair and accurate accounting assessment. This committee is dedicated to reforming t. S. A. We proved our commitment to this effort by passing four important pieces of legislation on the house floor just this monday that will keep americans safe. This legislation came out of this committee as a result of the recent t. S. A. Failures. Spafle, these bills will help strengthen and secure the Precheck Program improve the vetting process for aviation employees, help keep our airport screening equipment better maintained and implement better policies at local for contractors. The bottom line is this. The threat is evolving but americans are concerned that t. S. A. Is not keeping up with that threat. Administrator neffenger, you have a tough job. Ahead of you. And to to lead this agency. But we have confidence in you. And we look forward to working with you in these joint efforts to reform t. S. A. And together, today, we are eager to hear from you about your plans for the future and your vision. And with that, the chair now recognizes the Ranking Member. Ranking member thompson thank you very much, mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. I would also like to congratulate administrator neffenger on his appointment. And i look forward to working with him to advance the mission of t. S. A. Another thing is welcome to the fish bowl. T. S. A. Was established by congress in the wake of the september 11 attack. It has responsibility for protecting the nations aviation and Transportation System and ensuring the Free Movement of people and goods. Over the years in protecting Aviation Systems t. S. A. Has used a number of methods to screen passengers. Some of the Technology Technological changes t. S. A. Has made however, have cost taxpayers millions of dollars while failing to adequately address the threat to Aviation Security. Unfortunately, t. S. A. Is still having problems with its technology today. For example, last month, it was reported that auditors posing as passengers were able to smuggle mock explosives and banned weapons through checkpoints at various airports across the country. Earlier this spring, the Inspector General released a report claiming that t. S. A. Does not properly manage the maintenance of its airport screening equipment. According to the i. G. , t. S. A. Has not issued adequate policies to airports for carrying out maintenance responsibility. Administrator neffenger, i want to challenge you to address these issues with the technologies used in the airport environment. As you report this issue consider both the current threat picture and the emerging threats. Keep in mind that they are small and minority businesses in this country with exceptional technologies that could be beneficial to t. S. A. And improve efficiencies at the airport. And i highlight that because weve gotten accustomed to using three or four vendors. And every time weve come before this committee, somebody would say, well, they are the only someone with capacity to do what we need. My question is, how hard have we looked and how cooperative have we been with other people who are in this arena . So i look forward to working with you on that. Former administrator pistol implemented a riskbased approach to passenger screening. However, both the Government Accountability office and the office of Inspector General have identified shortcomings with this approach. Especially when it comes to granting passengers expedited screening through managed inclusion. Significant shortcommings that ive observed with with managed inclusion include problems with the model used to identify passengers for this managed Inclusion Program. And the usefulness of having behavior that takes an officer to implement the managed Inclusion Program. And the reason i say that, mr. Director, is we have been asking for whatever science thats available relative to behavior detection officers and how that falls into this layered system of protection and unfortunately weve yet to get that report back from a scientific standpoint. This past monday legislation introduced by subcommittee chairman katko Ranking Member rice and me, directs t. S. A. To limit expedited airport screening to participants of the Precheck Program and other known low risk passengers. Our bill passed the house. Last week, three new measures were approved by the transportation security subcommittee. As we consider the three bills, we know that there are some issues that remain for the full committees consideration. For instance, significant concerns have been raised by a Diverse Group of labor stakeholders for the measure aimed to address the alarming reports of multiple Security Breaches caused by employees exploiting security gaps and abusing the credentialaling privileges. As we close these gaps we must ensure that the men and women whose job is to protect the flying public are not unduly impacted. As t. S. A. Legislation works its way through the legislative process, we would welcome constructive engagement from t. S. A. Administrator neffenger again, not only do i look forward to hearing from you on how you plan to address these issues, but i also want to hear from you on how you plan to address the most valuable asset within t. S. A. Which is its work force. T. S. A. Is plagued with very low morale and an extremely high turnover rate. Employees cite low pay and barriers to advancement as some of their main issues. Additionally the fellow air Marshall Service has not had a class in nearly four years. Again, i want to know your perspective on this. And what steps you plan to take to improve employee morale and if you plan on employing more federal air marshals. T. S. A. Plays a vital part in protecting america. We can Work Together to help solve its problems. I look forward to this committee working with you as the new administrator and na bipartisan fashion. To help solve t. S. A. s problems. And to improve. With that i yield back. Chairman