Activities

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Activities

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

1201 New York Avenue, NW

Suite 300

Washington, DC 20005

HAV[email protected]

www.eac.gov

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Contents

Introduction

........................................................................................................................................................................1

Operations

............................................................................................................................................................................3

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission .......................................................................................................................3

Executive Director .............................................................................................................................................................3

General Counsel ................................................................................................................................................................3

The Ofﬁce of Inspector General ........................................................................................................................................3

EAC Federal Advisory Committees ..................................................................................................................................3

Public Meetings .................................................................................................................................................................5

Freedom of Information Act Report ..................................................................................................................................5

Operating Budget ..............................................................................................................................................................6

Federal Financial Assistance To Improve Federal Elections

.......................................................................7

HAVA Funds .....................................................................................................................................................................7

Help America Vote College Program ...............................................................................................................................8

Mock Election Grant Program ..........................................................................................................................................9

The Voting System Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing and Post-Election Audit Initiative..................................9

The Military Heroes Initiative .........................................................................................................................................10

The Accessible Voting Technology Initiative .................................................................................................................10

Voting System Testing and Certiﬁcation

............................................................................................................11

Voting System Test Laboratory Accreditation ................................................................................................................11

Voting System Certiﬁcation ............................................................................................................................................11

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines ...............................................................................................................................13

Research, Policy and Programs

...............................................................................................................................15

Research ..........................................................................................................................................................................15

Policy ...............................................................................................................................................................................16

Programs ..........................................................................................................................................................................17

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

The Ofﬁce of Inspector General Activities

.........................................................................................................19

Grant Audits ....................................................................................................................................................................19

Reviews of EAC Operations ...........................................................................................................................................19

Management Challenges .................................................................................................................................................20

Improved Outreach ..........................................................................................................................................................20

Communications and Clearinghouse

....................................................................................................................21

Open Government Policy ................................................................................................................................................21

National Clearinghouse for Elections..............................................................................................................................21

Sharing Information About EAC-Certiﬁed Voting Systems in the Field .......................................................................22

Focusing on Voters’ Needs .............................................................................................................................................23

Moving Forward

.............................................................................................................................................................25

Appendix

............................................................................................................................................................................27

2001 Tally Votes...............................................................................................................................................................27

Board Rosters ..................................................................................................................................................................30

Commissioners’ Biographies .........................................................................................................................................36

Executive Director’s Biography ......................................................................................................................................38

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Introduction

Since the passage of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)

in 2002, election administration has changed dramatically.

Early voting was rare 10 years ago. Absentee ballot

tracking, vote centers and ballots on demand were unheard

of. Live webcasts of the vote tabulation process were not

available. Yet some of these innovations have become

increasingly commonplace.

By providing funds to states to modernize their voting

systems and voter registration databases, HAVA was

a catalyst for many election reforms. For instance, the

HAVA-mandated move to statewide voter registration

databases facilitated the migration from paper poll books

to digital poll books, which makes the voter check-in

process faster and more accurate. Commissioners and staff

of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) have

observed poll workers using the digital poll books and

have heard poll workers comment about how much easier

the voter check-in process has become.

Some of the biggest innovations have taken place on

the Internet, where voters in most states can verify their

voter registration, get directions to their polling place

and download a sample ballot from the Web site of their

elections ofﬁce.

Jurisdictions are also electronically transmitting registra-

tion materials and blank ballots to military and overseas

voters to help ensure they receive their ballots on time and

to comply with the Military and Overseas Voter Empower-

ment (MOVE) Act, which Congress passed in 2009.

Some areas offer all voters, not just Uniformed and

Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA)

voters the ability to track their absentee ballot. Through

a barcode on the ballot envelope, the ballot is scanned

before it enters the mail system and when it is returned to

the elections ofﬁce. Voters in some jurisdictions can also

check the status of a provisional ballot on line.

Vote centers offer voters the ﬂexibility to vote at a

designated location that is convenient for them. Digital

poll books made it possible for voter check-in information

to be updated and shared countywide in real time.

Election ofﬁces are also opening their election-night

operations to the public. For example, Orange County,

California, which has 1.6 million registered voters, uses

the Internet to increase transparency by providing a

streaming video of election-night operations, including

vote-by-mail ballot procedures and updates of election

results every 30 minutes.

Numerous counties have embraced social media to

communicate with voters and the news media about

polling place hours, wait times and closures. Douglas

County, Kansas, used Twitter during a local election in

2009 to inform voters of a polling place closure because of

a ﬁre. News outlets saw the Twitter feed and rebroadcast

the news within minutes. Broward County, Florida,

and Forsyth County, Georgia, posted early voting wait

times on their Web site so people could avoid long lines.

Counties also used text messaging to coordinate Election

Day activities with poll workers.

Election ofﬁcials who implemented these innovations,

such as early voting processes, online customer service

features for voters and digital poll books had to also create

procedures to accompany the new systems. They have

learned valuable lessons after launching these innovations

during an election.

EAC has also facilitated the collection of election admin-

i stration data on a national basis through its Election Ad-

ministration and Voting Survey (EAVS). Election ofﬁcials

are now assembling and reporting on an array of election

statistics, which helps inform a variety of stakeholders on

the conduct of federal elections. The EAVS is the most

comprehensive federal compilation of election data

available to the public.

As tasked by HAVA to be the national clearinghouse for

elections, EAC has taken the lead in collecting these inno-

vative and modern solutions in elections and in providing

this information to election ofﬁcials and the general public

in a central location at EAC.gov. EAC will also establish

an online tool that will pair seasoned election ofﬁcials with

the profession’s newest members, providing an online

exchange of ideas and solutions. Helping election ofﬁcials

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

at both the state and local levels connect with each other

improves efﬁciency, avoids duplication of efforts, saves

money and creates a network of experts who can support

each other and their goal to provide customer service to voters.

Information, data, research and best practices that EAC

program areas produced and collected all become part of

the national clearinghouse for elections. The ﬁscal year

(FY) 2010 program highlights described below demon-

strate EAC’s modern, inclusive approach to improving

federal elections and providing excellent customer service

to the public and election ofﬁcials.

Voting Systems Testing and

Certiﬁcation

� Certiﬁed a fourth voting system in 8 months at a cost of

less than $1 million.

� Issued a report to Congress on progress toward

establishing guidelines for remote electronic voting

systems for absentee voters.

� Held a joint workshop with the Federal Voting Assistance

Program (FVAP) and the Commerce Department’s

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

on UOCAVA remote electronic absentee voting systems;

jointly completed a UOCAVA Pilot Program Testable

Requirements document.

� Completed a draft revision of the 2005 Voluntary

Voting System Guidelines (VVSG), Version 1.1 that

addresses the comments received during the public

comment period ending September 28, 2009. The

revised version and policy decisions were presented

to the EAC commissioners and discussed at a public

meeting in September 2010.

Communications and Clearinghouse

� Launched a new Web site, recently named as one of the

top ﬁve government Web sites by Congress.org, with

powerful search and improved navigation tools. Visitors

may customize their experience by choosing automatic

updates by program area and have the option to submit

comments and rate EAC materials and products.

� Before the 2010 general election, provided information

to voters about early and absentee voting deadlines in

each state and U.S. territory.

� Created a map displaying the location of all EAC-

certiﬁed voting systems, along with hyperlinks to

related test reports, correspondence and other informa-

tion about the voting systems.

Grants

� Awarded 15 Help America Vote College Program grants

to recruit students to serve as poll workers; awarded

8 Mock Election grants that, in conjunction with the

current grant portfolio, will help educate students about

the electoral process; and awarded a $500,000 Military

Heroes Initiative grant to improve voting accessibility

for recently injured military personnel.

� In coordination with the Voting Systems Testing and

Certiﬁcation division, conducted a roundtable discus-

sion on research, development and implementation

of technologies and other types of assistance to make

voting more accessible.

Research, Policy and Programs

� Developed a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

for modifying EAC’s regulations for the National Voter

Registration Act (NVRA) in accordance with HAVA

and published the Notice in the Federal Register.

� Issued Election Management Guidelines chapters and

Quick Start Management Guides on Technology in

Elections, Elections Ofﬁce Administration, Accessibil-

ity, Building Community Partnerships, Canvassing and

Certifying an Election, Communicating with the Public,

Conducting a Recount and Provisional Ballots.

� Released the Congressionally mandated report, Free

Postage for the Return of Voted Absentee Ballots.

� Translated the National Mail Voter Registration Form

into ﬁve Asian languages. Expanded the translated

versions of the Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections to

include four Native American languages.

� Partnered with the Ofﬁce of Citizenship within U.S.

Citizenship and Immigration Services to make the

Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections available to new

citizens in the U.S. naturalization ceremony packet.

EAC will continue to ﬁnd new and efﬁcient ways to im-

prove federal election administration. One size does not ﬁt

all in elections, and EAC is uniquely positioned to gather

and share solutions for the many aspects of the United

States’ very diverse and decentralized election administra-

tion landscape—everything from ballot on demand to

voting centers and a wide variety of voting systems.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

The U.S. Election Assistance

Commission

EAC is an independent, bipartisan agency created by

HAVA. It assists and provides guidance to state and local

election administrators in improving the administration

of elections for federal ofﬁce. EAC provides assistance

by disbursing federal funds to states to implement HAVA

requirements, auditing the use of HAVA funds, adopting

the VVSG and serving as a national clearinghouse and

resource of information regarding election administration.

EAC also accredits voting system testing laboratories and

certiﬁes, decertiﬁes and recertiﬁes voting systems.

EAC has two commissioners currently serving, Gineen

Bresso and Donetta Davidson, and two vacancies.

Commissioners, who are nominated by the President

and conﬁrmed by the U.S. Senate, may serve only two

consecutive terms. Commissioners serve staggered terms.

No more than two commissioners may belong to the same

political party. Former Commissioner Gracia Hillman

resigned in December 2010 after serving in a holdover

capacity pursuant to HAVA Section 203(b)(3)B.

Executive Director

Thomas Wilkey was named executive director of EAC in

May 2005 by a unanimous vote of the commissioners and

was unanimously reappointed to the post in June 2009 for

another 4-year term. His duties include managing daily

operations, preparing program goals and long-term plans,

managing VVSG development, reviewing reports and

studies and overseeing EAC staff appointments.

