Hearings
Hearing Type:
Open
Date & Time:
Tuesday, August 2, 2022 - 2:30pm
Location:
Hart 216
Witnesses
Full Transcript
[Senate Hearing 117-598]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-598
OPEN HEARING:
ON THE NOMINATION OF TERRENCE L. EDWARDS
TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE
NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
OF THE
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
AUGUST 2, 2022
__________
Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
50-077 WASHINGTON : 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
(Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong. 2d Sess.)
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia, Chairman
MARCO RUBIO, Florida, Vice Chairman
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
RON WYDEN, Oregon JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico SUSAN COLLINS, Maine
ANGUS KING, Maine ROY BLUNT, Missouri
MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado TOM COTTON, Arkansas
BOB CASEY, Pennsylvania JOHN CORNYN, Texas
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York BEN SASSE, Nebraska
CHUCK SCHUMER, New York, Ex Officio
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio
JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma, Ex Officio
----------
Michael Casey, Staff Director
Brian Walsh, Minority Staff Director
Kelsey Stroud Bailey, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
AUGUST 2, 2022
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Warner, Hon. Mark R., a U.S. Senator from Virginia............... 1
Rubio, Hon. Marco, a U.S. Senator from Florida................... 2
WITNESS
Edwards, Terrence I., Nominee to be Inspector General of the
National Reconnaissance Office................................. 3
Prepared Statement........................................... 6
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees............ 20
Additional Prehearing Questions.................................. 30
Posthearing Questions............................................ 42
OPEN HEARING: ON THE NOMINATION OF TERRENCE L. EDWARDS TO BE INSPECTOR
GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE
----------
TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Select Committee on Intelligence,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in
Room SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark R. Warner,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Warner (presiding), Rubio, Wyden,
Heinrich, King, Bennet, Casey, and Sasse.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK R. WARNER, A U.S. SENATOR FROM
VIRGINIA
Chairman Warner. I want to call this hearing to order and
thank you for being here today.
Mr. Edwards, congratulations on your nomination to be the
Inspector General for the National Reconnaissance Office, the
NRO. You have an impressive background, both within the IC and
at DOD, which I believe makes you well qualified for this
important position.
I believe that Cristan Farmer, your longtime partner, is
here, and I would like to acknowledge her.
Let me just recognize that Mr. Terrence Edwards has served
the United States as a federal employee for almost two decades.
As an attorney for the U.S. Army and the National Security
Agency; as Deputy General Counsel for Management in the Office
of the Director of National Intelligence; and as Chief of Staff
for the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence,
Stacey Dixon.
Intelligence Community IGs are important source of
independent oversight of the Intelligence Community. Both
Congress and the Executive Branch rely on IGs to assist their
respective agencies in evaluating performance and identifying
areas for improvement. Perhaps no responsibility is more
important than ensuring lawful whistle-blowers are aware of
their right to provide information about wrongdoing, to
authorize recipients and are protected from reprisal for doing
so.
The NRO's classified budget is significant. And the NRO
Inspector General plays a vital oversight role in detecting and
hopefully deterring any fraud, waste, or abuse within the NRO.
This is important as this budget is classified and therefore
not subject to public scrutiny. As we conduct our oversight of
the NRO, this Committee also relies on an independent and
strong NRO IG to identify programs that may need improvement or
cost savings may be found. Congress and the American people
must have full confidence that their findings, and your
findings when I hope you're going to be confirmed, are
objective, independent, and entirely confirmed by facts.
You should also know that if confirmed, you will have very
big shoes to fill. Your predecessor Susan Gibson was in the job
for more than five years before her recent retirement, and she
ran a tight ship. She was admired by the IG community for
integrity and professionalism, as well as for specific
expertise in intelligence and procurement law and policy. I
note that she has written a letter expressing your strong
support for your confirmation, which speaks volumes to your
qualifications for this job.
I've reviewed the material provided by you prior to this
confirmation hearing. I'm confident that you're a person of
high integrity and well qualified for the job.
Thank you, again, for being here today. And for your years
of service to our country. I look forward to your testimony.
