Hearing of the House Armed Services subcommittee of readiness of the House Armed Services subcommittee on the continued oversight of the transfer of excess military equipment to civilian Law Enforcement agencies to order. I would like to begin by recognizing the dedicated service of our readiness secretary clerk. This will be her last official event for our subcommittee and i want to personally thank her for her contributions to our efforts in the past year. I wish her the best of luck as she moves forward with future endeavors. Thank you, jody. [applause] mr. Wilson one of the objectives of the subcommittee is to bring attention to matters that impact the overall readiness of the department of defense, that includes management challenges and budget implications that could be administrated more efficiently. We want to ensure necessary oversight to ensure our armed forces achieve the highest levels of readiness possible. Given the current threats facing our nation and the budgetary pressure placed on the department of defense, accountability is always paramount and every dollar counts. Rigorous oversight can make sure mistakes dont happen, and when they inevitably do, we learn lessons from missteps. For this reason, im very grateful we have convened this hearing today on the recent Government Accountability office gao report highlighting deficiencies found with the management and operation of the Law Enforcement support within the Defense Logistics Agency. Is responsible for the 1033 program, which has provided valuable resources to federal, state and local Law Enforcement agencies since 1991. These necessary items have contributed to Law Enforcement ability to conduct counter narcotics, counterterrorism, counter narcotics and Border Security missions throughout the United States and in short, items are and insure items already paid for by the taxpayer continue to serve the citizens of United States. Earlier this month, the gao lesot stated the inappropriately assigned more than 100 controlled items with an estimated value of 1. 2 million. This reveals efficiencies in the process for verification and approval of Law EnforcementAgency Applications and the transfer of control property. The department of defense dla leso program must improve its monitoring, management and administration of this critical and important program. I read the gao recommendations very carefully and applaud dla for taking a proactive approach to addressing the shortfalls and immediately acknowledging, let me say enough, immediately acknowledging, the problems identified. I look forward to hearing what progress the dla has made in continuing to remedy these various deficiencies, but our oversight tends to ensure taxpayer dollars are used responsibility, security is maintained for sensitive items and accountability of equipment is never taken for granted. Our panel will address the findings and recommendations of the gao report as well as the actions taken by dla to correct identified deficiencies. I now turn to our very valued breaking colleague from guam for her introductory comments. Del. Bordallo thank you, mr. Chairman, for calling this important hearing on the recent gao on the gao report on the dod program also known as the 1033 program. Thank you also to our four witnesses for being here today for what i expect to be an insightful discussion. Let me begin that i understand the value of the 1033 program. It allows Law Enforcement agencies to fill critical equipment shortfalls at little to no additional cost to the payer, leveraging access excess dod property. Many of these items are noncontrolled, can be purchased at any of the Office Supply r Furniture Store and help alleviate budgetary stress, particular on local agencies, but this can also be controlled property, items that are sensitive in nature and cannot be released to the general public, such as firearms and militarygrade imagery technologies. That is what makes the gao report particularly concerning. Not only does it highlight the negligence with which dla treated property procured with taxpayer dollars but it demonstrates a dangerous vulnerability that could compromise the safety of the American People. So i am particularly appreciative that gao conducted this operation and delivered this report, because it brings to light these older abilities vulnerabilities and allows us to conduct critical oversight on the handling of equipment to ensure reforms are in place to better secure the transfer program. I am deeply disturbed, however, by the prospect that a malicious individual or organization could procure dod property, especially controlled items. Understanding this is likely the result of a combination of issues, including inadequate protocols and safeguards, insufficient training and potential cultural errors, i expect to dig down on how this program to be reformed. So i do look forward to the discussion this morning and hope we can come away with clear objectives and steps forward to ensure the program has the proper safeguards and accountability in place. Mr. Chairman, i thank you again for holding this important meeting and i yield back. Mr. Wilson thank you. We are pleased to recognize our witnesses today. I want to thank them for taking the time to be with us. We have the director of defense capabilities in management of the Government Accountability office. The director of forensic audits and Investigative Services of Government Accountability office. The Deputy Director of Logistics