General Counsel

Appointed by the Commission in September, 2010,

EAC General Counsel Mark A. Robbins has 20 years of

experience in public policy, federal administrative law and

executive management. He is the former executive director

of the White House Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight

Board and the former general counsel for the U.S. Ofﬁce

of Personnel Management (OPM). In accordance with

HAVA, the general counsel is appointed to a 4-year term

and may serve additional terms by a vote of EAC. As

EAC’s chief legal ofﬁcer, Mr. Robbins provides advice to

commissioners and senior leadership on legal issues affect-

ing EAC’s activities and operations.

The Ofﬁce of Inspector General

EAC’s Ofﬁce of Inspector General (OIG) conducts audits,

investigations and other reviews of EAC’s programs and

operations, which include internal reviews of how EAC

conducts business and reviews of recipients of funds

disbursed by EAC. The OIG’s work is designed to enhance

the economy, efﬁciency and effectiveness of EAC. The

OIG also works to detect and prevent fraud, waste, abuse

and mismanagement in EAC programs and operations.

OIG reports educate and inform clients (EAC, Congress,

Ofﬁce of Management and Budget, Government Account-

ability Ofﬁce, state governments, other federal entities and

the public) of opportunities to improve the efﬁciency and

effectiveness of EAC and its programs.

EAC Federal Advisory Committees

Board of Advisors

EAC’s Board of Advisors includes members appointed by

the following groups, as speciﬁed in HAVA (two members

appointed by each): National Governors Association;

National Conference of State Legislatures; National

Association of Secretaries of State; The National Associa-

tion of State Election Directors; National Association

of Counties; National Association of County Recorders,

Election Ofﬁcials and Clerks; The United States Confer-

ence of Mayors; Election Center; International Association

of Clerks, Recorders, Election Ofﬁcials and Treasurers; the

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights; and Architectural and

Transportation Barriers Compliance Board.

Other members include representatives from the U.S.

Department of Justice, Public Integrity Section of the

Criminal Division and the Voting Section of the Civil

Rights Division; the director of the U.S. Department

Operations

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

of Defense Federal Voting Assistance Program; four

professionals from the ﬁeld of science and technology, one

each appointed by the Speaker and the Minority Leader

of the U.S. House of Representatives and by the Majority

Leader and Minority Leader of the U.S. Senate; and eight

members representing voter interests, with the chairs

and the ranking minority members of the U.S. House of

Representatives Committee on House Administration and

the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration

each appointing two members.

The Board of Advisors elects a chair, vice chair and

secretary from its members. Ofﬁcers serve for a term of

1 year and may serve no more than two consecutive terms

in any one ofﬁce.

The Board of Advisors participated in two virtual public

forums. During February 8–19, 2010, board members

provided input about Phase II of the Election Operations

Assessment, which contains threat trees for the seven

types of voting types covered by the Election Operations

Assessment. During April 26–30, 2010, board members

commented on a draft version of the EAC Recounts and

Contests study. The draft version contained information

about the laws and procedures each state uses to govern

recounts, contests and standards for what constitutes a

valid vote. The study included best practices that states use

with respect to recounts and contests.

The Board held its annual meeting June 16–18, 2010,

in Washington, D.C. Agenda items included EAC

program updates, a presentation from NIST regarding

the UOCAVA Voting Systems Threat Analysis and other

administrative matters. The Board passed the following

motions during the June meeting:

� Motion 2010-001: Recommendation that EAC begin a

dialogue with voting system manufacturers, state and

local election ofﬁcials and other relevant parties about

the maintenance and sustainability of voting systems.

� Motion 2010-002: Recommendation that Board Chair

Jim Dickson communicate to Congressman Dan Lun-

gren’s ofﬁce that a discussion was held regarding the

hiring of EAC’s general counsel and that the sentiments

of the Board were shared with EAC.

� Motion 2010-003: Recommendation that EAC conduct

a study of the performance of secondary school students

as poll workers in the election process.

� Motion 2010-004: Recommendation that EAC study the

establishment of the Help America Vote Act Founda-

tion created under Title VI of HAVA.

� Motion 2010-005: Recommendation that the Board

create a special committee to work with EAC to

develop recommendations establishing future studies on

the election administration profession.

� Motion 2010-006: Recommendation that the chair

appoint a committee to deﬁne sustainability issues that

could be studied by EAC and provide advice to the

Board regarding recommended studies.

� Motion 2010-007: Recommendation that the Board

recognize the contributions of Terri Hegarty, Craig

Donsanto and other former Board members for their

service.

The Board of Advisors’ motions, meeting minutes and

presentations are available at EAC.gov.

Standards Board

The Standards Board consists of 110 members; 55 are state

election ofﬁcials selected by their respective chief state

election ofﬁcial and 55 are local election ofﬁcials selected

through a process supervised by the chief state election

ofﬁcial. HAVA prohibits any 2 members representing the

same state to be members of the same political party.

The Board elects 9 members to serve as an executive

board, of which not more than 5 are state election ofﬁcials,

not more than 5 are local election ofﬁcials and not more

than 5 are members of the same political party.

The Standards Board participated in three virtual public

forums in FY 2010 to review and comment on the draft

EAC Recounts and Contests study, three draft chapters

of the Election Management Guidelines and Phase II of

the Election Operations Assessment. The Board held its

annual meeting on July 27, 2010; the executive board met

in person in Washington, D.C., and the other members

participated virtually via WebEx. Agenda items included

EAC program updates, commercial off-the-shelf products

and UOCAVA projects. The following resolutions were

passed at the July meeting:

� 2010-01: Amended Article X, Section 2, of the bylaws

of the Board, allowing proposed bylaw amendments to

be submitted to the Designated Federal Ofﬁcer at least

70 days before a Standards Board meeting.

� 2010-02: Amended Article VIII, Section 2, of the

bylaws of the Board, allowing proxy designations by

electronic means and clarifying that proxies may vote

for all matters outside of elections.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

� 2010-03: Amended bylaws to authorize executive board

elections to be conducted by mail-in ballot.

� 2010-04: Recommended that EAC coordinate the

implementation of its UOCAVA Roadmap with its

advisory boards and NIST to apply the NIST Risk

Management Framework and other methods to identify

security controls and technologies to mitigate security

concerns.

� 2010-05: Concluded that the Board provide recommen-

dations to NIST and the Technical Guidelines Develop-

ment Committee (TGDC) regarding the deﬁnition of

auditability and the development of alternatives to

software independence. Also established a Software

Independence ad hoc committee.

Standards Board resolutions, meeting minutes and

presentations are available at EAC.gov.

Technical Guidelines Development

Committee

HAVA mandates that the TGDC help EAC develop the

VVSG, a task that was completed in May 2005. The

VVSG are not mandatory and each state retains the

prerogative to adopt these guidelines.

By law, the chairperson of the TGDC is the director of

NIST. The TGDC is composed of 14 other members ap-

pointed jointly by EAC and the director of NIST. Members

include representatives from the EAC Standards Board,

EAC Board of Advisors, Architectural and Transportation

Barriers Compliance Board, American National Standards

Institute, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,

The National Association of State Election Directors

(2 representatives) and other individuals with technical and

scientiﬁc expertise related to voting systems and voting

equipment.

TGDC meeting minutes, roster, resolutions and other

related material are available at www.vote.nist.gov.

Public Meetings

In FY 2010, EAC held eight public meetings, which

were also available to the public via webcast. Public

meeting topics included military and overseas voters, the

Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE)

Act and EAC’s Quality Monitoring Program for certiﬁed

voting systems. EAC also held two public hearings about

proposed changes to NVRA regulations. Public meetings

and hearings are available to the public via archived

webcasts and meeting agendas, minutes and testimony are

posted at EAC.gov.

Freedom of Information Act Report

In FY 2010, EAC received 10 requests under the Freedom

of Information Act (FOIA). Nine requests were processed

and completed. One request was partially completed; EAC

is awaiting clariﬁcation from the requestor to complete the

request.

The median processing time was 16 days, and the average

was 14.8 days. The range in number of days for response

was from 3 to 22 days. Of the 10 requests completed in FY

2010, 7 were completed within 20 days, 2 were completed

within 40 days and 1 partial response was provided within

20 days.

In no instances did EAC not comply with a request, no

appeals were made, in no instances did a court review a

decision to withhold, no administrative appeals were made

and EAC received no expedited review requests.

Two EAC employees processed FOIA requests, but neither

employee is solely dedicated to FOIA activities. EAC

spent approximately $17,500 processing FOIA requests in

FY 2010. EAC initiated fee waiver requests on all FOIA

requests. No fee waiver adjudications were initiated.

EAC withheld documents in two instances; one instance

under FOIA exemption 5, and one instance under FOIA

exemption 6. The information withheld included internal

memoranda, personnel ﬁles and conﬁdential business

information.

EAC’s FOIA regulations instructions for submitting a

request and the FOIA Reading Room are available to the

public at EAC.gov.

EAC FOIA Policy

(a) The Commission will make the fullest possible

disclosure of records to the public, consistent with

the rights of individuals to privacy, the rights of

individuals and other entities with respect to trade

secrets and commercial or ﬁnancial information

entitled to privileged and conﬁdential treatment and

the need for the Commission to promote free internal

policy deliberations and to pursue its ofﬁcial activities

without undue disruption.

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

(b) All Commission records shall be available to the public

unless they are speciﬁcally exempt under this part.

sion’s preference is to furnish records to requesters in

electronic format, when possible.

(d) To carry out this policy, the Commission has desig-

nated a Chief Freedom of Information Act Ofﬁcer

(Chief FOIA Ofﬁcer).

Operating Budget

Since 2004, EAC has received funds in three appropriations:

Salaries and Expenses, Election Reform Programs and for

FY 2008 only, Election Data Collection Grants. The purpose

of the Data Collection grants of $2.0 million each to ﬁve

states was to measure the costs of improving the collection

of election data at the precinct level during the 2008 federal

election. In FY 2010, the Salaries and Expenses appropria-

tion of $17,959,000 funded the $3.5 million transfer to

NIST; $750,000 for College Poll Worker recruitment and

training grants; $300,000 for Mock Elections for high

school students; and general ofﬁce expenses including

salaries, travel, rent, and expenses incurred for telecom-

munications, printing, contracts, supplies, and equipment.