mccaul i thank the Ranking Member. Other members are reminded that Opening Statements may be submitted for the record. We are pleased to have the new administrator for the t. S. A. , mr. Peter neffenger serves as affers the sixth administrator of the t. S. A. Where he leads Security Operations at more than 450 airports within the United States. And a work force of almost 60,000 employees. Prior to joining t. S. A. , administrator neffenger served as the 29th vice commandant of the United States coast guard. And the coast guards deputy commandant for operations. We want to thank you for being here today. And your debut performance before this committee. The chair now recognizes admiral neffenger. Administrator neffenger thank you. I have written comments for the record and just a brief opening statement. Good morning chairman mccall and rank Ranking Member thompson and the other members of the committee. Thank you for letting me testify in my new role as administrator of the t. S. A. Im pleased to share my vision and my thoughts about the future of t. S. A. Let me begin by saying that t. S. A. Is fundamentally a counterterrorism organization. Our job is to deter, detect, and disrupt those who would harm our system of transportation across the country. Especially the aviation sector. We protect legitimate trade and travel. We have a no fail mission. One for which the consequences of a successful attack overwhelm the risk equation and for we must ensure we deliver mission success. This critically Important Mission is my highest priority. As i appear before this committee this morning, im in the middle of my now fourth week on the job. Although brief, ive been thoroughly impressed with the professionals who occupy our ranks and i want to thank mr. Thompson for noting those. Officers and employees who are sworn an oath to serve their nation in the mission are critically Important Mission that encounters more than two million travelers a day in the aviation sector alone. Ive also had some time to become more familiar with the challenges facing the agency and the development of of a set of priorities. My highest priority is to ensure solutions to the recent covert testing failures. Overall, there are several critical elements that are essential to improving screening operations. First we must ensure the appropriate measures of effectiveness are in place to drive in institutional focus on our primary mission. But we measure is what our employees will Pay Attention to. So its imperative that we get our metrics right. Second, we must employ a culture of operational evolution. One that constantly reassesses our assumptions, our plans and our processes. And must be able to rapidly field new concepts of operation and new technologies. Finally, delivering an effective system and earning the confidence of the traveling public will only come through competence disciplined performance and professionalism. Ive conveyed these standards to our work force. And i commit to you that i will relentlessly pursue these objectives. I take on this challenge with the Leadership Perspective that has been central to my approach, my entire career. A well defined and clear statement of mission, clear and unequivocal standards of performance, training, and resourcing. That enable the work force to achieve success, and an unwavering pursuit of accountability. I will set expectations of strong values for the work force and i will lead with t. S. A. s core values of integrity, innovation and team spirit at my core. Since its creation after the attacks of september 11, 2001, t. S. A. Has played an invaluable role in protecting the traveling public. However, nearly 14 years later, we continue to face a range of threats from terrorists who are inspired by messages of hatred and violence. And a number of terrorist groups remain intent on striking the United States in the west. And we know that some of them are specifically focused on aviation. And more troubling today the threat is more decentralized and more diffuse and more complex than ever before. These per sevent threats are t. S. A. s most pressing challenge. Ouren miss will continually adapt and so must we. We must leverage intelligence, technology, the experience of our frontline operators, and our partners in federal state and local governments in the private sector to employ effective measures. We must pay particular attention to the insider threat. A second challenge facing t. S. A. Is retention, training, and accountability. Frontline managers and screeners are critical to our success, agency culture, morale, and effectiveness are a direct result of career long development, recognition, and accountability. In the traveling public expects to be treated with dignity and respect. I will pay close attention to training and Work Force Development to include how to leverage and expand the t. S. A. Academy to develop leaders and improve individual performance and instill a greater sense of pride in our agency, its mission, and its values. A third organizational challenge for t. S. A. Is to ensure it is continually fielding the tools and equipment the work force needs today while envisioning how to modernize our system and transform the traveling experience in the future. I see a future where advanced capabilities can transform the experience while preserving risk based security as a central feature. I think its possible in a an individuals buy row metric identity could become the boarding pass of the future. Linked to Intelligence Systems and requiring passage through an integrated capability design tore detect metallic and nonmetallic based threats. This can be realized with a suitable strategic approach. As such i commit myself to ensuring that t. S. Sarks a high performing, highly capable counterterrorism organization. Gided by a risk based strategy and employing a multilayered Intelligence Driven operation and that we recruit and retain a