Operations of the Defense Logistics Agency. And the director of the Defense Logistics Agency dispositions services. We will begin with statements from each organization. We will begin, very appropriately, with the Government Accountability office. Ms. Merritt chairman wilson, Ranking Member and numbers of the subcommittee, they given the opportunity to be here today with my colleague. Our testimony today summarizes key findings from our july 2017 report on dod Access Control excess control property and addresses how federal, state and local enforcement agencies reported using and benefiting from the property, and the way in which the dla has taken actions to enhance processes, including internal controls related to the transfer of such property. Dod has no authority to transfer excess personal property to federal, state, and local authorities. Dla administers the Law Enforcement support program for dod. During calendar years 2013 through 2015, dod has reported transferring approximately 1. 1 billion of excess control property to Law Enforcement agencies. Control property typically involves sensitive equipment and items that cannot be released to the public such as detonation robots, small arms and ambush protected vehicles. Law enforcement officials we surveyed and interviewed cited a number of ways in which they have benefited from the program, with several reporting the transfers of control property allows them to save money. The reported uses include enhancing counter drug and counterterrorism activity, search and rescue, Natural Disaster response and police training. Dla has taken action to enhance processes for the program and responds to past recommendations made by gao. Dla has taken steps to address previously identified weaknesses in its processes and procedures, mostly at state and local levels. In our july report, we note that witnesses at the federal area in three levels, verifying and approving applications, transferring property, and three, assessment of risk. Through creating a fictitious federal agency, we gained access attainedogram and controlled items worth 1. 2 million. Including night goggles, simulated rifles and simulated pipe bombs. Which could be lethal when modified with commercial items. Specific weaknesses highlighted in our report include internal dlas internal controls for verifying approving federal Agency Applications and enrollment in programs were not adequate. Specifically, lesos reliance on Electronic Communications without verifications so they cannot properly vet applicants. Second, we identified deficiencies in the transfer of properties, such as dla personnel not routinely verifying identification of individuals picking up property. Third, while dla has taken some steps to address, identify these deficiencies in the program, they lack a conference a framework for instituting for our prevention and mitigation measures at all stages of the process. Dla officials acknowledge that they have not conducted a fraud Risk Assessment. Overall, we concluded in our report that dlas current controls do not provide reasonable assurance in preventing fraud. Therefore, we made four recommendations to dla. One, review and revise policy or procedures for verifying and approving applicants. Two, ensure dispensation services, verify that persons picking up items have valid credentials. Three, guidance that requires Disposition Services officials to verify the quantities and types of items picked up beforehand. Lastly, conduct a fraud Risk Assessment to design and implement a strategy with control internal strategies to mitigate and prevent fraud. Dod concurred with our recommendations and highlighted actions to address each one. Chairman wilson, Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee, that concludes my prepared statement. My colleague and i would be happy and pleased to respond to any questions you may have. Mr. Wilson thank you very much. Indeed, your professionalism is very, very impressive. Mr. Mcelrath, would you like to have a presentation . Thank you very much. We now proceed to the logistics agency, mr. Scott. Mr. Scott mr. Chairman, member, committee members, thank you for allowing me to be here today to discuss the execution of the 1033 program, also known as the Law Enforcement support office program. Scott, Deputy Director, dla Logistics Operations. With me is mr. Mike cannon, the director of dispensation services for dla. We appreciate the opportunity to discuss the july 2017 gao report on department of defense excess property and advise you of the actions we have taken to further strengthen our process. Dla Disposition Services is a Field Service of dla is , responsible for the final disposition of excess property received from military services. Dla Disposition Services also administers and executes the 1033 programs through their leso. About 7500 federal, state and local Law Enforcement across the 50 states and u. S. Territories actively participate in the program. 