145 



istrator on board to direct the activities of this group. It at times 

 kind of cruises along with a good, stiff rudder in the water and give 

 it proper direction and focus constantly, and maybe that would be 

 helpful. That might be helpful on an ongoing basis, but we feel that 

 the quality of employee that we deal with on a day-to-day basis is 

 just fine. We are very pleased with them. 



Mr. Horn. Ms. Colon, do you have any comment? 



Ms. Colon. I think we agree in that the quality of the employees 

 at FAS is very high. We find, however, that the employees on the 

 ground in overseas markets are more market focused than the peo- 

 ple in Washington. 



Mr. Horn. Is there a rotation education process where you serve 

 some time in Washington, some time overseas to get a feel for what 

 both sides do? 



Ms. Colon. I am not sure how they rotate. 



Mr. Horn. We might want to ask that of the administrators. Let 

 me ask you, Mr. Chairman, what are the plans of the joint sub- 

 committees? Are they planning to have FAS Administrators back 

 at all after this discussion with people in industries or is this going 

 to be a submission of written questions? What are the plans? 



Mr. Penny. I think we are going to proceed to review this in an 

 informal setting, some of the recommendations that have come 

 from industry regarding the performance of FAS. I think, for start- 

 ers, that would be more productive than another committee hear- 

 ing and if, based on that, we have several proposals that seem to 

 make sense, we may proceed with a legislative document and then 

 go to a committee meeting to review and discuss that proposal. 



Mr. Horn. Fine. I commend you and Mr. Condit for holding 

 these hearings. I am sorry I have to leave for another commitment. 

 Thank you all for coming. 



Mr. Penny. Mr. Seng, I know this follows on the line of question- 

 ing conducted by Mr. Horn. But I am concerned about the assertion 

 that I can't do a multiyear plan with FAS. We heard testimony 

 from the Department that multiyear plans were accepted. Is there 

 a breakdown in communication here? Are the policies ambiguous? 

 What is the cause of the difference of opinion on this point? 



Mr. Seng. I guess there are 2 years that we receive funding from 

 FAS. One would be from the FMDO project funds, as they call it, 

 which have been in effect for the last 3 years. That is on a year- 

 to-year basis. As far as the MPP program is concerned, we have 

 only been operating on a 1-year basis as far as this is concerned. 



Mr. Penny. I think that program in particular is the program 

 where they have indicated that multiyear contracts are possible. 



Mr. Seng. That would be news to me. 



Mr. Penny. Are you asserting that in both categories, a 

 multiyear contract of sorts would be preferable? 



Mr. Seng. Yes. My impression would be as maybe on the project 

 funds we can probably operate on a year-to-year basis, but on the 

 MPP funding, definitely a multiyear plan — 5 to 3 years — ^would be, 

 I think, best in our interests. 



Mr. Penny. You talked about 6 months of paperwork and proc- 

 essing that is required of the application in order to get that re- 

 newal or that new contract if perhaps you are moving into a new 