During FY 2010, EAC ﬁnalized policies and procedures

in the areas of general administration, travel and informa-

tion technology. Also during FY 2010, EAC made

great progress in the program areas, achieving the goals

described in the EAC Strategic Plan, which is based on the

mandates of HAVA.

Internal Controls

EAC is subject to numerous legislative and regulatory

requirements that promote and support effective internal

controls. EAC believes that maintaining integrity and

accountability in its programs and operations is critical for

good government, demonstrates responsible stewardship

over assets and resources, helps ensure high-quality and

responsible leadership, allows for effective delivery of

services to customers and maximizes desired program

outcomes.

EAC has developed and implemented management,

administrative and ﬁnancial system controls to reasonably

ensure that (1) programs and operations achieve intended

results efﬁciently and effectively; (2) resources are used in

accordance with the mission of the agency; (3) programs

and resources are protected from waste, fraud and abuse;

(4) program and operations activities comply with laws

and regulations; and (5) reliable, complete and timely data

are maintained and used for making decisions.

EAC used controls that ensure that transactions are executed

in accordance with budgetary and ﬁnancial laws and other

requirements, consistent with the purposes authorized and

are recorded in accordance with federal accounting stan-

dards. EAC ensures that assets are properly acquired and

used and that they are safeguarded to deter theft, accidental

loss or unauthorized disposition and fraud. EAC is still

collecting programmatic performance data and ensuring

that the data are adequately supported. To this end, EAC

contracted for and received recommendations from an

independent review of (1) its Strategic Plan per formance

measures and systems to collect the data and (2) risk levels

associated with providing inaccurate information for mak-

ing internal decisions. During FY 2011, each manager will

become familiar with internal control requirements and

responsibilities and be able to sign statements of assurance

that controls are in place and functioning.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

State

2010

Payment

Required

State Match

Date

Received

State

2010

Payment

Required

State Match

Date

Received

Alaska $500,000 $26,316 3/29/10

Hawaii $500,000 $26,316 3/10/10

Idaho $500,000 $26,316 2/16/10

Illinois $4,193,259 $220,698 8/13/10

Indiana $2,068,525 $108,870 12/17/09

Kansas $916,581 $48,241 9/13/10

Maryland $1,810,987 $95,315 12/22/09

Michigan $3,359,723 $176,828 *****

Minnesota $1,670,911 $87,943 10/8/09

Nebraska $591,388 $31,126 1/29/10

Nevada $694,006 $36,527 6/9/10

New Mexico $613,898 $32,310 2/4/10

North Carolina $2,787,357 $146,703 1/15/10

Oklahoma $1,181,900 $62,205 12/11/09

Pennsylvania $4,277,466 $225,130 2/1/10

Puerto Rico $1,240,015 $65,264 *****

Rhode Island $500,000 $26,316 11/27/09

Texas $6,829,389 $359,442 12/23/09

West Virginia $657,360 $34,598 4/14/10

Wisconsin $1,835,843 $96,623 2/4/10

Total $36,728,608 $1,933,085

Alaska $350,000 $18,421 3/29/10

Arizona $1,211,411 $63,759 8/16/10

Arkansas $647,217 $34,064 5/17/10

California $7,857,562 $413,560 *****

Idaho $350,000 $18,421 4/8/10

Illinois $2,935,281 $154,490 8/13/10

Indiana $1,447,967 $76,210 9/13/10

Iowa $710,834 $37,413 3/29/10

Kansas $641,607 $33,769 9/13/10

Kentucky $983,033 $51,739 3/19/10

Michigan $2,351,806 $123,781 *****

Minnesota $1,169,637 $61,560 6/23/10

Mississippi $671,573 $35,346 7/22/10

Montana $350,000 $18,421 5/3/10

Nevada $485,804 $25,569 9/24/10

New York $4,564,310 $240,229 3/12/10

North Carolina $1,951,150 $102,693 8/13/10

North Dakota $350,000 $18,421 4/8/10

Pennsylvania $2,994,226 $157,592 9/24/10

Puerto Rico $868,011 $45,685 *****

Rhode Island $350,000 $18,421 6/15/10

South Carolina $968,829 $50,991 5/25/10

South Dakota $350,000 $18,421 9/13/10

Texas $4,780,572 $251,612 9/13/10

Washington $1,407,879 $74,100 9/13/10

Total $40,748,710 $2,144,690

*****Indicates funds have been requested and disbursement is being processed.

EAC’s Grants Management Division distributes and moni-

tors HAVA funds, provides technical assistance to states

and grantees on the use of funds and reports on require-

ments payments and discretionary grants to improve the

administration of elections for federal ofﬁce. The division

also negotiates indirect cost rates with grantees and

resolves audit ﬁndings on the use of HAVA funds.

HAVA Funds

In FY 2010, Public Law 111-117 included $70 million for

HAVA Section 251 payments. The funds are distributed

according to a formula based on the voting age population

of the state according to the most recent census and the

Federal Financial Assistance To

Improve Federal Elections

total voting age population of all states. To draw the funds,

the states certify that they are in compliance with appli-

cable laws and requirements per HAVA Section 253.

A state may use a requirements payment to carry out

activities to improve the administration of elections for

federal ofﬁce outside of the activities listed under HAVA

Title III if the state, per Section 251, certiﬁes that it has

implemented the requirements of Title III or that the

amount it will spend on other activities will not exceed an

amount equal to the minimum payment amount applicable

under Section 252. Title III includes voting system

standards, voting information requirements, provisional

voting, statewide voter registration lists and identiﬁcation

2009 Section 251 Funds Distributed in FY 2010 2010 Section 251 Funds Distributed in FY 2010

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

requirements for voters who register by mail. A state

may also use a requirements payment to improve the

administration of federal elections. In November 2009,

EAC provided training via a webinar to states on using the

Standard Form 425 Federal Financial Report. The webinar

is available at EAC.gov.

EAC paid $29.7 million of the $70.0 million awarded

in FY 2010, which represents all funds requested by the

states by September 30, 2010.

Each year, EAC prepares a report for Congress that

describes how the states have spent HAVA funds. On

February 1, 2010, the division released the EAC Annual

Report on Grant Programs as of September 30, 2008. The

report was released along with the FY 2011 Congressional

Budget Justiﬁcation and FY 2009 Annual Performance

Report. A comprehensive chart detailing all HAVA funds

provided to the states is available at EAC.gov.

To assist state and local governments regarding the proper

use of HAVA funds, EAC established the Funding Advi-

sory Opinion request process, through which any federal

or state government ofﬁcial, any local election ofﬁcial

(provided the local jurisdiction received or anticipates

receiving HAVA funds), or any member of the EAC staff

may request an advisory opinion concerning the use of

HAVA funds. During FY 2010, EAC issued three Funding

Advisory Opinions regarding the use of HAVA funds. All

Funding Advisory Opinions are available at EAC.gov.

Help America Vote College Program

The Help America Vote College Program, established by

HAVA Section 501, provides grants to encourage student

participation as poll workers or assistants, to foster student

interest in the electoral process and to encourage state and

local governments to use students as poll workers.

In FY 2010, EAC awarded $750,000 in College Poll

Worker grants to 14 institutions of higher education and

one nonproﬁt organization to recruit students to serve

as poll workers in the 2010 federal election. The 2010

grantees were as follows:

� Alverno College, Milwaukee, Wisconsin: $40,800.

� Benedictine University, Lisle, Illinois: $55,385.

� Central Connecticut State University, Hartford, Con-

necticut: $32,107.

� College of the Canyons, Santa Clarita, California:

$59,200.

� Harris-Stowe State University, St. Louis, Missouri:

$43,433.

� Keystone College, La Plume, Pennsylvania: $39,996.

� Kids Voting of Central Ohio, Columbus, Ohio: $84,000.

� Kutztown University, Kutztown, Pennsylvania:

$58,868.

� Lourdes College, Sylvania, Ohio: $34,783.

� Marshall-Wythe Law School Foundation, Williams-

burg, Virginia: $63,700.

� Morehouse College, Atlanta, Georgia: $38,037.

� Southern Utah University, Cedar City, Utah: $46,480.

� Suffolk University, Boston, Massachusetts: $30,211.

� University of Rochester, Rochester, New York:

$62,000.

� University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee:

$61,000.

The 2010 grantees developed creative ways of engaging

students in the electoral process, and many set up measures

to ensure continuation of their programs. The University

of Tennessee, for example, offered online training videos

as an option for students to complete their poll worker

training. They also plan to offer a 4-credit-hour class for

students who participated in the program to review data

and study advanced election issues and to hold a followup

symposium to talk about the experience with students,

election ofﬁcials and the media. Professors at Southern

Utah University created pre- and post-assessments to ﬁnd

out how students’ understanding of the political process

had changed.

The Help America Vote College Poll Worker grants

help relieve poll worker shortages across the country and

provide election ofﬁcials with technically proﬁcient poll

workers. According to EAC’s 2008 Election Administra-

tion and Voting Survey, nearly one-half of the jurisdictions

reported experiencing difﬁculties recruiting poll workers.

Thanks to these grants, many grantees reported having an

adequate number of poll workers, some for the ﬁrst time.

As of FY 2010, EAC had awarded 89 grants totaling $3.1

million to recruit and train college poll workers since 2004.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Mock Election Grant Program

The Mock Election Grant Program, authorized under

HAVA Section 295, encourages youth participation and

civic engagement by enabling students to participate in

simulated elections with voting equipment, ballots and poll

workers. The grants enable students to become familiar

with voting processes and technologies so that when they

become eligible to vote they will be more comfortable

with their civic responsibilities.

In FY 2010, EAC awarded eight Mock Election Program

grants totaling $300,000 to six government agencies, one

civic group and one nonproﬁt organization. The grants

were intended to be used for high school students to oper-

ate programs of simulated elections, complete with voting

equipment, ballots and poll workers.