30 federal Agency Headquarters are currently enrolled. These are the higher headquarters to the 345 federal Law Enforcement activities participating in the program. Dla has worked extensively over the last several years to improve the state and local side of the program, which is 96 of total participation. When the gaos recent review did evaluate recent enhancements in the state and local program, it also highlighted on her abilities in the federal program. Dla takes the findings very seriously and is actively addressing and correcting the deficiencies. In september, 2015, dla began a focused improvement effort to strengthen our federal program. We have implemented robust controls in our federal program, which already exist in our state program. Specifically, we have addressed revised our procedures for verifying and approving federal Agency Applications for enrollment. First, dla now requires an executivelevel representative in the federal agency designate a point of contact in writing. This poc will validate and enforce all enrollment applications and all equipment requests for field activities. Second, dla now requires the poc to sign a memorandum of understanding outlining and accepting the responsibilities for management of their program. We have certain sent all current 30 agencies, and 12 authority returned it. Third, dla will visit each headquarters and meet with poc and confirm eligibility. As of today, we have visited 22 federal headquarters. Additionally, dla has strengthened the internal approval process for enrolling federal agencies. First, we have designated a federal le a liaison to manage the application process. Second, dla will utilize the Fbis National Crime Information Center database to verify the legitimacy of all organizations. Finally, the leso Program Manager is now required to approve all federal applications as a second internal review. With regard to the gao findings, ive processed weakness for customer verification identity and the type of property issued, we have taken the following actions. First, we immediately conducted remedial training at sites. Sites visited. Second, we mandated enforcement training at all 103 of our disposition sites, we are 50 complete on this aggressive effort and are on track to finish two months ahead of schedule. Third, we added this topic as an emphasis item to our existing compliance program, which includes, among other things, no notice spot inspections and a dla headquarters management in response to the gao fraud Risk Assessment, dla headquarters specifically, our Inspector General office and my logistics directorate will lead the effort with participation by Disposition Services. Dla has made significant enhancements to improve its internal controls in the 1033 program. We remain committed to Continuous Process Improvement to ensure we provide the best possible support to Law Enforcement agencies and their critical mission. Chairman wilson, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, we thank you for the opportunity to discuss this important issue here today and are prepared to answer any questions you have. Mr. Wilson mr. Cannon . Mr. Cannon mr. Scott spoke on mr. Wilson it is amazing that behalf of the agency. An agency acknowledged that an error occurred and is taking a positive response. We appreciate your service. I am grateful today that we have really talented members of the subcommittee here, people who are really dedicated to the American People. So many of them are here that we are going to strictly follow the fiveminute rule. We have the talented drew warren. He will keep the fiveminute rule, beginning with me. We will proceed right away. How did you determine the specific vulnerabilities you assessed the led to the decision that the control measures by using a fictitious agency, how did you determine that . We appreciate you being proactive. Ms. Merritt while we were conducting some of our fieldwork in some of the states, we reviewed some of the names of the applicants, and as we were reviewing the names of applicants, we noticed one applicant that had a title that did not seem to be a legitimate agency. While doing that, we questioned dla and they acknowledged that was an entity in which they had been investigating and continue to investigate. That was one of the key triggers for this, as well as we have made a number of recommendations over the years to tighten controls and we wanted to ensure that some of these recommendations were properly implemented. My colleagues probably will have a little bit to add to that response. Based on the information we received from our defense capabilities team, we formulated a plan to create a fictitious Law Enforcement entity and created an online presence. After that, we submitted an application to dla for approval. We went through their online enrollment process and actually went on their online ordering system to acquire goods. Mr. Wilson that is amazing. We all appreciate you being proactive. Additionally, how you how do you assess the defense logistics and how does this compare to what you initially found the beginning of your investigation last year in 2016 . Ms. Merritt we briefed dla continuously on the progress of our work including the inspector , generals office. In may, we had a formal meeting with them where we fully disclosed our findings to them. At that point in time, they told us about some respective actions they had started relating to the application. For example, they have modified their application. As the review continued, they also have begun developing memorandums of understanding at that time. In short, a number of actions were already commencing. As we continue and got closer to the end, and they realize we had in fact posed as a fictitious organization and obtained items, then they also noted that there were additional actions they were going to take in order to close those particular gaps in their process. Mr. Wilson thank you. For mr. Scott, your service for the security of American