I now recognize the Vice Chairman.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, A U.S. SENATOR FROM
FLORIDA
Vice Chairman Rubio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Mr. Edwards, for being here. First of all, thank you for your
willingness to serve, and congratulations on your nomination.
You know, what's interesting about the Intelligence Community
writ large is the only area of government where the public
basically trusts these oversight committees in the House and
Senate, and the men and women who serve in the role you're
about to serve as the full extent of the oversight over what
happened.
Because of the nature of their work, their budgets are
often classified--their activities as well. And so that's it,
obviously. This Committee, the House counterpart, and folks
like yourself that serve in that role of oversight over the
Community. So, it's really important in particular that the
Community--that the agency that you will be in this role as
Inspector General at the NRO, which is the premier intelligence
agency on the planet, in terms of the ability to see things
from overhead. And while it's the best in the world and
continues to be, we face unprecedented challenges and threats
from near-peer adversaries in China and in Russia who have
launched capabilities and are continuing to expand their own
capabilities in this field. And so, it's critical for us that
oversight ensure that we are doing everything we can to deliver
space capabilities to our Nation at the speed of technology;
and that we expand investments in commercial space to protect
our satellite resources with the same enthusiasm and the same
attention as we have for building and delivering them.
So, I encourage you to be mindful of that role that you
will play once confirmed. And ensuring not just the safety and
security of Americans and American interests, but also in the
American people's confidence in the office that you will lead,
if confirmed.
So today is an opportunity to hear from you about your
previous work in government, and in the Intelligence Community
in particular. And we look forward to your testimony and your
vision of what the role of Inspector General will be.
Thank you.
Chairman Warner. Thank you, Vice Chairman.
Mr. Edwards, I'm going to ask you to stand and raise your
right hand.
[Witness stands and raises right hand.]
Do you solemnly swear to give this Committee the truth, the
full truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Edwards. I do.
Chairman Warner. Please be seated.
I'm now going to ask you five standard questions the
Committee proposes to each nominee who appears before us.
They just require a simple yes or no answer for the record.
One, do you agree to appear before the Committee here and
in other venues when invited?
Mr. Edwards. Yes.
Chairman Warner. If confirmed, do you agree to send
officials from your office to appear before this Committee and
designated staff when invited?
Mr. Edwards. Yes.
Chairman Warner. Do you agree to provide documents and any
other materials requested by the Committee in order to carry
out its oversight and legislative responsibilities?
Mr. Edwards. Yes.
Chairman Warner. Will you both ensure that your office and
your staff provide such materials to the Committee when we
request it?
Mr. Edwards. Yes.
Chairman Warner. And finally, do you agree to inform and
fully brief to the fullest extent possible all Members of this
Committee of intelligence actions and covert action rather than
only the Chair and the Vice Chair?
Mr. Edwards. Yes.
Chairman Warner. Thank you very much.
Mr. Edwards we'll now proceed to your opening statement,
after which I recognize all the Members by seniority for five
minutes for questions.
Mr. Edwards, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF TERRENCE L. EDWARDS, NOMINEE TO BE INSPECTOR
GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE
Mr. Edwards. Chairman Warner, Vice Chairman Rubio, and
Distinguished Members of the Committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as
you consider my nomination to be the Inspector General for the
National Reconnaissance Office. I am deeply honored that the
President nominated me for this position, and I am grateful for
the support of Director Haines, Principal Deputy Director
Dixon, and Director Scalise.
If confirmed, I look forward to engaging with you, Director
Scalise, and the dedicated professionals at the NRO. In
addition, if confirmed, I look forward to leading the talented
NRO IG staff to affect positive change and to further the NRO's
critical mission.
Before I outline my qualifications, there are several
important women in my life that I would like to thank. First, I
would like to thank my mother, Deborah Edwards, who retired
last year after serving this country for 30-plus years as a
civil servant. She taught me the importance of commitment to
service, having integrity, and being a hard worker.
Second, I would like to thank my partner and best friend,
Cristan Farmer, for taking this journey with me for 17 years.
Third, I would like to thank the Honorable Susan Gibson,
the Honorable Stacey Dixon, and Mrs. Cathy Szymanski for their
leadership, mentorship, and confidence in me.
