The leadership of the House Oversight Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, IT, and Government Innovation probed the General Services Administration (GSA) chief information officer (CIO) Thursday on the agency’s purchase of Chinese-made videoconference cameras that contained known security vulnerabilities.
Chairwoman Nancy Mace, R-S.C., noted that the GSA employees were acting with sheer “incompetence” during the procurement of the equipment, and Ranking Member Gerry Connolly, D-Va., called the recently uncovered actions by GSA’s internal watchdog “a very troubling episode.”
GSA’s CIO David Shive appeared before the subcommittee on Feb. 29 after the agency’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) flagged in January that GSA employees provided “egregiously flawed” information to acquire 150 videoconference cameras in 2022 that were manufactured in China, and therefore not compliant with the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (TAA).
“The General Services Administration has become a bit of a frequent flyer with this committee in the worst kind of way,” Rep. Connolly said during his opening statement of the subcommittee hearing titled “Made in China: Is GSA Complying with Purchasing Restrictions?”
“Unfortunately, the GSA’s OIG report that is the focus of today’s hearing provides yet another instance in which GSA did not follow proper processes and policies,” the ranking member continued, adding, “Today, GSA must once again begin the work to regain the trust of the American people and of this committee.”
According to the Jan. 23 OIG report, GSA Office of Digital Infrastructure Technologies (IDT) employees “misled a contracting officer with egregiously flawed information to acquire 150 Chinese-made, TAA-noncompliant videoconference cameras.”
“Before completing the purchase, the contracting officer requested information from GSA IDT to justify its request for the TAA-noncompliant cameras, including the existence of TAA-compliant alternatives and the reason for needing this specific brand,” the IG said. “In response, GSA IDT provided misleading market research in support of the TAA-noncompliant cameras and failed to disclose that comparable TAA-compliant alternatives were available.”
GSA’s CIO testified before the committee leadership on Thursday that his employees did not intentionally seek to mislead, while also denying findings that the purchasing arm of the Federal government failed to comply with TAA.
“GSA fully supports the purchase and use of American-made products wherever possible, and is committed to complying with all acquisition statutes, including the BAA [Buy American Act of 1933] and the TAA,” Shive said in his opening statement. “GSA was in full compliance with BAA for both the first and second procurement of our cameras.”
“The TAA did not apply to either of these acquisitions because neither equaled nor exceeded the threshold of $183,000,” he said. “The value of an acquisition is a determining factor in the applicability of any of our trade agreements.”
Robert Erickson, the deputy IG at GSA, testified alongside Shive, noting that GSA’s argument for purchasing the Chinese-manufactured cameras “does not pass the commonsense test.”
According to Erickson, GSA’s purchase of the videoconference cameras was a pilot program – meaning the agency had intentions of eventually scaling up its purchases. The known security vulnerabilities found in the cameras were particularly troubling, Erickson said, because of China’s ability to potentially breach GSA’s firewall and surveil the agency.
Additionally, Erickson testified that GSA’s OIG found market research proving that there were alternative camera options available that were TAA-compliant. Erickson noted that the OIG did not find any evidence of GSA intentionally providing misleading data, but rather what Rep. Mace called “gross incompetence.”
“It’s just so confusing, Mr. Shive, in your testimony to say, ‘This was the only camera that met our requirements, this was a pilot program that met our requirements,’ and yet, you’re not going to buy more of these cameras, but if you do, it’ll be a different camera, even though there’s no other camera on the market that fits your requirements,” Rep. Mace said.
“The math doesn’t work for me, and that level of incompetence is why people in this country don’t have a lot of faith in our agencies when they come here and say things that just don’t make sense and they don’t add up,” the chairwoman said.
Ranking Member Connolly added, “There seemed to be no sensitivity or care that it was Chinese and that there were security concerns inherent in a Chinese camera … It’s a very troubling episode.”