Families is very important with the 1033 program. What is the process for Law Enforcement agencies to obtain controlled items, what additional steps in the authorization process for obtaining the items has been considered in light of the Government Accountability office s investigation . Mr. Scott our process previous to finding out what they were able to accomplish required that mr. Cannons Organization Work directly with the federal law agencies. There was an application that had to be filed. They had to provide statutes of authority. Senior agents in charge had to find those applications to be able to get into the program. As you have heard, our controls were not adequate. We recognize that. We started our efforts to improve the federal Program Prior to the gao starting their effort and i will say, immediately, i think the first meetings we had with them were in march of 2017 when we learned what they were able to do in their investigation. By april 3, we had implemented those additional things you have heard about. Those include, now that we get an executive level sponsorship from the federal agency. We have a poc identified going forward, we visit the organizations to validate. We are now going to use the fbi database to ensure the organization is correctly loaded there and is legitimate. Those are all things we have added and we believe those processes will prevent this from happening in the future, mr. Chairman. Mr. Wilson and those are very responsible safeguards. I believe there were three recommendations. Is there still one pending to be acted upon . Yes, there is. Mr. Scott mentioned that they to scheduling with the oig do the fraud Risk Assessment. Mr. Wilson thank you very much. Councilwoman. Del. Bordallo the gao recommendations included strengthening internal rituals internal controls and reviewing authorization protocols. Given what we know now, what is your level of confidence that such a violation will not happen again, and secondly recognizing the only 4 to 7 of transfers should the dla suspend the program until the problems are fixed . You have stated that changes have been made, but we would not be here if there was not still a problem. Will it happen again or should we suspend the program until changes have been made . First of all, the control measures we have in place, i am confident will preclude this from happening again. As mr. Scott alluded to, we now require very similar to the tight controls we had implemented at the state and local procedures, a federal executive appointment of their poc, a facetoface visit to , ande they are compliant as a backup, the ncic database check to verify the are a valid agency. With those controls in place, i am confident this will not happen again. Del. Bordallo all right, second part of my question . Mr. Cannon in march when we got an out brief and discussed this with the gao, i immediately suspended the release of all property to federal agencies until we could put these controls in place. Those controls included a memorandum of understanding, which we had began developing over a year ago. That memorandum of understanding was finalized by dla in summer of 2016, and until the agencies complete the new requirements, i do not release additional property. Del. Bordallo you dont think the program should be suspended . Is that in essence what you are saying . Cannon, dod respondent to dla has a policy requiring onsite officials to request and verify identification from all customers. What, if any, disciplinary actions have been taken against the individuals and the supervisors responsible for oversight and training who approved the fictitious application for enrollment in the Law Enforcement support office program, approved the request to property or conduct of the transfer of property without following proper procedures . How is dla determining who is responsible . Mr. Cannon we are looking at our records to determine the type of property that was released and where it was released so we can determine as best we can the individual or individuals responsible. Prior to that, as soon as we identified the locations that the property came from, we immediately conducted remedial training for every person on site for the control measures we had a place that were not followed. We have also added additional emphasis on our controls when we do our semiannual self inspection, when we do our biannual compliance reviews, when i do my no notice site visits and when the headquarters comes down to do their visits as well. Anytime an individual is found whose either behavior or performance is not up to we take appropriate corrective actions depending on the circumstances. Del. Bordallo what kind of disciplinary action would you take . Are you releasing the people . Changing their positions or what . Mr. Cannon i have a range of actions i could take depending on the circumstances and condition. I have taken actions for infractions everywhere from a letter of counseling to dismissal. The range is open, depending on the situation, maam. Del. Bordallo one quick question. Ms. Merritt, while the majority of your report focused on the application approval and transfer of property, you can you provide insight into what you observed with respect to accountability and tracking of controlled property both at the , disposition sites as well as once transferred to a federal, state, or local Law Enforcement agency . I dont have much time left. Ms. Merritt at the federal level, we did observe one