highly trained work force, one that harks the opportunity for Career Growth and development while placing a premium on professional values and accountability. That we pursue advanced capabilities with innovation and competition central to our way of thinking. And that t. S. A. Continues to strengthen its integration in the intelligence community, in the private sector, with our stakeholders and among d. H. S. And other state, local partners. And develop and lead the work force and adapt and invest appropriately and remain focused on these critical success factors. Finally throughout my years of service i remain aware of the need to balance desires for greater security with protection of the liberties and the rights that we cherish. Safeguarding Civil Liberties and privacy interests is a top priority and i look forward to working with this committee to enhance the safety of the traveling public and to achieve this balance. I am proud to see how the men and women of t. S. A. Each and every day and to have the privilege of serving with them in the defense of our country. Members of the committee, i thank you for the opportunity to be here today. And i look forward to your questions. Chairman mccaul thank you, admiral. I now recognize myself for questions. Admiral, you and i know al qaeda, particularly al qaeda in the arashian peninsula and the Corazon Group in syria are still very intent on hitting the aviation sector. Primarily flew bombs, specifically nonmetallic i. E. D. s. This led to a heightening of screening at 25 airports overseas. We have made some progress against them through strikes, recently taking out the leader of the Corazon Group. And others. But that threat is still there. And with this dismal report card that came in 96 failure rate. Given the threat thats out there, im concerned about the safety of the American People when they travel on airplanes. Not to mention that 73 aviation workers have potential ties to terrorism. Now, i cant get into all the details. Because it still remains classified in terms of what slipped through the cracks. But what are you doing what are you planning to do as the new t. S. A. Administrator to address this enormous failure . Administrator neffenger mr. Chairman thank you for the question. And youre absolutely correct to point out that this is a huge concern. And it greatly disturbs me to know that we had that fale youre rate at the checkpoint. As you know the checkpoint although not the only element system of our security is a critical part of security and the barrier between the sterile and nonsterile areas of an airport and a visible deterrent and the last chance to catch items that we do not want getting onboard aircraft. So as i look at the fill youre rate my immediate questions were the same ones that secretary johnson had. As you know that came out during my nomination and confirmation process. And i had a number of conversations with the secretary. He immediately ordered an establishment of a team to take hard look at the nature of the failures and what theyve done. So i inherited that theme. Ive seen the work that theyve done. And what i can do is ill speak directly to what that team is doing. But ill speak in more systemic terms of what its telling us about where our concerns are. As you know, ill begin by saying that covert testing is a is a net positive because you want to try to break your system of security on a daily basis to ensure that youve got it right. And it goes back to the need to continually adapt and evolve your organization. But when it breaks to the extent that we saw, that that raises some significant questions about how effective that youve been. So what the team has done is they took a hard look at exactly what the nature of each individual failure was. We looked case by case. Of the tests that the i. G. Did and the i. G. And i sat and talked with the i. G. Extensively about this. And theyve been quite open about sharing their results. We looked at the nature of the tests. And we looked to see is it a Technology Issue . Is it a Human Performance issue . Is it a process or procedure issue . And as you might suspect, it is in some cases some combination of those three those three elements. And then we looked to see whether there was whether there was a way to mitigate that. So that what the team has done over the past three months, is to take a part all of those. And you got a detailed brief and i would off to the committee a detailed brief on the specifics of that team. I think that it would be it would help you to understand how were moving forward. And then we looked at how how do we train out those specific failures . Because the immediate need is to train out those failures. So that we dont have a repeat of those. We are now in the process of doing that over the course of the next 60 days by the end of september. We will have trained the failure, the specifics about the failures to every frontline member of t. S. A. That will address the immediate problem. And i think that we can do that. The bigger question is, are there systemic issues in the way we are approaching our business that led to those failures in the first place . So that we what i doesnt want to see is some other set of failures in the future. I know that i can train to these. But im interested in figuring out how we train to the larger questions out there. And thats what were working on now. And that goes to a vision for how you then begin to think of yourself in this continuously evolving continuously adapting way. And as i said, the the thing to remember is that there is there are other elements of the system. Some of them virtual. Some other physical elements of the system. But the checkpoint is one of the most important. And we have to get that right. Chairman mccaul you talked about technology and vision for the future. And you and i have talked about this privately. It seems like we have precheck i think has been a