From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: Protecting Sensitive NASA Technology Description: Audio interview by GAO staff with Belva Martin, Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management Related GAO Work: GAO-14-315: Export Controls: Management Decisions and Lack of Oversight Create Risk of Unauthorized Access to NASA Technologies Released: May 2014 [ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. It's May 2014. Recent allegations of export control violations at two NASA centers have raised questions about NASA's ability to protect its sensitive technologies. A team led by Belva Martin, a director in GAO's Acquisition and Sourcing Management team, recently looked at how NASA is implementing and overseeing compliance with its export control policies. GAO's Sarah Kaczmarek sat down with Belva to talk about what they found. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] U.S. export control regulations require that NASA protect its sensitive technologies. What policies does NASA have in place to do this, and how well are they being implemented? [ Belva Martin: ] NASA has policies in accordance with U.S. export control laws. But we found weaknesses in two primary areas that I'd like to share. One is there's a lack of clarity with respect to the frontline employees, the center export administrators. NASA has 10 centers, and we found variation in the placement, the authority, and the resources provided to these employees, in part, because the decisions are left to the center directors, so those export administrators that had a direct reporting authority to the center directors found that it enhanced their effectiveness, while those that were two or three levels below found that it impacted their ability to carry out their responsibilities. So, that's an area that should be clarified. The second weakness was in implementation of the foreign national access program. NASA does share its research, its technologies. It has foreign nationals working in its facilities, and they need access to technologies, computer, data, etc., but it's not unfettered access. And GAO and the NASA IG found areas where NASA's policy was not implemented in this area of foreign national access. And it's important to note that even one instance of noncompliance could damage national security. The NASA administrator has taken some actions to correct these deficiencies. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] Turning to the issue of oversight then, how well is NASA management overseeing that these policies are being followed? [ Belva Martin: ] As I mentioned, a lot of the day-to-day decisions are devolved to the centers, but NASA has a staff at their headquarters who has a responsibility for oversight, but we found that these officials, as well as some of the center export officials, really didn't know where the sensitive technologies were located or, in some cases, what those technologies really are. So that hampered the ability of NASA to effectively target its resources to protect its most sensitive technologies. So that's a concern. We found that a couple of the centers had undertaken steps to identify technologies, working with counterintelligence officials and threat assessments, to identify, catalog, if you will, their sensitive technologies so that they can more effectively protect them. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] This brings me to the recommendations of the report. What is GAO recommending here? [ Belva Martin: ] We had three primary categories of recommendations, and I've talked about those three areas. One is to clarify the policy with respect to the center export administrator, in terms of consistency in their placement, in the authority that they're given, as well as the resources. The second major area of recommendation was for NASA to fully implement corrective actions with respect to their foreign national access program, and then to do an assessment to make sure that the actions taken had the intended result. And then, thirdly, to adopt a more risk-based approach to identifying and protecting their technologies. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] Finally, what do you see as the bottom line of this report? [ Belva Martin: ] The bottom line really is to strike an effective balance. NASA has a responsibility to share its technologies, its research, to as wide an audience as possible. The scientific community benefits, private industry benefits from NASA's research and technologies, but on the other hand, it also has a responsibility to protect its technologies so that, again, we, the U.S., maintain a military as well as a technological superiority. So striking that balance is really important, and for NASA, having an effective export control program contributes to helping NASA to strike the appropriate balance. [[ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] To learn more, visit gao.gov, and be sure to tune in to the next episode of GAO's Watchdog Report for more from the congressional watchdog, the U.S. Government Accountability Office.