I would also like to thank the many colleagues, friends,
and family who have helped me throughout my career in this
confirmation process.
At a time when the American public demands more
transparency and confidence in their institutions and
policymakers, I believe the IG's role to provide independent,
objective, and fact-based analysis of agencies, programs, and
operations is vital and reinsuring to the American public that
their institutions are serving them in a lawful, ethical, and
effective manner. At each stage of my career, I have seen
firsthand the importance of conducting careful and objective
analysis of the facts and the law.
I started my career in government as Army Fellow at the
Army Materiel Command. From there, I became an attorney in the
Office of General Counsel at the Army Sustainment Command,
where I was immersed and ultimately fell in love with federal
acquisition law, regulation, and policy. In that position, I
learned the importance of oversight, knowing your craft, and
having the courage to provide sound objective advice, despite
the possible consequences. Being the lead attorney as a GS-9 on
a $150 billion contract that provided critical services to our
soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kuwait taught me these
lessons and more.
I then went on to the Army Communications and Electronics
Command, where I continued amongst other things to practice in
the areas of acquisitions, procurement, and fiscal law,
ultimately serving in the role of Senior Acquisition Attorney
for the command.
In 2012, I joined the Intelligence Community, working as a
Senior Attorney at the National Security Agency.
In 2016, I joined the ODNI's Office of General Counsel,
where I served as a Deputy General Counsel for Management. In
this position, I provided legal advice on a full range of areas
for the DNI and a broader Intelligence Community, including
ethics, appropriations, acquisitions, and space. Currently, I'm
the Chief of Staff to the PDDNI, where I manage the operations
of the PDDNI's office and serve as a PDDNI Senior Advisor on a
full range of national security and management issues. As a
result of my knowledge, and experience that I've gained, I am
well grounded in many areas of law germane to the NRO and IG's
missions, including fiscal and intelligence law, procurement
integrity, whistle-blower protections, accounting, ethics, and
security.
My experience at both NSA and ODNI have given me important
exposure into the vital acquisitions and intelligence roles of
the NRO to ensure that the Nation has the right space-based
capabilities it needs to stay safe and secure. I am also aware
of the rapidly-changing nature of the space domain that brings
new possibilities and challenges. I am mindful of the potential
risks to NRO's mission, as the space domain becomes more
competitive and contested.
I have watched as the NRO has moved to embrace the growing
commercial marketplace to procure new capabilities and increase
resiliency and speed to address these potential risks. I
believe the oversight of the NRO Inspector General, in
coordination with Congress, plays a critical role in ensuring
these new possibilities that are developed, implemented, and
maintained in a lawful, effective, and efficient manner. To
that end, I pledge to be transparent, accessible, and
responsive to this Committee in support of Congressional
requests and interest.
Congressional oversight is fundamental to the checks and
balances established in our Constitution. If confirmed, I will
fully support the IG's notification in reporting requirements,
and I will keep the NRO's oversight committees fully and
currently informed.
Mr. Chairman, I have been both blessed and honored to
devote my career to public service. Each and every day I wake
up, I come to the office, I give them all, and look to make a
positive difference. I know the position I've been nominated
for comes with great responsibility.
If confirmed, I pledge to do my very best to keep making a
difference and to serve with the integrity and purpose that
this position and our Nation demands.
Thank you again, for your consideration of my nomination,
and I look forward to taking your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Edwards follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Warner. Thank you, Mr. Edwards. Thank you for
outlining what has been an obviously very distinguished career.
I only have two or three quick questions.
One of the things this Committee has been very forceful on
with our friends at the NRO is recognizing the value of
commercial space. And I think we've seen a bit of a sea change
where at first there was quite a bit of pushback, kind of if
not invented here, if not built here inside the government
domain. I think the NRO has gotten much better.
Obviously, there are certain things--exquisite technical
metrics--that we need to do directly through the NRO alone. But
how do you see the IG's role recognizing different types of
acquisition rules? They're making sure we strike that balance
right between commercial and government only in terms of
overhead.
Mr. Edwards. Senator, thank you for that question.