success and global entry, more passenger friendly, nor risk based, which i think is where t. S. A. Should go. But as we look at the future, you have the checkpoint of the future. And the use of technologies. What is your vision for the next say five to 10 years . What will the experience be like . What is your goal for the traveling passenger . Administrator neffenger a wonderful question. Because as somebody who has traveled a lot over the years i know what checkpoints can feel like. When you get there. I do think that theres a vision for something in the future. One of the best terms i heard recently was security at the speed of life. And i like that. There are a number of interesting and innovative ideas out there. I mentioned one in my opening statement. The idea that you are your boarding pass. And if i can tie you biometrically to a reservation and identification and do it in a verified way, then then one, that moves you through the process faster. We eliminate boarding passes. And every airline has a different style of boarding pass and makes it very challenging for those document checkers to check those. Because theyre looking at something different. Theres not a lot of consistency there. So i think we can eliminate the boarding pass and move to integrated technology that does. And right now, theres a challenge because the a. I. T. Machines dont do metal detection. Metal detectors dont do nonmetallic explosives. And nothing sniffs for explosives as you go through. Ive actually seen prototypes of machines that you can walk through and it does all of that in one. Now, can they be fielded effectively . I dont know. I think this goes back to your earlier question about competition. I think we can do more to incentivize competition in the private sector. I am currently right now tied to a process that has me buying a lot of equipment that may be obsolete shortly after i buy it. I have to adapt continuously to a changing threat. I looked at the way the department of defense has periodically incentivized competition in the private sector to come up with new ideas. I think theres ways to do that. I would love to have more conversations with this committee on ways that we can do that. Ways that we can use or modify some of our acquisition practices and policies to allow us to do that. Chairman mccaul well, i look forward to working with you on that. And thank you for your testimony. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member. Ranking member thompson thank you very much, mr. Neffenger your comments clearly are a breath of fresh air. And i think the chairman will agree with me on that. Weve passed a modernization of acquisition, legislation to kind of give the department of the department a freer rein. One of the challenges we have is the culture that weve always done it this way. So we buy technology being t. S. A. , that we already know does not address the emerging threat. But because this is how we do, many in congress have raised their question a number of times. Im glad to see you willing to say how can we get out of this . C. I. A. Nasa, some of the other agencies, they have vehicles that they use to incentivize the acquisition of new technology. Some of it is you you create a you purchase participation with those companies so they can continue development. We tried that for quite a while. And i want to talk to you a little bit about that. Going forward. But as we talk about technology lets talk about how we do processes. The manager Inclusion Program and some of us have had real problems with it. It appears that the issue became how can we get people through the checkpoint faster rather than how can we guarantee that those people who go through have actually been vetted . So were at cross purposes. How do you see the Department Working on this managed Inclusion Program . Administrator neffenger well, thanks for your question. I agree completely with you. I would like to see us and in fact ive ordered a phasing out of the managed Inclusion Program. Because the goal is to have a fully vetted population in the Precheck Program. The more i know i want known people, people i trust going through the program. Thats that is really the heart of riskbased security. Is i want to separate out a known population from the ones i dont know anything about. And i want to make the experience less less intrusive for the known population. One that reduces the burden on the agency. Im paying attention to the things i need to Pay Attention to versus people that ive already vetted. So i think we have to phase out managed inclusion because it introduces i think a perhaps a higher level of risk than we want in the system. And grow the use of passenger detecting or passenger screening canines. The explosive detection dogs that we have out there. That is they are a tremendous asset. And were looking to were looking to expand that program slightly. And to reposition some of the some of the canine teams that we have in locations that are lower risk to higher risk locations. But more importantly, i want to look to ive were working on a request for a proposal to put out the option for private sector third Party Screeners to help us do the initial marketing and collection of people into the Precheck Program. Ive had a number of conversations with travel aggregators. With credit card companies. And the like. And i think that theres an opportunity to expand that bree check population. The known population, enrolled population. Over the near term. And so im encouraged by the opportunity and hopingi am encouraged by the opportunity. I hope this request for proposal generates a lot of competition in the private sector. And then to grow that population. And then to move people that are already screen, like we did with military members and others, that have already had that ground checks, that already have biometrics on file, into the Precheck Program based on their ongoing clearance