The 2010 winners, chosen from a highly competitive pool

of 34 applicants, used a wide range of creative approaches

to engage high school students, particularly those in rural

areas, including American Indian reservations, and urban

locations. The 2010 grantees include the following:

� Seminole County Supervisor of Elections in Sanford,

Florida. To partner with Crooms Academy of Informa-

tion Technology to hold debates in which candidates,

voters and community leaders discuss issues before the

students and to train students to serve as poll workers

on Election Day: $15,441.

� Polk County Auditor’s Ofﬁce in Des Moines, Iowa. To

educate students using computer simulations of com-

mon and lesser known aspects of the voting process,

from establishing eligibility and operating voting

equipment to casting a provisional ballot and assisting

voters who have special needs: $49,293.

� Ofﬁce of the Secretary of State of the Commonwealth

of Kentucky. To engage a large population of

students—30,940 students in underserved counties

throughout the state—in mock elections and related

educational activities through partnerships with the

Kentucky Department of Education and the NewCities

Institute: $44,553.

� Michigan Government Television in Lansing. To

partner with Leland Public Schools to recruit 100,000

students in rural and urban areas to participate in

educational election activities leading up to the National

Student/Parent Mock Election: $42,000.

� State of Montana Secretary of State. To partner with

the School Administrators of Montana and the Ofﬁce

of Public Instruction to educate students living on

American Indian reservations about the election

process through a customizable election curriculum

that incorporates a variety of multimedia platforms:

$30,000.

� League of Women Voters of Oregon Education Fund.

To partner with the Governor’s Ofﬁce, the secretary of

state, the Oregon Department of Education, the Oregon

School Board Association and the Oregon Associa-

tion of Student Councils to reach 80,000 students in

350 schools to participate in a simulated election of

the state’s vote-by-mail system and election-related

educational and leadership development activities:

$41,413.

� State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.

To partner with the Rhode Island Board of Elections,

Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary

Education and Roger Williams University to develop

and implement a statewide voter education project that

will reach at least one-half of the state’s high school

population of 46,000 and target urban and immigrant

communities: $37,300.

� Ofﬁce of the Washington Secretary of State. To provide

students in 100 schools with opportunities to participate

in online voting, election-related educational activities

and two televised segments cosponsored by TVW,

Washington’s public affairs broadcast network, on the

mock election that will feature interviews with students

and teachers and a forum in which student audience

members engage with panelists on national and local

issues: $40,000.

The Voting System Pre-Election

Logic and Accuracy Testing and

Post-Election Audit Initiative

This grant will award approximately $2 million to develop

and document processes for coordinating high-quality

and cost-effective voting system pre-election logic and

accuracy (L&A) testing and post-election audits. During

FY 2010, EAC developed the ﬁnal notice of federal funds

available, which included public comments gathered

during FY 2009. This notice set forth funding parameters,

including the scope of work, eligibility requirements and

qualiﬁcations, selection criteria and other related details.

Through this initiative, EAC seeks to capture and test

innovative, high-quality processes and tools, as well as

practices that are cost effective and evidence based for

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

performing voting system pre-election L&A testing and

post-election audits by jurisdictions of varying sizes,

locations and equipment conﬁgurations. Congress funded

this initiative under the Consolidated Appropriations Act

for FY 2009/2010.

The Military Heroes Initiative

In FY 2010, EAC established and awarded the Military

Heroes Initiative, a $500,000 2-year grant aimed at

advancing voting technology and processes for recently

injured military personnel. The grant seeks to improve

voting technology and processes for military service

members who have sustained disabling injuries in combat

operations. According to the National Council on Dis-

ability, more than 30,800 U.S. service members in recent

years have returned from a combat zone with a range

of disabilities, including loss of limbs, loss of sight and

traumatic brain injury. HAVA disability requirements

(speciﬁcally Section 301) and the Military Oversees

Voting Empowerment Act contain provisions aimed at

signiﬁcantly improving the voting process for people with

disabilities and military personnel.

The winner of the grant competition was the Information

Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), which

is partnering with the Georgia Institute of Technology

Applied Research Corporation, a leading research institute

with extensive experience working with military institu-

tions and conducting accessibility research, and with

Operation Bravo Foundation, a pioneer in developing

voting alternatives for military and overseas citizens.

Funds will support research to better understand the needs

of injured military personnel in major hospital, recovery

and rehabilitation facilities related to election processes,

including (1) documentation of current practices associated

with voting activities at these facilities, (2) identiﬁcation of

barriers that may prevent this population from voting pri-

vately and independently and (3) reviews and assessments

of new and innovative technologies that assist military

personnel with participating in the electoral process.

Through a study of all aspects of the voting process, ITIF

and its partners will evaluate and offer recommenda-

tions to improve the voting needs of military personnel

with disabilities. In addition to assessing current voting

technologies, services and processes, ITIF will review

alternative ballot delivery and return methods and perform

user-focused studies to identify potential solutions. Their

recommendations will be delivered by early 2012 for

potential use in the 2012 federal election. Through the

Military Heroes Initiative, EAC seeks to foster a better

understanding of the voting needs of injured military

personnel and enhance the military’s processes for sup-

porting the participation of this important constituency in

elections. This initiative is funded under the Consolidated

Appropriations Act for FY 2009/2010.

The Accessible Voting Technology

Initiative

This grant will award $7 million to support research and

development that advances voting accessibility technology

to enable citizens with disabilities to vote privately and

independently. During FY 2010, EAC developed the ﬁnal

notice of federal funds available, which included public

comments gathered during FY 2009. This notice set forth

funding parameters, including the scope of work, eligibil-

ity requirements and qualiﬁcations, selection criteria and

other related details.

In designing the grant, EAC consulted with a variety of

accessibility, technology and election administration

experts during a series of public meetings and roundtable

discussions during a period of several months. This initia-

tive seeks to increase the accessibility of new, existing and

emerging technological solutions in such areas as assistive

technologies, interoperability and voting system design.

This initiative is funded under the Consolidated Appropria-

tions Act for FY 2009/2010.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Voting System Testing and Certification

In FY 2010, EAC’s Testing and Certiﬁcation Program

staff continued to operate a thorough, rigorous and trans -

parent testing process. While maintaining a consistent

level of scrutiny, they made internal changes to further

streamline the process and reduce the time and cost of

testing. As a result, in FY 2010, EAC certiﬁed three voting

systems. Currently, four additional voting systems are in

testing at EAC.

In addition, EAC worked with NIST and the Department

of Defense Federal Voting Assistance Program to develop

Pilot Program Testing Requirements and created a Voting

System Pilot Program Testing & Certiﬁcation Manual in

FY 2010. EAC cosponsored a number of roundtable events

and discussions with NIST and FVAP in the following

areas: UOCAVA pilot program, UOCAVA remote voting

systems and a review of the 2010 election.

In FY 2010, the division focused on development and

structure of the Quality Monitoring Program outlined in

the Voting System Pilot Program Testing & Certiﬁcation

Manual. The ﬁrst EAC systems were certiﬁed in FY 2009,

making FY 2010 the ﬁrst year EAC could implement the

Quality Monitoring Program. EAC continues to develop

and update the procedures and policies for this program.

Voting System Test Laboratory

Accreditation

HAVA Section 231 requires EAC and NIST to develop a

program for accrediting voting system testing laboratories.

The National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

(NVLAP) of NIST evaluates test laboratories and performs

periodic re-evaluations to verify that the laboratories

continue to meet the accreditation criteria. When NIST

determines a laboratory is technically competent to test

systems, the NIST director recommends a laboratory to

EAC for accreditation. EAC makes the ﬁnal determination

to accredit the laboratory. EAC issues the accreditation

certiﬁcate to approved laboratories, maintains a register

of accredited laboratories and posts this information on its

Web site at EAC.gov.

Laboratories must adhere to the requirements of EAC’s

Voting System Test Laboratory Program Manual or face

possible suspension or revocation of accreditation. These

requirements include stringent conﬂict-of-interest and

compliance-management programs.

Currently, two test laboratories are accredited by EAC:

SLI Global Solutions (formerly SysTest Laboratories)

and Wyle Laboratories. In FY 2010, EAC reaccredited

Wyle Laboratories as a voting system test laboratory under

EAC’s program. The reaccreditation was issued after on-

site inspections of Wyle Laboratories in accordance with

EAC’s Voting System Test Laboratory Program Manual

requirements. CIBER, Inc., did not renew with NVLAP,

which rendered them inactive as an accredited laboratory;

their accreditation would have expired in 2010.

Information on Voting System Test Laboratory Accredi-

tation, including the Voting System Test Laboratory

Program Manual, is posted in the Testing and Certiﬁcation

section of the EAC Web site at EAC.gov.

Voting System Certiﬁcation

HAVA instructs EAC to establish the federal government’s

ﬁrst voluntary program to test and certify voting equip-

ment. The certiﬁcation program was established after the

2005 VVSG were adopted and the ﬁrst recommendations

regarding laboratories for federal accreditation were given

to EAC by NIST in February 2007.

The ﬁrst step in the certiﬁcation process is manufacturer

registration. Applicants are required to provide written

policies regarding quality assurance and document

retention and also provide a complete list of manufacturing

facilities. Through registration with EAC, the manufac-

turer agrees to meet all program requirements.

A manufacturer that has a system ready for testing

submits an application for testing to EAC and selects an

EAC-accredited laboratory to conduct the testing. The

laboratory submits a test plan to EAC for approval; tests

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

the voting system; and provides a test report, based on

the ﬁndings from testing, to EAC for review and action.

EAC technical reviewers and staff members review the test

reports. If the testing and report of a system demonstrate

conformance with all applicable voting system standards

or guidelines, the program director will recommend the

system for certiﬁcation. EAC’s executive director will

consider the recommendation and provide a ﬁnal decision

on the system. Commissioners serve as the appeal body.

Upon certiﬁcation, a system may bear an EAC mark of

certiﬁcation and may be marketed as EAC certiﬁed.