I think it's critical that the IG execute its fundamental
functions when reviewing any acquisitions, or any programs at
the NRO. As the NRO moves in a new direction, and expands its
commercial buy, or it expands, buying new additional
capabilities. I think it's critical that the Inspector
General's Office fully understands what he's doing, and reviews
those programs to ensure they are effective and efficient, and
assist where they can in helping to determine whether or not it
makes sense to buy more commercial versus building organically.
If confirmed, I would ensure that my office plays that role.
And looking at whether or not the programs and procedures they
put in place--that the NRO director puts in place--is
appropriate and efficient.
Chairman Warner. Related to that, and this is again an area
where the Committee has been very, very active, we have been
concerned that, particularly in terms of overhead, capabilities
move so quickly. And that the old-fashioned process of putting
out an RFP, putting out an RFI before an RFP, we took so long
on acquisitions, by the time we actually made a selection built
and launched, technology already passed us by.
So, we don't want to sacrifice quality, and we obviously
want to maintain the integrity of the programs. But the
acquisitions process has oftentimes been way too slow. In a
world where, between overhead, basic progress seems to have a
new satellite constellation from the commercial side come every
two to three years, how do we keep up with that acquisition
process? And what role should you play in that?
Mr. Edwards. Chairman, I think you're absolutely right. I
think as technology moves most quickly, agencies are having a
difficult time figuring out, again, how to utilize them within
the structure that they have to operate. I think what the IG
can do--and if confirmed, I will do--is making sure that,
again, those agencies, or NRO specifically, fully understands
what rules--the rules that are played under, are where there
are flexibilities and where there are not flexibilities. To
ensure that again, they could buy the technology and the
capabilities in the timeframe that they are dealing with.
Chairman Warner. Last question is, I remember early on, as
I was trying to learn overhead and just trying to understand
that IC side of the house--NRO, NGA, and some occasional
activities with the Agency. Understanding that DOD side of the
house was even more complicated. But now we've got Space
Command, Space Force, NRO. I think the IG has got a critical
role in how that intel side of the house interacts with our
brothers and sisters on the DOD side. If you can speak to that
for a moment?
Mr. Edwards. Chairman, I have a lot of experience in that
area. Being professional in both the DOD and the IC and being
an acquisition professional. I think, in my experience, the DOD
and the IC work really well together when they have effective
communications and they have processes in place to talk through
how they will deal with disagreements, and whether things that
are of mutual interest, how they will work together on those
things.
I think the IG can be effective in ensuring that those
communications and those processes and procedures are effective
and efficient to ensure that they are both working or marching
in the right direction. If confirmed, I would commit to
ensuring that when we review those processes and procedures, we
are providing recommendations that are actionable, so that we
are getting to the end result.
Chairman Warner. Thank you. Senator Rubio said he had to
step out for one moment. He'll be right back.
I'm going to go to Senator Heinrich and then Senator Sasse.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
for holding this hearing today.
Congratulations, Mr. Edwards, on your nomination. I want to
thank you for joining us today for one of our rare open
hearings.
I see from your record that you have over 15 years of
federal government experience, most of them in the IC. I want
to thank you for your continued service to our country.
All agencies are challenged by the need to adapt and
constantly improve cybersecurity programs and defenses, and
certainly NRO is no exception. Should you be confirmed, will
you commit to reporting to this Committee any security breaches
that NRO discovers? And how NRO is working to prevent and deter
such breaches?
Mr. Edwards. Yes.
Senator Heinrich. A year ago, the U.S. Space Command, the
Space Force, and the NRO announced that they had developed a
framework that formalizes end-to-end coordination between the
Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community, and
between acquisitions and operations.
What role should the NRO IG's office play in reviewing the
collaboration and coordination between and among these
organizations?
And then just stepping back a little more broadly, how do
you see the NRO Inspector General's Office playing a role in
improving the Title 10/Title 50 relationship?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, thank you for that question. I think
in order for those processes that work well, they need to be
effective and efficient. And I think that's where the IG can
assist in reviewing those processes that they have established
to make sure that again, they make sense, that they're actually
going to meet the desired result.