case in which one federal organization in d. C. Was not aware of how much property had been transferred to that agency or to its respective activities in the field. That was quickly remedied when they contacted them, they were able to obtain a list and halt temporarily halted any approvals at that time. At the local and state sites themselves, that actually went pretty well because they have a state coordinator. All of the processes were being double checked. Unlike the federal level, there were more checks and balances. I yield back. We now proceed to councilman austin scott of georgia. You said that you recognize recognized the problem prior to the examination. Correct. When did you recognize the problem . We started our efforts in september 2015. We began by bringing in federal agencies for more training to ensure they knew how to work with the program. That quickly led to the development of the memorandum of understanding. At the point when we heard in march of 2017, the investigative, what had happened as you heard we quickly moved to implement additional procedures. You said your efforts began in 2015. When did you first recognize that you had a problem . We recognized that the control measures in place for the federal agencies were not as robust for the state agencies as we discussed the federal program with the participants. You recognized the problem in 2015. You did not expedite those actions until the gao report. Correct. Most of the items on these boards are not legal items. What have the control is been fire with a have been different if they had been firearms or a lethal item . We have additional application process in place for items such as weapons and Armored Vehicles and aircraft, so there is a more thorough investigation process they wouldve had to go through for those items. The difference in the threshold, is it based on the cost of the item . What leads to the additional measures . When we did our risk analysis internally, we determined in conjunction with guidance from the White House Committee and the white house review Permanent Working group that extra controls were in place. We have always had asked her controls in place for weapons and aircraft. And so it would be potentially somebody used something fake to obtain something from the government and then turn around and sell it on ebay or at a pond shop or something along those lines . Do we have any idea what happened to the items or the value of the items . The items from the gao report . The ones that occurred prior to you recognizing that something happened for you to recognize that you had a problem , that items go to was there misrepresentation, theft of items . Looked over control measures we noticed they were not as stringent as the control measures we had in place for the state and local programs, so our efforts were to make the programs more similar in levels of control. Not that anything had gone out but to prevent things from going out. So but you do not believe that anybody misrepresented something to obtain something for free or at a discount and then turn around and sell it for a profit . I have no knowledge of that happening. Do we know where the items are . We know where all of the items from the gao report are, yes, sir. Chairmanhat said, mr. That pretty much answers the , questions that i had. I am happy that we know where the items are and i appreciate the additional measures being put in place. It is an important program. I will tell you, i know a lot of the discussions involving the program revolve around larger equipment. I know a sheriff deputy very well that stepped out of the bearcat. As he stepped out of it, buckshot hit the window and had he been in a normal squad car, he wouldnt be with us today so i hope that we continue this program. Make sure we get our Law Enforcement officers the equipment they need to do their job. Thank you very much. For your insight, and your personal view. We are grateful to precede to councilman Anthony Brown of maryland. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate that you and the Ranking Member have convened and convened this hearing to look into this important issue. My question really goes to a little bit of a broader look at the 1033 program, in response to protests in ferguson. Following the killing of michael brown, president obama created a dod and Justice Department group to ensure oversight according to the constitution. That group has not met since january of this year under the new administration. In fact, President Trump intends to rescind the previous executive order that ensured training for a equipment acquisition and that is of concern to me. I am concerned that the transfer of Armored Vehicles and firearms as well as other controlled items makes our police stations look more like Foreign Operating bases. It would unsettle me to see Armored Vehicles patrolling the andets of prince Georges Anne Arundel county. Does the agency take into account the actual or potential threat that a Community Faces prior to delivering these military style equipment . Congressman, we actively support that Permanent Working group. Dla, our vice director is the lead on that group. That group looks very closely at the categorization of items in which things would be prohibited. Which things should be controlled. They completed another look at of 2016 goingber into this fiscal year and we take that very seriously. When we take the applications, we apply the decisions made from that working