In FY 2010, EAC certiﬁed three voting systems: Election

Systems & Software (ES&S) Unity 3.2.0.0, Rev 1; Micro-

Vote EMS 4.0B Voting System; and Unisyn’s OpenElect

1.0. An EAC certiﬁcation means a voting system has met

all applicable requirements of the VVSG by passing a

series of comprehensive tests conducted by a federally

accredited test laboratory. Manufacturers must also meet

technical and ethical standards to ensure the integrity of

the process and the system when it makes its way from the

test laboratory to production and into the marketplace.

Currently, four voting systems are being tested at EAC:

Dominion Democracy Suite 4.0, ES&S Unity 3.2.1.0,

ES&S Unity 5.0.0.0 and Sequoia WinEDS 4.0.34.

Information regarding systems in testing, test plans, test

reports and decisions on certiﬁcation are posted in the

Testing and Certiﬁcation section of the EAC Web site at

EAC.gov.

Quality Monitoring Program

EAC monitors all voting systems it certiﬁes through its

Quality Monitoring Program. The program requires manu-

facturers to submit reports whenever a federally certiﬁed

system experiences an anomaly. This program requires

manufacturers to notify EAC if a modiﬁcation is made

to a certiﬁed system’s software, ﬁrmware or hardware.

EAC conducts site visits of accredited laboratories and

participating manufacturers’ facilities.

In FY 2010, EAC received notiﬁcation from ES&S regard-

ing the Unity 3.2.0.0 system. EAC conducted an informal

investigation and issued a system advisory notice on the

DS200 scanner regarding a power down and freeze issue

experienced during L&A testing and on Election Day.

A system advisory notice was issued for the MicroVote

EMS 4.0B. The system advisory notice stated that memory

cards larger than 32 megabytes do not operate properly

with certain Inﬁnity Voting Panels.

In addition, as part of the Quality Monitoring Program,

EAC is required to conduct onsite manufacturing assess-

ments. These onsite visits provide the opportunity for EAC

to ascertain that the manufacturers of voting systems are

following EAC’s required procedures. In FY 2010, EAC

conducted manufacturing site visits for ES&S and Unisyn

Voting Solutions. For each visit, EAC creates a site visit

report that is posted at EAC.gov.

List of Registered Manufacturers

 Dominion Voting Systems Corporation

 Election Systems & Software

 Everyone Counts, Inc.

 Hart InterCivic

 MicroVote General Corp.

 N.V. Nederlansche Apparatenfabriek (Nedap)

 Precise Voting®

 Scytl

 TruVote® International

 Unisyn Voting Solutions®

How Does a Voting System Get Certiﬁed by EAC?

Step 1: Voting system manufacturers must register with EAC.

Step 2: Manufacturers must submit an application and select

a federally accredited test laboratory to begin the

testing process.

Step 3: Test laboratory submits draft test plan to EAC for

approval.

Step 4: EAC approves test plan.

Step 5: Voting system is tested to the applicable standards.

Step 6: Testing concluded; draft test report submitted to EAC

for approval.

Step 7: EAC approves test report and issues initial decision on

certiﬁcation.

Step 8: Test laboratory rebuilds voting system in a trusted

environment, otherwise known as a “trusted build.”

Step 9: Manufacturer provides software identiﬁcation tools to

EAC, which enables election ofﬁcials to conﬁrm use of

EAC-certiﬁed systems.

Step 10: Manufacturer provides voting system software to EAC

repository.

Step 11: Manufacturer agrees in writing to all EAC certiﬁcation

conditions and program requirements.

Step 12: EAC certiﬁes voting system.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Information generated by the Quality Monitoring Program,

including anomaly reports, are posted in the Testing and

Certiﬁcation section of the EAC Web site at EAC.gov.

Communication and Clariﬁcation

In an effort to increase efﬁciency and streamline the

certiﬁcation process, EAC established the Requests for

Interpretation (RFI) process. This process enables program

participants to request interpretations of the VVSG. In

addition, EAC established the Notice of Clariﬁcation

(NOC) process, through which EAC issues clarifying

language based on written requests from manufacturers

or test laboratories seeking clariﬁcation about a program

requirement, policy or guideline.

All RFIs and NOCs are available in the Testing and

Certiﬁcation section of the EAC Web site at EAC.gov.

EAC Decisions on RFIs Issued in FY 2010

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2009-05

(T-Coil Requirements)

2002 Voting System Standards (VSS), Volume I,

Sections 2.2.7.2 c & d

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Sections 3.2.2.2 c ii & iii

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-01

(Voltage Levels and ESD Test)

2002 VSS, Volume I, Section 3.2.2.8

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Section 4.1.2.8

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2009-06

(Temperature and Power Variation Tests)

2002 VSS, Volume I, Section 3.4.3

2002 VSS, Volume II, Sections 4.7.1, 4.7.2, Appendix Sec. C.4

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Section 4.3.3

2005 VVSG, Volume II, Sections 4.7.1, 4.7.3, Appendix Sec. C.4

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-02

(Coding Conventions)

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Section 5.2.3 d

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Section 5.2.5

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Section 5.2.6

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Sections 5.2.7 b, c, d, & e

2005 VVSG, Volume II, Section 5.4.2

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-03

(Database Coding Conventions)

2005 VVSG, Volume II, Section 5.4

2005 VVSG, Volume II, Sections 5.4.2.a–5.4.2.v

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-06

(DRE Accessibility Requirements and Other Accessible Voting

Stations)

2005 VVSG, v1.0, Volume I, Section 3, Usability and

Accessibility Requirements

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-04

(Functional Requirements With Respect to Security)

2002 VSS, Volume I, Section 2.2.1, Security

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Section 2.1.1, Security

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-05

(Testing of Modiﬁcation to a Certiﬁed System)

2005 VVSG, Volume I, Section 1.7

Voting System Pilot Program Testing & Certiﬁcation Manual,

Section 4.4.2.3

EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation 2010-07

(Module Length)

2002 VSS, Volume II, Section 5.4.2.i

2005 VVSG, Volume II, Section 5.4.2.i

EAC NOCs Issued in FY 2010

Notice of Clariﬁcation 09-004: Clariﬁcation of the

Development and Submission of Test Reports

Notice of Clariﬁcation 09-005: Clariﬁcation of the

Development and Submission of Test Plans for Modiﬁcations

for EAC-Certiﬁed Systems

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines

The VVSG is the set of testable standards by which EAC

evaluates all voting systems. EAC’s accredited laborato-

ries conduct a conformance assessment using the VVSG to

evaluate the voting systems. A system submitted to EAC’s

program will receive certiﬁcation only if it complies with

the VVSG; nothing guarantees that a system will meet

the VVSG requirements and ultimately receive an EAC

certiﬁcation.

EAC, the TGDC and NIST work together to develop

voluntary testing standards. The 2005 VVSG are currently

in place, while EAC and NIST are formulating future

versions and updates.

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Revisions to the 2005 VVSG

After reviewing comments and receiving input from a

series of roundtable discussions about the next iteration,

EAC determined the 2005 VVSG should be revised before

the adoption of the next iteration, which may not occur for

several years.

To implement updates to the 2005 VVSG, EAC followed

the procedures in HAVA, which included providing a

120-day public comment period, longer than what is required

by HAVA, and soliciting input from EAC advisory boards.

EAC and NIST are currently reviewing the boards’ input

and will present an update to EAC for ﬁnal adoption.

EAC held a roundtable discussion in FY 2010 to discuss

accessibility issues and proposed updates to the VVSG.

Also, EAC held a public meeting and hearing in Washing-

ton, D.C., to discuss the Quality Monitoring Program and

the proposed updates to the VVSG.

UOCAVA and Pilot Program Testing

Requirements

The MOVE Act requires that EAC work with NIST and

FVAP to develop Pilot Program Testing Requirements.

EAC cosponsored a number of roundtable events and

discussions with NIST and FVAP in the following areas:

Pilot Program Testing Requirements, Internet voting and

UOCAVA remote voting systems. During FY 2010, EAC

issued ﬁnal Pilot Program Testing Requirements and

created a proposed Voting System Pilot Program Testing

& Certiﬁcation Manual.

Information regarding the Pilot Program Testing Require-

ments and the Voting System Pilot Program Testing &

Certiﬁcation Manual is posted in the Testing and Certiﬁca-

tion section of the EAC Web site at EAC.gov.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Research, Policy and Programs

The Research, Policy and Programs (RPP) division is

responsible for HAVA-mandated research and studies,

covering topics such as ballots cast and returned in accor-

dance with UOCAVA, NVRA and the Language Acces-

sibility Program. The RPP division produces educational

materials for voters to facilitate successful participation

in federal elections, such as registering to vote and voter

guides that election ofﬁcials throughout the nation can use

to supplement state and local education materials.

The division also administers the Election Management

Guidelines program to help election ofﬁcials promote

secure, accurate and accessible elections by providing

information on topics such as ballot design, contingency

planning, managing change in an election ofﬁce, media

and public relations and developing an audit trail.

In FY 2010, the division developed a list of potential

research projects and policy and program initiatives,

including timelines, many of which are mandated by

HAVA and/or authorized by Congress, to guide staff

initiatives and work schedules through 2012. Progress has

been made toward completing several projects noted in the

research schedule, and the list will continue to be revised

in accordance with EAC and/or Congressional priorities.

Research

Under HAVA requirements, EAC collects information

about election administration issues and shares that infor-

mation with Congress, election ofﬁcials and the public.

EAC released to Congress the HAVA-mandated report,

Free Postage for the Return of Absentee Ballots. Research

efforts continued in FY 2010 on two HAVA-mandated

studies: (1) Recounts and Contests and (2) Election

Administration in Urban and Rural Settings. Highlights

of the major surveys released in FY 2010 follow in the

next section. EAC research and accompanying data sets

are available at EAC.gov and www.data.gov. Data are

provided in several formats to accommodate multiple

audiences.

The 2008

Election Administration and

Voting Survey

In FY 2010, EAC adopted the 2008 Election Administra-

tion and Voting Survey, the third iteration sponsored

by EAC. Survey data provided by the states include

73 questions covering topics such as voter registration,

provisional ballots, domestic civilian absentee ballots and

election administration.