In my experience, being a professional in both a Title 10
and a Title 50 organization, I've seen that those agencies work
really well together and more effectively when they have
effective communication, and they're working off of the same
page. And I think, as the IG, if confirmed, we can help in that
area, because that's what the Inspector Act mandates us to do,
is to look at procedures to ensure they're effective and
efficient.
Senator Heinrich. The independence of the IG in any agency
is central to our confidence that investigations will be
conducted objectively and fairly, and that benefits both the
complainant and the target of an investigation. It's also why
this Committee took steps to make the NRO IG, a Presidentially-
appointed, Senate-confirmed position. In fact, you would be
only the second NRO Inspector General to be Senate confirmed.
So being able to raise difficult questions, issues with
senior officials and agency directors is a very necessary
quality in an IG. In your opinion, what are the measurable
indicators of independence? And specifically, what actions
would you take if a senior IC official sought to prevent you
from conducting an audit or an investigation of any sort?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, you're absolutely right. Independence
is critical and is a cornerstone of the Inspector General Act.
I think, if confirmed, what I would do is ensure that my office
is following the standards that are outlined in regulation,
law, and policy to ensure that we are being objective and fair.
In addition, I think it's critically important that an IG have
full control over their decisions, their staff, and their
resources. It's my understanding today that the NRO IG has
that, and if confirmed, I intend to maintain that.
With respect to your second question, Senator, about if
someone tried to prevent me from issuing a report. It's my
understanding that the only individual that can request that I
not look at something, if confirmed, is the Secretary of
Defense. And that is under the Inspector General Act, Section
8, and that is in consultation with the DNI and only for
national security purpose. And so, if a senior official or any
person asked me not to look at something, if confirmed, I would
try to work it out at the lowest level. I will remind them of
the law to make sure that they fully understand and get, again,
what I was attempting to do. And for some reason, if I was not
able to work it out, I would work up the chain, to the director
of NRO, and if necessary, come to this Committee for your
assistance.
Senator Heinrich. Mr. Chairman, those are all my questions.
Thank you.
Chairman Warner. Senator Sasse.
Senator Sasse. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Edwards, congratulations on your past service and on
this new potential calling. I think, building on what Senator
Heinrich said about this being a rare public hearing for us, I
think many of my constituents and my colleagues' constituents
are often surprised to learn how much of a role the IC has in
space.
So, could you maybe walk the public through how you think
about the role of the IC in space versus, say, NASA? Where
there's collaboration, where there's duplicate efforts that are
necessary? And why? Can you just explain the IC's role in
space?
Mr. Edwards. Yes. So, in my reading of Executive Order
12333, the NRO Director is responsible for the development, for
acquiring and operating space-based systems for the collection
of intelligence and information to ensure that the Nation is
safe. I think that's a different mission than NASA is
responsible for, although I think they may coordinate on things
of mutual interest. But it's my understanding NASA does not
collect intelligence.
Senator Sasse. So, there's obviously platforms. And then
there's the information that's gathered and the uses of that
information. So, I'm like many on this Committee, a champion of
NRO, NGA, other IC agencies that have responsibilities on or
touching on space. But obviously, the technological
developments that we're seeing happen in the private sector--
and the Chairman has been an effective and relentless advocate
on this, Chairman Burr before him, Senator Blunt--have talked
constantly about how much innovation we're seeing in the
private sector.
In your new responsibility, how would you look at whether
or not the government is harnessing all of the greatest
opportunities that exist, that are often faster and cheaper in
the private sector? The government is often great at building
exquisite systems and getting exquisite imagery, but often in
ways that are sort of biased toward current uses. And one of
the things we see happening in the private sector is a bias
toward non-consumption--is often shattered when you end up with
a sometimes lower-quality, but lots cheaper, use of a new
commercial application.
How would you approach the question of whether or not the
agency is moving quickly enough to harness all the innovation
of the American private sector?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, again, thank you for your question.