group on what is allowed for us to execute. That group when they made those determinations in those categories, they brought in a number of different folks to have those discussions that included experts on the use of those type of weapons, it included Civil Liberties leaders, it included Law Enforcement leaders if i can jump in. Can this small city of Seat Pleasant in prince georges know, with, i do not 12,000 residents, acquire the same equipment that the city of baltimore can obtain or do you do some sort of Risk Assessment, potential threat training, capabilities of the local Law Enforcement agencies . All requirements have to pass through a state coordinator. Mr. Cannons group also reviews that. They review it also against the sides of that force and a number of items that they are allowed to have. The training for the items is that goes back on the Law Enforcement community. To you require the training . We require they train and show that they have done that. I just have a little bit of time left. Dla efforts, if any, is the taking to work not only with local Law Enforcement but also alongside Community Members . Alongside Community Members. You mentioned Community Members through the transfer process. One of the requirements that we have levied on the program for the state and local agencies is that before they receive property from us they must be approved by their governing body so whether that is the state or county but whoever oversees that body must approve not only their participation in the program but their withdrawal of property. Pleasant city council . Correct, if they are in the program right. One final thought followup. Are there any restrictions on transferring equipment under the 1033 program when the local Law Enforcement agency is under investigation by the doj for any violation of civil rights . And is that addressed in consent orders that they handful that are currently in place . We coordinate with the department of justice and any time they have concerns with the department, we restrict the transfer of property to that department until they tell us otherwise. It is not you evaluate whether it ought to be restricted, or if there is a violation you restrict . Doj evaluates and then advise advises us to restrict. Thank you, i yelled back. Yield back. Thank you. We now proceed to congresswoman Vicky Hartzler of missouri. I appreciate the work from the dla and addressing this. Please discuss the process for a Law Enforcement agency to obtain controlled items. What other steps in authorization process for obtaining these items are being considered in light of the gaos investigation . The process that we have in place for our states and local locals is a similar process we have already implemented for the federal government that somebody wants to withdraw property that has to go through , the state or federal coordinator to improve that they need it. We also have apportionment rules. We give preference to counter drug counterterrorism and Border Patrol responsibilities but for raps, and we also look at the local ability for Law Enforcement agencies that provide mutual support and if there is mutual support available from another close by Law Enforcement agency we will , so we willn them not give the county and the city both a if they are in the same location. For weapons we authorize one per paid and for vehicles it is typically one vehicle on armored like a humvee for every three officers. Given the gao created fictitious Law Enforcement agency that was approved, how do they plan to reevaluate the Law Enforcement agencies that are currently enrolled in the program to ensure each enrollment is verified as being legitimate and an eligible Law Enforcement agency and how long will this process take and what impact will it have on approving new applications . For the federal side of the program as we discussed earlier , all of those are suspended until they come forward and comply with our new procedures prc, and our confirming their identities and in the fbi database. We think those requirements are both sounded to ensure integrity to the program and then there are also reasonable on the state side of the program, we also intend to be proactive and go back and retroactively look at every single one of those organizations against the fbi database as well, just to ensure that we do not have anything else there. Great, and the gao report mentions an annual training conference for state coordinators and representative brown talked about the training and that the state court our state coordinators take this training within the state. If this training is provided , why are Law Enforcement agencies reporting the need for more training on at iso Program Policy is and why did you feel the need to develop an Online Training tool why does this training vary within the state . So we do an annual conference it is actually next month. We trained and advised the state coordinators on the policy and in the state coordinators are responsible to train some states do that better than others. We have developed online trading to assist. We offer over the phone or skype a needs to knowle how to get into the program. We also have job aids which are checklists to help them do the stepbystep procedures. We go to every state to review their program and inventory a large number of their property. We provide training as required while we happened to be there visiting that lea. Will Online Training replace training that the state may have . Is it either or . Or is it to supplement . It is to supplement. We are also going to take when we conduct the fraud Risk Assessment. We have noted the number ofleas that require training. We are going to make that part of what we look at. Thank you very much. It sounds like you are taking very proactive steps and we appreciate you doing that. I yield back. Thank you very much. We now proceed to congresswoman carol porter of new hampshire. Thank you very much. Concerned, like everybody is here, about this but i am puzzled because it seems that there is more more red tape to open a doughnut shop than there is to get this equipment, or there was. And i am puzzled as to how the rules and regulations could have been so loose that they were able to create a fictitious agency to receive material so can you please walk me back to the beginning who drafted these regulations that allowed because as i listen to you and you know, isay am glad you are doing that, that now you have identified the point of contact and you have all these steps here but common , sense says they should have been there at the beginning. And so i would like you to walk me that to the very beginning who drafted this obviously, with , so many holes in it that it was possible to do this and who else and i also would , like to see that the people who drafted this clearly are not confident enough to handle this work. So im not comfortable with the example of well, we are going to , go back and we have several possibilities. This is a question of competence. This is a serious job and they failed the people of this country and so i would appreciate your comments on that. At 1033 Program Management was transferred to Defense Logistics Agencys Disposition Services in very late 2008 through and we completed the transfer in 2009 and we are following procedures from there the procedures that we had in place of hiring the completion gao andficient by the we have since made improvements. The application wasnt immediately approved. There was some backandforth between gao and my staff and it , took several months before the application was approved and it was approved but should not have been. We have tightened up those procedures since then. I will add, congresswoman, we view it just a seriously. The other things that have been reviewed and again our view of those controls was that working directly with us federal organizations and the things he went through that we did have the controls in place. That clearly is not the case. But the program is also been reviewed by other external folks as well. There have been previous gao reports. We have had an independent it doesnt make it any better it doesnt make it any better review of the program by the rand corporation. There have been previous gao reports. We have had an independent rand corporation. It doesnt make it any better but the external reviews also did not identify these deficiencies now that we know them, we are all over it to make sure it never happens again. I appreciate your honesty and your comment but is still doesnt cover the basic problem. I read something about how they are going to have to show an identification. So can you tell me what was meant by that that they didnt have to show an identification . When somebody comes to a Disposition Services site to pick up property they are not an employee of Disposition Services, everyone is required to present identification and follow signing procedures and we have always had is measures in place. In this case those measures were not adequately followed so what i have done since then is i immediately at the three locations because i dont know the specifics because the gao report didnt identify them but we are able to figure out the locations they went to. We immediately conducted remedial training to ensure they were following the protocols that are already in place and then we started, i actually brought my about this facetoface in the first second week of july and gave them 30 days to train every single individual every single employee and Disposition Services are following the proper procedures for identification of personnel and counting count and quality we have about 50 of our sites complete and we will be complete. Emphasizing the need to follow the established procedures. And i appreciate that but again these are not toys and these were rules and regulations that were violated and could have wound up in a very serious outcome. And so i think just speaking to them is not enough. They had a responsibility to follow this protocol which was weak enough as it was and so i am still want to know what happened besides you guys shouldnt have done that . Of the moment mr. Cannon is able to identify who those individuals are. Our agency and his organization have a president and are prepared to take the appropriate administrative disciplinary action and that can be anything from suspensions without pay to removal from the position. Thank you and i yield back. Thank you. We appreciate your service and we now proceed to congressman Donald Mceachin of richmond. Thank you. Many of my questions have been touched on so i am going to ask one that might be more nuanced. When you all dispose of controlled properties such as the items that we have been talking about, and lets assume that you are going to local Law Enforcement requested it do you take into consideration what in that area at the time . For instance if there are , tensions between the local citizens and the Police