The 2008 EAC survey collected information on how

133,944,538 Americans participated in the election, and,

although the completeness of state responses varied sig-

niﬁcantly, valuable voting data were collected from each

of the 50 states, 4 territories and the District of Columbia.

Survey highlights include the following:

� More than 190 million people were reported as

registered to vote in the 2008 Presidential election—an

increase of more than 14 million since the last Presiden-

tial election.

� Less than two-thirds of voters cast a traditional ballot

in person at a polling place on Election Day because

alternative means of casting a ballot increased.

� Of voters, 13 percent cast their ballots early, which is

more than double the number of early voters from 2006.

� More than 26 million domestic absentee ballots were

sent by states––91.1 percent of which were returned to

the election ofﬁce and submitted for counting.

� Nearly 1 million ballots were sent to UOCAVA voters––

69 percent of which were returned to the election ofﬁce

and submitted for counting. Of those ballots returned,

93.6 percent were counted (the others were rejected for

various reasons, including missing deadlines).

In addition to collecting voting data, the 2008 survey

collected information on a range of election administration

topics, including the age of poll workers, polling places

and types of voting technology used. Among the key

ﬁndings were that states employed 878,360 poll workers

in the 2008 election, stafﬁng some 132,237 polling places

(or roughly 7 poll workers per polling place). As expected,

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

poll workers tended to be older than the average U.S.

citizen, with 60 percent of poll workers being between the

ages of 41 and 70. Nearly one-half of reporting jurisdic-

tions reported having at least some difﬁculty in obtaining a

sufﬁcient number of poll workers.

The types of voting technologies vary across and within

states. The Virgin Islands, the District of Columbia and

21 states reported deploying 218,370 Direct Recording

Electronic (DRE) machines. Another 16 states reported

using 81,088 DREs that produced voter-veriﬁed paper

audit trails. The most widely deployed technology was the

optical or digital scanner that reads voter-marked ballots;

43 states reported using 107,519 such counters in at least

some of their jurisdictions.

EAC also issued a guide to the EAVS, which is the data

policy governing states’ collection and submission of their

data, as well as processes for verifying and correcting the

data.

2008 Uniformed and Overseas Absentee

Voting Act Study

The 2008 UOCAVA study is EAC’s third report to

Congress regarding UOCAVA voters. It is based on

information gathered from a survey of 55 states and ter-

ritories, asking for data at the county (or equivalent) level

regarding the November 4, 2008 election and the previous

2-year period.

The 2008 edition of the survey was the result of discus-

sions with state and local election ofﬁcials, political

scientists, researchers, members of election administration

and advocacy groups and the general public. The 2008

survey requested states to report on their state laws,

deﬁnitions and procedures for the ﬁrst time.

Highlights of the 2008 survey include the following:

� Nearly 1 million ballots were transmitted to UOCAVA

voters for the 2008 election.

� Of the ballots transmitted, 69 percent were returned

and submitted for counting, and, of those returned,

93.6 percent were counted (the others were rejected for

various reasons, including missing deadlines).

� A total of 28,131 voters submitted a Federal Write-in

Absentee Ballot (FWAB). Because of challenges in

tracking FWABs, this number actually may have been

higher.

� Response rates to the 2008 survey were markedly better

than response rates in 2006, but consistency across the

states in the way terms are deﬁned and the way data are

collected remains uneven.

Policy

In FY 2010, the Policy Department of RPP completed

research on state laws applicable to provisional voting and

began work on the HAVA-mandated voluntary guidance

that will be provided to the states. Another major area of

activity was the reissuance of regulations pertaining to

the NVRA of 1993. In accordance with HAVA and EAC’s

Strategic Plan, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

related to NVRA was developed and published in the

Federal Register on August 9, 2010.

The 2010

Election Administration and

Voting Survey

During FY 2010, EAC prepared the 2010 Election

Administration and Voting Survey for release. The 2010

survey is divided into two parts. The ﬁrst part captures

quantitative data pertaining to the NVRA and UOCAVA

and to other election administration issues, such as the

counting of provisional ballots and poll worker recruit-

ment. The second part, the Statutory Overview, contains

information about states’ election laws and procedures.

This information will help EAC and the public understand

the data provided in the ﬁrst part of the survey, as well as

the laws and procedures used to administer elections at the

state and local levels. The proposed information collection

for the survey was out for two 60-day public comment

periods. The ﬁnal 2010 EAVS was released in May 2010.

The data collected through the EAVS are the basis for

three reports: the NVRA, UOCAVA and comprehensive

EAVS. (The 2008 NVRA report was released in FY 2009.)

How Americans Voted in the 2008 General Election

Other

In person

Domestic absentee

UOCAVA

Early voting

Provisional

Not categorized

60%

17%

13%

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

The Policy Department of RPP is charged with creating

guidance for commissioner review about provisional vot-

ing and statewide voter registration databases. In FY 2010,

EAC began to research state statutes and regulations and

collected manuals about provisional voting and statewide

voter registration databases.

Proposed Changes to the National Voter

Registration Act Regulations

In FY 2010, EAC sought comments on the proposed

changes to its regulations pertaining to the NVRA of 1993.

Section 9(a) of the NVRA requires the responsible agency

to issue regulations for developing a national mail voter

registration form and for submitting a biennial report to

Congress on the effect of the NVRA.

In the NPRM, EAC proposed to amend its NVRA regula-

tions to ensure they are consistent with the 2002 HAVA

and to make some technical amendments. EAC also asked

for public comment on other issues related to the national

mail voter registration form and administration of the NVRA.

The public could comment on the NPRM via postal mail,

e-mail, or www.regulations.gov. Comments received are

posted at www.regulations.gov. EAC invited the public to

comment on these changes until November 23, 2010.

EAC also held two public hearings, in August and Septem-

ber, on the proposed changes. The testimony presented

was made available to the public on the EAC Web site at

EAC.gov.

After all comments and testimony are received, EAC will

issue one or more Final Notice(s) of Proposed Rulemaking.

In addition, EAC will analyze the public input to determine

whether the national mail voter registration form must

be revised and the nature of guidance that EAC should

provide to the states.

Programs

The primary focus of the Programs Department of RPP

was to provide additional resources for both voters and

election ofﬁcials before the 2010 federal general election.

Resources included everything from election management

materials to registration deadlines to basic information

about federal elections.

Resources for Voters

In FY 2010, RPP’s Language Accessibility Program worked

to reach the strategic goal of meeting the language needs

of minority voters who participate in federal elections by

translating the Glossary of Election Terminology into four

Number of Ballots Transmitted to UOCAVA Voters—2008 Election

100,000–121,395

50,000–99,999

20,000–49,999

10,000–19,999

1,125–9,999

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Native American languages and by broadly distributing

the Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections. The glossaries and

the Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections were translated into

Navajo, Cherokee, Dakota and Yup’ik and were already

available in English, Spanish and ﬁve Asian languages:

Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tagalog and Vietnamese. The

Ofﬁce of Citizenship of the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and

Immigration Services distributed more than 700,000 copies

of the Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections to new citizens.

After completing a technical study that analyzed transla-

tions of the national voter registration form into Asian

languages, EAC released the NVRA Form in March 2010

in Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tagalog and Vietnamese.

Resources for Election Ofﬁcials

One of EAC’s top priorities is providing assistance to

election ofﬁcials. The Election Management Guidelines

and Quick Start Management Guides were created to assist

state and local election ofﬁcials with effectively managing

and administering elections.

Working with 26 election ofﬁcials from across the country

and other election administration experts, the Programs

Department released three new Quick Start Management

Guides in 2010 on Technology in Elections, Elections

Ofﬁce Administration and Accessibility. In addition, the

Resources for Voters Available in Several Languages

By Using This

Postcard Form and Guide

For U.S. Citizens

The National Mail Voter Registration Form is available in

English, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tagalog and

Vietnamese.

A Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections

is available in English, Spanish,

Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tagalog,

Vietnamese, Cherokee, Dakota,

Navajo and Yup’ik.

The Glossary of Key Election Terminology is available in

English, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tagalog and

Vietnamese.

A Vot er ’ s G ui d e

to Federal E le c t ions

U . S . El E c ti o n A S Si S tA n c E c o m mi S S io n

U.S. ElEction ASSiStAncE commiSSion

LA Comisión de AsistenCiA eLeCtorAL de estAdos Unidos

2009

Glossary

of key eLeCtion terminoLogy

Spanish

GloSArio dE términoS

ElEctorAlES clAvE

Español

department worked with more than 40 election administra-

tion experts and issued eight new chapters for the Election

Management Guidelines. The new materials were sent to

more than 5,000 election ofﬁcials across the country.

Accessibility

April 2010

8 New Election Management

Guideline Chapters

� Building Community

Partnerships

� Canvassing and Certifying

an Election

� Communicating With the

Public

� Conducting a Recount

� Provisional Ballots

� Technology in Elections

� Elections Ofﬁce

Administration

� Accessibility

New Resources for Election Ofﬁcials in FY 2010

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

The Office of Inspector General Activities

In FY 2010, the EAC Ofﬁce of Inspector General issued

ten reports: ﬁve audits of states that received funding under

the HAVA grant programs; one audit of a nonproﬁt organi-

zation that received EAC grant funds; and two audits, one

evaluation and one investigation of EAC’s operations. These

audits identiﬁed more than $3.5 million in questioned

costs or additional funds that should be dedicated to the

respective grant programs. All reports are available on the

OIG Web site, EAC.gov/inspector_general.

Grant Audits

Audits of states receiving funding from EAC under the

HAVA grant programs continued to reveal weaknesses in

the states’ maintenance of inventory records for equipment

purchased with federal funds, failure to appropriately

document and support personnel costs and failure to

account for interest earned on federal funds either at the

state or county (subgrant) level. The ﬁve audits resulted in

$3,139,543 in questioned costs related to the use of federal

funds for noncompetitive procurements and for insuf-

ﬁciently documented personnel charges. An additional

$403,820 in interest was owed to the states’ election funds

because the respective states’ failure to deposit matching

funds in a timely manner and to require counties to accrue

interest on advances.

The OIG conducted an audit of Project Vote, a nonproﬁt

organization that received funding from EAC under the

Help America Vote College Program. Project Vote was

unable to produce records supporting the grant charges

totaling $33,750. As a result, the OIG questioned all

$33,750.