I think it's important, just being an acquisition
professional, in general, for an agency, always to be looking
at whether or not they can do it organically, or does it make
more sense to go to the private sector. Oftentimes, there's a
balance there, and that's, I think, what you're getting at. I
think it's important that the agencies actually, you know,
strike that balance to ensure again, they are not wasting the
taxpayer dollars and they are, again, figuring out a way to
ensure that they have the best capabilities to build it, to
ensure they're protecting the United States. Where I think the
IG can help and, if confirmed, where I would assist with that,
is making sure that, again, the agencies or the agency, in this
case NRO, make sure that it understands that the trade-offs
they are making with respect to organic versus nonorganic, that
they're doing it reasonably, and are taking into account all
the things they're required to take into account when they're
making that trade off. I think that the IG's office can assist
in that by making sure that, again, when we review those
programs, they are effective and efficient in making those
decisions.
Senator Sasse. Well, thank you. And I think the Committee
will look forward to working with you and trying to instill and
ask the hard oversight questions about that urgency.
We're nearly at my time, but I want to ask one question
about your day job today. You currently serve as the Chief of
Staff to the Principal Deputy at ODNI. And I'm curious as to
your public reflections on how that bureaucracy--how the ODNI
is functioning, and if there are places where it can be trimmed
to be quicker and more nimble?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, I think we should always look at our
processes to make sure that, again, they are working
effectively and efficiently. I believe that, again, the ODNI is
doing that.
Senator Sasse. Thank you, Sir, very diplomatic.
Chairman Warner. Mr. Edwards, I should have warned you.
Senator King, and then we'll go to the Vice Chairman.
Senator King. Mr. Edwards, I don't want you to be
diplomatic. The major qualification for this job--you've got
all the written qualifications of legal background, and staff
work, and working in the Intelligence Community. But the real
qualification for this job is backbone. Is the willingness and,
in fact, relishing taking a position that is contrary to that
of the people who hired you. And give me some reassurance
because, as Senator Rubio pointed out at the beginning, the odd
thing about these jobs that we're talking about here is you're
going to work for a secret agency.
Nobody else is watching other than this Committee and its
comparable Committee in the House. In other words, the public
doesn't--there's no newspaper that reports, that can know,
what's going on within the NRO, that knows about the contracts,
how they're structured. So, it's doubly important, it seems to
me, because of the secret nature of the agency. And that makes
your job doubly important, because very few other people are
looking.
Reassure me that you're willing to bite the hand that
appointed you.
Mr. Edwards. Senator, thank you for that question.
I know this is a difficult job. My job has always been
difficult as an attorney, where I've been responsible for
advising the clients of what the law, regulation, and policy
states, particularly when you're trying to advance mission.
Senator King. Do you recall a time when as an attorney, you
told your governmental clients, You can't do that because the
law doesn't allow it?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, I have no problems with saying no. I
think a lot of an attorney's clients get upset with them,
because they constantly say no, because the law, regulation,
and policy requires them to do so--particularly in the areas
that I'm expert in. If you're--we're talking ethics or fiscal
law, there's oftentimes I have to say to my clients, we can't
do that. If confirmed, I have no problems as the IG doing the
exact same thing: Following the law, being tough but fair in
the investigations, the audits, and evaluations that I do,
because that's what this job requires. That's what the American
people expect of me: making sure that, again, I'm providing
oversight for things that they cannot see always.
Senator King. Exactly. That's what I think. That's very
important, and I'm heartened to hear your response.
We haven't talked much in this hearing about whistle-
blowers. Part of the IG's responsibility is the oversight and
management of the whistle-blower process. It's interesting, I
learned some time ago, the first whistle-blower law in the U.S.
preceded the Constitution. It was in 1788, the Continental
Congress passed the first whistle-blower law.
And again, it's sort of anomalous for the government to pay
people to differ with its own activities. So, can you commit to
this Committee that you will have a fair, open, and reasonable
process for dealing with whistle-blowers and not in any way try
to suppress information that might come forward?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, yes. I will absolutely commit to
that. Whistle-blowers are essential to this process and to
oversight. We must make sure, and if I'm confirmed I will make
sure that all of the processes in my Office to educate them to
open and welcome them to report any concerns that they have are
effective, confidential, and frees them from any chances of
reprisal.