Department or anything like that , or do you just sort of just those of the property in accordance with whatever guidelines you have in place . If we have a request from Law Enforcement agencies that request for property has to be first approved by the local governing body, so the state city council. Then that has to go to a state coordinator who has to approve the request and then when that , request comes to us we will issue property if the property is available. If property is not issued to the department of defense who has First Priority and to our special programs who have Second Property isen that then destroyed. Let me follow up on that and ask a question may a slightly different way assuming that it has been approved by the governing body then submitted to you by the state liaison are there any circumstances in which you say, you know, no city of richmond you are just not going , to get this property for whatever reason . We have priority of property to counter drug Border Protection and counter d protection. So, if there are multiple requests that will determine which gets it but we also if the fbi tells us that they have concerns and advises us then we do not issue to that. The other thing congressman is we also have allocation limits, too. So that in terms of the quantity of those types of items that they can have, the size of the organization, that is another thing that can limit how much of these controlled items eight unit can get. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you very much. We now have a final question. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We have heard that dla described the actions that they have taken and that they believe they have taken appropriate actions to fix the problem. My question to you is how would you assess the actions both in response to your recommendations and other steps that they have taken . We have assessed those actions as positive steps in the right direction. We cannot emphasize enough that we believe that top leadership and Senior Leadership at dla is imperative in order for those recommendations to be implemented. We continuously follow up on the limitation of the on the implementation of the recommendations and we will do so at this point in time and often time in our reporting on programs we do include those status reports. Statuses are also published on our public website as well, so you as well as the public at large have opportunities to look at the progress that is being made by dla on those recommendations. So i take it that you are satisfied with what they are doing now . But you are going to be closely monitoring it in the future. Is that correct . Yes. The steps as it relates to the recommendations that we have are all steps that we have proposed. They also established timelines in their comments to us on the report. So, that is also very important as to whether or not they need they meet those milestones and hopefully those will be , immediate milestones. With respect their we do and sowith respect their we do continue to follow, as i said, and if there are problems, we do note that. I yield back. Thank you back. As we conclude the program is so important to help provide security for American Families. Could you tell the American People that is how many state, local, federal agencies that you work with what is the value of , surplus equipment that you provide . We have 8621 agencies in the program. We have the property on the books of those folks for the program is over 1. 5 million pieces of equipment valued over 2. 4 billion in original acquisition value that is the good that we are providing. Thank you for restating that. It is so important the American People know that. We appreciate a Government Accountability office, your success in working with the dla. At this time, we shall adjourn and we thank all of you for being here today. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] washington journal live every day with news and issues that impact you. We focus on the senates efforts to repeal and replace the Nations Health care law. Join the discussion. Coming up live on cspan3, former white house ethics director discussing the six months he worked in the Trump Administration and his decision to resign. Then, a discussion about iranian Public Opinion after the president ial election there in may, the nuclear agreement, and the Trump Administration. Later, a conversation of the importance of the u. S. Japan military alliance at 2 30. You can follow these at cspan3, cspan. Org, and the free cspan radio app. Sunday on cspan3 am a looking at two u. S. President s. At 6 00 p. M. Eastern, john f. Kennedys life in photos. The wonderful thing about the never pushedhey photographers or writers away. They did not care how they were photographed, whether the tie was fixed, the coat was off they knew if they made themselves accessible to the media they would be published. Of course, it was a groundswell. That the Media Coverage of jfk was the first time we had seen anything like it. That is followed by looking Ronald Reagans relationship with john paul ii. Paul ii said to reagan when he was shot im praying for you. Letter to the vatican, im praying for you. Date created the most exclusive prayer society. American history tv every weekend on cspan3. Investorfinancier and on government corruption in russia. Lawyer diedussian after he investigated fraud involving tax officials. Act was signed by president obama that blocked russian officialsss