Reviews of EAC Operations

The OIG provided oversight to the independent public

accounting ﬁrm that performed the annual audits of EAC’s

ﬁnancial statements and its compliance with the Federal

Information Security Management Act (FISMA). EAC

received an unqualiﬁed opinion of its ﬁnancial statements.

The auditors identiﬁed one instance of material noncom-

pliance with laws and regulations. The auditors noted

EAC’s violation of the Purpose Act and Antideﬁciency

Act related to the use of FY 2004 funds dedicated for

use as HAVA requirements payments to make grants

under the Help America Vote College Program and Mock

Election Program. EAC reported the violations in keeping

with federal law and Ofﬁce of Management and Budget

requirements. Thus, the auditors made no recommenda-

tions related to the violations. The annual FISMA audit

revealed that EAC was in substantial compliance with

FISMA and made two recommendations to improve the

agency’s contingency planning and management of Privacy

Act information.

The OIG also conducted an evaluation of EAC’s settlement

of a complaint of a prohibited personnel practice ﬁled by

an employment applicant. The OIG considered whether

EAC had the authority to enter into the settlement, used

appropriate ﬁscal year funds and followed appropriate

protocols in entering into the settlement agreement. The

review found that EAC had authority, used appropriate ﬁs-

cal year funds and obtained advice from other government

agencies in the absence of an established agency policy for

these types of settlements.

An investigation into EAC’s working environment

was completed during FY 2010. The investigation was

instituted after complaints that EAC employees feared

retaliation for reporting wrongdoing or for speaking

to the OIG. The investigation was conducted under an

interagency agreement with the Department of Interior

Ofﬁce of Inspector General (DOI OIG). The DOI OIG

considered whether any actionable retaliation had occurred

or whether a hostile working environment existed at

EAC. The investigation found no retaliation. Applying the

federal statutes governing hostile working environments,

the investigation found no such condition at EAC. The

report did identify some signiﬁcant issues related to human

capital management at EAC. The same issues were echoed

in EAC’s employee survey published in early 2010. These

issues were referred to EAC for appropriate action.

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Management Challenges

In addition to conducting the audit and performing inves-

tigative work, the OIG annually issues a report to EAC

outlining the most signiﬁcant management challenges.

In FY 2010, the OIG reported on ﬁve management chal-

lenges. Four of those had been issued in previous years:

performance management and accountability, ﬁnancial

management and performance, information technology

management and security and human capital management.

One challenge was new in FY 2010 and is related to EAC’s

lack of an approved records management system. Based

on agency-reported action, the OIG closed the challenge

related to ﬁnancial management and performance. The

OIG will continue to track EAC’s progress on the other

four challenges.

Improved Outreach

The OIG took steps in FY 2010 to improve its communication

and outreach with its clients. The OIG issued two newsletters.

The newsletters focused on helping OIG clients report waste,

fraud, abuse and mismanagement in EAC programs and

on helping EAC grant recipients understand and avoid

the types of issues that were uncovered in the OIG grant

audits. The OIG also revamped its Web site to provide

more information to the public about its mission and work.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Communications and Clearinghouse

In FY 2010, the Communications and Clearinghouse divi-

sion unveiled a new Web site that enables EAC to receive

more public input and feedback, increase transparency and

add more information about voting in federal elections,

effective election management and EAC programs and

operations. The new Web site features leading-edge search,

navigation and content-delivery tools that transformed

the site into a more modern, dynamic and transparent

source of information for the public and election ofﬁcials.

The new tools have greatly improved users’ ability to ﬁnd

information more efﬁciently through a powerful search

tool that provides more qualiﬁed, relevant results and sort-

ing and ﬁltering options. Site searches are also enhanced

by the new streamlined mouse-over navigation bar, which

enables users to quickly scan the contents of the site

without clicking through to subsequent pages.

EAC’s most commonly requested materials, such as the

National Mail Voter Registration Form, voter guides,

Election Management Guidelines and NVRA reports are

just one click away. The new Election Resource Library

now holds all these materials for easy searching, sorting

and browsing.

The site also provides several mechanisms through which

the public can provide direct feedback to EAC on agency

activities and operations. For instance, the public can rate

and comment on nearly 200 EAC reports, policies, manu-

als and election management guidelines in the Election

Resource Library.

The new Web site played a major role in efforts to deliver

information to voters to help them have a successful ex-

perience on Election Day during the 2010 federal election

year. The Resources for Voters section provided informa-

tion on poll worker requirements, registration, provisional

voting requirements and other election administration

topics, such as early and absentee voting deadlines.

In FY 2010, EAC contracted for new educational videos to

provide further information to the public about the voting

process. The division is currently producing four of these

videos to inform the public about EAC, student voting

procedures, pre-election and post-election activities and

registering to vote.

Open Government Policy

Communications and Clearinghouse staff completed a

draft Open Government Policy in accordance with federal

requirements and created the companion EAC.gov/open

site to notify the public about EAC’s open government

initiatives. In addition, EAC’s new Public Comment

section at EAC.gov makes it easier for the public to keep

track of draft EAC policies on which the agency is seeking

public input. The public may also submit general com-

ments at EAC.gov/contact.

National Clearinghouse for Elections

In FY 2010, Communications and Clearinghouse staff

proposed a National Clearinghouse for Elections as the

central location for information about elections pursuant

to HAVA Section 202 on EAC duties, operations and

initiatives. The pilot policy as proposed by staff would

consist of information provided by local, state, or federal

government entities in ﬁve categories: voting system

performance, poll worker information, contingency plans,

pre-election activities and post-Election Day activities.

Examples of pre-election activities would include logic

and accuracy testing, voting system storage and security

procedures, chain-of-custody procedures, polling place

accessibility initiatives, polling place setup plans and

ballot distribution strategies. Regarding post-Election Day

activities, EAC would collect information and procedures

about canvassing activities, recount procedures and audits.

The proposal included a recommendation for an initial

6-month pilot program to be launched in FY 2011.

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Sharing Information About EAC-

Certiﬁed Voting Systems in the Field

To further educate the public about EAC’s Voting System

Testing and Certiﬁcation Program, Communications and

Clearinghouse staff developed, built and populated a

map that categorizes states based on their respective laws

regarding voting system certiﬁcations and the location of

EAC-certiﬁed systems. Users can click through for histori-

cal records about the voting system, including System

Advisory Alerts, draft and ﬁnal test plans, correspondence

and basic information about the voting system manufacturer.

No Federal Requirement: Relevant state statutes and/or regulations make no

mention of any federal agency, certication program, laboratory, or standard

required for voting systems.

Requires Testing by a Federally Accredited Laboratory: Relevant state statutes

and/or regulations require voting systems to be tested by a federally or nationally

accredited laboratory to federal standards.

Requires Testing to Federal Standards: Relevant state statutes and/or rules

require voting systems to be tested to federal standards. (States reference

standards drafted by the Federal Election Commission, National Institute of

Standards and Technology, or the Election Assistance Commission).

Require Federal Certication: Relevant state statutes and/or rules require that

voting systems be certied by a federal agency.

Voting Systems Map

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Focusing on Voters’ Needs

The structure of the new Web site was developed based on

the needs of EAC stakeholders, including voters, election

ofﬁcials, academics, advocacy organizations and policy

experts. It is divided into six main sections: Resources for

Voters, Voting System Testing and Certiﬁcation, Election

Management Resources, Payments and Grants, Research

and Data and the National Voter Registration Act.

EAC will continue to collect feedback and input from its

stakeholders through the online comment tools and rating

system available in the Resource Library.

Interactive Map for Voters

EAC provided the public with access to every state election ofce through an interactive map, which was featured prominently on EAC.gov in the months leading up to the 2010 federal

general election. This map was consistently one of the most popular sections of the Web site.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Moving Forward

In ﬁscal year 2011, the U.S. Election Assistance Com-

mission will build upon its work in four main areas:

testing and certifying voting systems; developing the

nation’s clearinghouse for elections; improving services

for military and overseas voters; and collecting data about

how, where and when Americans vote.

Also during FY 2011, EAC will release the results of its

2010 EAVS, the most comprehensive national survey

of its kind about how, when and where Americans vote.

This survey contains valuable information for the public,

policymakers and ofﬁcials at every level of government.

The data collected about military and overseas voters will

provide the ﬁrst opportunity to consider what effect the

Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act may have

had during the 2010 federal election.

EAC will also continue its work to improve the voting

process for uniformed and overseas voters through the

Military Heroes Initiative and the UOCAVA Electronic

Absentee Voting Pilot Project.

Voting System Testing and

Certiﬁcation

EAC’s Voting System Testing and Certiﬁcation Program

will hold its manufacturers accountable through the Qual-

ity Monitoring Program, which was established to ensure

that voting systems certiﬁed by EAC are the same systems

sold by manufacturers. The quality monitoring process is a

mandatory part of the Voting System Testing and Certiﬁca-

tion Program. It includes ﬁelded voting system reviews,

anomaly reporting and manufacturing site visits. EAC

issues system advisory notices to inform jurisdictions and

the public about anomalies or issues with an EAC-certiﬁed

system.

Clearinghouse Activities

EAC’s Voting System Reports Clearinghouse is the result

of a policy that EAC adopted to post and distribute voting

system reports and studies submitted by state and local

governments. The policy also covers collecting and sharing

information regarding the states’ implementation of the

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines.

In accordance with a new California law, EAC will begin

receiving data from California regarding voting system

anomalies. EAC will incorporate these reports into the

Clearinghouse as part of a policy authorizing staff to post

and distribute voting system reports and studies that have

been conducted or commissioned by a state or local govern-

ment. EAC anticipates other states and local governments

will also provide data to the Clearinghouse to increase the

public body of knowledge regarding voting systems.

In addition, EAC is examining the set-up of an election

information exchange to enable state and local election

ofﬁcials across the country to ﬁnd answers and share ex-

pertise about day-to-day issues they face. Also in progress

is a proposed pilot Clearinghouse policy that would expand

current contents to include resources about other areas

of election administration, such as contingency planning,

pre- and post-election activities and poll workers.