Senator King. I appreciate that. And earlier in the hearing
you mentioned, I think, in response to Senator Heinrich's
question, when in doubt, come to this Committee. Where cleared,
we can hear, it's not a question of violating national
security. But this Committee, we have a very deep interest and
involvement with the Intelligence Community. And as I say, if
there are questions, this Committee can, I think, be of
assistance.
Finally, as I think about the IG job, it's really an odd
position, because the moment you're confirmed, you effectively
become adversarial to the people who appointed you. And that's
a very anomalous kind of situation. But I think it's the
essence of the job, and that's why it's so important. I think
the IGs are among the most important jobs in our entire
governmental structure. And the IGs, as I mentioned, of the
national security agencies, the Intelligence Community, are
especially important because of the secret nature of those
facility, of those agencies.
So, I congratulate you on your appointment. I look forward
to working with you. And remember, your job is to occasionally
say no.
Thank you.
Mr. Edwards. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Rubio. Thank you. And I don't have a lot of
questions. I've one that's been touched on already, and it's
the whistle-blower. And that the two most important whistle-
blower scenarios, or the more two more difficult ones, is one
that is potentially embarrassing to the executive, the people
who run it, or a broader Administration. And then the other is
when the individual coming forward, is alleging that their
superiors have sought reprisal against them for doing the right
thing or trying to punish them.
These are two very delicate situations. And again, unlike
any of these other agencies, where potentially a civil service
employee could go outside of the system and give exposure, or
leak, to a member of the media to expose some wrongdoing in an
agency.
You do that in the Intelligence Community, you're
committing a very serious crime and harming our national
security in the process. So, the key to people coming forward
and saying, my superiors are taking reprisals against me, or,
I'm coming forward with something but it's embarrassing to the
people in charge. The key to that is the confidence that the
Inspector General that is in office is actually an advocate and
will do something serious about it.
So, not having been presented with a case, these are all
hypotheticals, although they exist in the real world. What can
you do at the front end? What are the most important cues in
your mind that give employees the confidence that if they have
information about either reprisals and fear of reprisal, or
that it will be potentially politically embarrassing--what are
the cues that they take, in your mind, from an Inspector
General that they have confidence in coming forward?
Mr. Edwards. Vice Chairman, I think the first thing you
have to do as an IG to ensure or to reassure whistle-blowers
that you should have confidence in the system is making sure
that, again, that they understand that the IG will take their
claim seriously. And the way you do that is transparency. Is
making sure you're transparent about what their rights are.
You're transparent about how they are to come--or what the
processes are when they come to the IG.
When they come to the IG, making sure that, again, the
staff treats them with respect, and takes their claim
seriously, and protects their identity and their
confidentiality. And then, if appropriate, if valid, look into
their concern. I think if you do those things, they will have
confidence that the IG is credible, and that when they come,
they do not have to be fear that the IG will not do what they
need to do to protect those individuals.
Vice Chairman Rubio. Well, one additional role that I think
is really important in my mind, and I was hoping you would
maybe talk just a little bit about it, is the Inspector
General's role in making sure that the programs and the
Agency--in this case, the NRO--that they reflect the intent
that was authorized by Congress.
Oftentimes, and this is not unique to the Intelligence
Community, Congress will say we are designing and we're funding
and we're authorizing a program that does this. And then a year
later, when we go back and look at it, it's not exactly--they
have found every crevice and loophole to sort of do it the way
they want to do it. And oftentimes, it's been Inspectors
General who proactively have identified those places where the
intent of Congress is not being done.
How do you view the Inspector General's role in ensuring
that Congressional intent is being followed in the
implementation of policy and decisions?
Mr. Edwards. I think the IG Act is fairly clear on what the
role of the IG is. And the IG's job is to detect fraud, waste,
and abuse--and deter it. And it is to ensure that programs are
run efficiently and effectively. And so, we're talking
Congressional intent and the law. I think, if an IG, and if
confirmed, follows those principles in reviewing the programs
that are of, you know, Congressional interest, or required by
law, statute, or by stakeholders. The IG will be effective in,
I think, actually looking at those programs.
Chairman Warner. Senator Wyden.
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Edwards, my apologies for being late. The
Senate Finance Committee that Senator Warner serves on is
keeping everybody busy, and I apologize for my tardiness.
Congratulations and welcome to the Committee. In my view,
reports from Inspectors General should be public. And at the
very least, classified reports should be reviewed for possible
declassification and public release. That has not been done
enough. And Intelligence Community Inspectors General can help
to change this. For example, the Inspector General for the NSA
has made great strides in releasing their reports. So let's
start with the NRO-IG semi-annual reports, a few of which were
released to the public in 2017 and 2018.
If you are confirmed, will you commit to the timely public
release of all semi-annual reports?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, yes.
Senator Wyden. Did you say yes?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, I did.
Senator Wyden. Oh good! I'll quit while I'm ahead.
Mr. Edwards. However, as you know, NRO is still a national
security agency. And IGs still have the obligation to follow
the law. And if confirmed, I would strike that balance of
ensuring that, again, I work with the appropriate
classification folks to ensure that, where possible, I could
publish those semi-annual reports without offending any of the
classification rules, to ensure that we are preserving national
security.
Senator Wyden. Let me conclude this area with one last
question. Will you commit to reviewing all of your reports for
possible declassification, public release?
Mr. Edwards. Senator, absolutely.
Senator Wyden. Okay. Now with respect to whistle-blowers,
this is an area that our Committee spent a lot of time on and
we feel very strongly about. Now, Congress recently passed
legislation protecting IC contractors who make whistle-blower
disclosures to their supervisors. NRO has a large contractor
workforce. Tell me a little bit about how you are going to go
about making sure that those contractors are protected from
reprisals, because that is always the issue.
You know, you can write down, and Senator Warner been very
interested in it, I have, and Senator King--we've been very
interested in whistle-blowers. So we write down the appropriate
words and give as much directive as we can to protecting
whistle-blowers. But at the same time, real people take these
positions and I'd be interested in hearing from you how you're
going to make sure that the contractors are protected from
reprisals.
Mr. Edwards. So, Senator, I think the first thing is making
sure that, again, we are doing appropriate outreach to the
diverse workforce at NRO, to include contractors, so they fully
understand what their rights are so that when they submit
information that is of concern, they feel as though they are
going to be protected and that their identity is going to be
protected.
When they come to my office, if confirmed, I would reassure
that my staff treats them with respect and make sure that,
again, whatever they are bringing us, we're taking it
seriously, we are protecting their identity and
confidentiality, and we are acting appropriately to look into
whatever they are bringing to us.
Senator Wyden. I would only add, because I think that's a
thoughtful answer, particularly you're going to be affirmative
in terms of reaching out and the like, the first couple of
cases that you're going to be dealing with--I hope you're
confirmed, I'm planning to support you--are going to send a
very important message to those contractors about how you're
going to protect them from reprisals. So I would just urge in
the strongest way possible, those first couple of cases could
be sending a big message.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Warner. Any further questions? Well, I think,
Senator Wyden, let me echo what you said on the question
particularly on contractors. We've got an awful lot of them in
my state and I think they do generally good work and they need
to be afforded the protections. You know, I also think it's--
Senator Wyden is probably the most relentless voice on the
Committee on transparency. We want that transparency. We also
clearly have a mission at NRO where classification levels have
to be because there is always going to be healthy tension on
this Committee between those dual goals. And, you know, we
would probably urge you to err on the side of transparency, but
we also don't want to do things to put the national security
interests of our country at risk.
So I appreciate very much. I should, as I warned you before
the hearing started, do not take the lack of attendance as
anything other than a sign that most of my colleagues have
reviewed your background and I think felt comfortable with
that.
But for the sake of the staff, if any Members of the
Committee wish to submit questions for the record after today's
hearing, please do so no later than noon on Thursday, August
4th. Potentially we could even move on this if we're here for a
few more days and get you out of the Committee.
Mr. Edwards, thank you again for appearing before the
Committee today. Thank you to one of the women in your life who
is here and the others who are not here--your mom or mentors.
They also would be very proud, proud of you. And good luck
going forward.
With that, hearing is adjourned.
Thank you.
[Whereupon the hearing was adjourned at 3:14 p.m.]
Supplemental Material
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]