Improving Services for Military and

Overseas Voters

In FY 2010, EAC awarded the Military Heroes Initiative

Grant to a nonproﬁt organization to research accom-

modations and assistance needed for recently injured

military personnel to participate in federal elections. In

addition, EAC will continue to play a part in the Electronic

Absentee Voting Pilot Project to test the ability of new

or emerging technology to better serve uniformed and

overseas citizens through the MOVE Act. In FY 2011,

EAC and NIST will continue developing remote electronic

absentee voting guidelines for support of the UOCAVA.

Activities will include research on the extent and nature of

UOCAVA disenfranchisement and analysis from potential

pilot implementation. EAC, with assistance from the

Federal Voting Assistance Program, also plans to review

and evaluate the effectiveness of state initiatives under-

taken for the 2010 federal election related to blank ballot

distribution and delivery.

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Research

In the coming months, EAC will compile and release the

results of the 2010 EAVS, which will include the HAVA-

mandated collection of data about UOCAVA voters and the

effect of the National Voter Regis tration Act. These data

will inform the public and policymakers and provide the

basis for a more comprehensive report on a wider range of

election issues, including voting technology, poll workers

and digital poll books.

EAC will continue conducting research in preparation

for its study on election administration in urban and

rural areas, as well as continue researching and drafting

guidance related to provisional voting and statewide voter

registration databases. EAC intends to issue the voluntary

guidance pursuant to the EAC Strategic Plan.

In addition, the Language Assistance Program staff will

consider translating the Voters Guide to Federal Elections

to any additional languages determined to be covered

under minority language provisions of the Voting Rights

Act on the basis of the 2010 Decennial Census. EAC also

plans to complete interactive online election terminology

glossaries.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Appendix

Title

Decided by

Vote of

Date

Transmitted

Certied

Date

Fiscal Year 2010 Tally Votes

1 FY 2011 Budget Request 3 9/25/09 10/2/09

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From the New York State Board of Elections on

Behalf of Suffolk County, New York, for Approval to Purchase Six Motor Vehicles for a Poll

Worker Training, Voting Equipment Transport and Voter Education Program

3 10/7/09 10/14/09

Advisory Opinion in Response to Whitman County's Request to Use $360,000 of Help America

Vote Act (HAVA) Funds to Finance a Portion of the Costs to Remodel Ofce Space to be Used as

an Elections and Voter Registration Processing Center

3 10/7/09 10/14/09

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From the New York State Board of Elections on

Behalf of Niagara County, New York, for Approval to Purchase a Motor Vehicle for a Voter

Education Program

3 10/7/09 10/14/09

5 Designation of Alice Miller as Chief Information Ofcer 3 10/9/09 11/9/09

EAC Staff Recommendation to Adopt the 2008 UOCAVA and 2008 Election Administration and

Voting Survey Reports

3 11/2/09 11/5/09

EAC Staff Recommendation to Adopt the Following Election Management Guidelines (EMG)

Chapters: Building Community Parnerships; Canvassing and Certifying an Election;

Communicating with the Public; Conducting a Recount; and Provisional Ballots

3 11/6/09 11/12/09

Approval of New Scientic and Technical Expert Members of the Technical Guidelines

Development Committee (TGDC)

3 12/4/09 12/8/09

Adoption of Executive Order 13525 (December 23, 2009) Regarding Across the Board Pay

Increase to Government Employees

3 1/4/10 1/6/10

EAC Staff Recommendation to Adopt the EAC’s A Guide to the Election Administration and

Voting Survey Policy Document

1/4/10 WITHDRAWN

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From Cleareld County, Pennsylvania, to Use

Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Section 251 Funds to Pave the Handicap Access and Handicap

Parking for a Polling Location

1/6/10 WITHDRAWN

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From the Virgin Islands to Use Help America Vote

Act (HAVA) Section 251 Funds to Outt Space in a Different Building to House the Ofce of the

Supervisor of Elections

1/6/10 WITHDRAWN

Advisory Opinion in Response to Alaska’s Request to Use Help America Vote Act (HAVA)

Section 251 Funds to Modify Existing Ofce Space to Construct a Secure Storage Room at its

Headquarters Location in Juneau, Alaska

3 1/6/10 1/8/10

14 EAC Annual Report on Grant Programs 3 1/6/10 1/8/10

15 Selection of EAC Chair for 2010 3 1/13/10 1/15/10

16 Recommendation to Adopt the Fiscal Year 2009 EAC Annual Report 3 1/15/10 1/20/10

17 FY 2011 Budget Request 3 1/27/10 1/29/10

18 2010 EAC Mock Election Program 3 1/29/10 2/2/10

Submission of Maintenance of Expenditure (MOE) Proposed Policy "A" by Chair Donetta

Davidson for Public Comment

2-1 2/12/10 2/17/10

Submission of Maintenance of Expenditure (MOE) Proposed Policy "B" by Commissioner Gineen

Bresso for Public Comment

2-1 2/12/10 2/17/10

21 2010 EAC College Poll Worker Program 3 2/12/10 2/18/10

Approval of U.S. Election Assistance Commission's (EAC) "Citizens' Report: The FY 2008

Summary of Performance and Financial Results" (Citizens' Report) for publication on the EAC

Web site

3 2/12/10 2/18/10

23 Approval of U.S. Election Assistance Commission's (EAC) FY 2010 Operating Budget 3 2/12/10 2/25/10

24 Resolution of Wyoming Audit Appeal 3 2/23/10 2/26/10

2010 Tally Votes

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Title

Decided by

Vote of

Date

Transmitted

Certied

Date

Fiscal Year 2010 Tally Votes

Advisory Opinion In Response to a Request From the Virgin Islands To Use Help America Vote

Act (HAVA) Section 251 Funds To Outt Space in a Different Building To House the Ofce of the

Supervisor of Elections

3 2/23/10 2/26/10

26 Submission of Proposed Information Quality Guidelines for Public Comment 3 3/4/10 3/9/10

Advisory Opinion In Response to Oregon's Request To Use Help America Vote Act (HAVA)

Section 251 Funds To Purchase and Install Closed Circuit Cameras in Thirty-Six County Election

Ofces Throughout the State

3/10/10 WITHDRAWN

Advisory Opinion In Response to a Request From Tennessee To Determine Whether HAVA Title

II, 251 Funds May Be Used To Purchase Paper Ballots for Federal Elections

3/10/10 WITHDRAWN

Submission of Notice and Comment Policy and Voting by Circulation Policy for Public Notice

and Comment

3 3/25/10 3/30/10

30 Submission of UOCAVA Pilot Program Testing Requirements for Public Notice and Comment 3 3/26/10 3/30/10

31 Recommendation To Re-Accredit Wyle Laboratories, Inc. 3/31/10 WITHDRAWN

Submission of Voting System Pilot Program Testing and Certication Manual for Public Notice

and Comment

3 4/1/10 4/5/10

33 Update to Mississippi State Instructions on the National Mail Voter Registration Form 3 4/8/10 4/15/10

34 Update to Nevada State Instructions on the National Mail Voter Registration Form 3 4/8/10 4/15/10

35 Submission of Proposed Privacy Policy Statement for Public Notice and Comment 3 4/8/10 4/15/10

36 2010 Mock Election Program 4/20/10 WITHDRAWN

37 2010 Mock Election Program (Reissue) 3 4/21/10 4/23/10

38 Debarment and Suspension Regulations for Public Comment 3 4/21/10 4/26/10

39 Recommendation To Re-Accredit Wyle Laboratories, Inc. (Reissue) 3 4/23/10 4/27/10

40 Federal Register Notice for Change of Address 3 4/23/10 4/27/10

41 2010 Voting Technology and Accessibility Research—Military Heroes Initiative 3 4/26/10 4/27/10

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From Cleareld County, Pennsylvania, to Use Help

America Vote Act (HAVA) Section 251 Funds to Pave the Handicap Access and Handicap

Parking for a Polling Location—WITHDRAWN 5/6/10

5/5/10 WITHDRAWN

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From the New York State Board of Elections on

Behalf of Tioga County, New York, for Approval To Purchase a Vehicle for a Voter Education

Program and for Inspector Training of Optical Scan Voting Systems and Accessible Ballot

Marking Devices

3 5/5/10 5/11/10

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From Montana To Use Help America Vote Act

(HAVA) Section 101 Funds for Expenses Related to Post-Election Audits for Elections With

Federal Races on the Ballot

3 5/5/10 5/11/10

Advisory Opinion in Response to a Request From Tennessee To Determine Whether HAVA Title

II, Section 251 Funds May Be Used To Purchase Paper Ballots for Federal Elections

3 5/5/10 5/11/10

Advisory Opinion in Response to Oregon's Request To Use Help America Vote Act (HAVA)

Section 251 Funds To Purchase and Install Closed Circuit Cameras in Thirty-Six County Election

Ofces Throughout the State

3 5/5/10 5/11/10

47 Adoption of Final Document Titled A Guide to the Election Administration and Voting Survey 3 5/5/10 5/11/10

48 2010 Help America Vote College Poll Worker Program 3 5/24/10 5/27/10

49 Information Quality Guidelines 6/1/10 WITHDRAWN

50 Appointment of Chief Information Ofcer 3 6/16/10 6/21/10

51 Information Quality Guidelines 3 6/28/10 7/2/10

52 Debarment and Suspension Regulations 3 6/28/10 7/2/10

Close the July 16, 2010 Meeting at Which the EAC Will Discuss the Appointment of a General

Counsel

3 6/29/10 7/2/10

54 Privacy Policy Statement 3 7/13/10 7/16/10

EAC Staff Recommendation to Adopt the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for NVRA

Regulations

3 7/29/10 8/2/10

EAC Staff Recommendation to Adopt Three Election Management Guidelines (EMG) Chapters—

Technology In Elections; Elections Ofce Administration; and Accessibility

3 8/9/10 8/11/10

Close the August 25, 2010 Meeting at Which the EAC Will Discuss the Appointment of a General

Counsel

3 8/11/10 8/13/10

Close the September 1, 2010 Meeting at Which the EAC Will Discuss the Appointment of a

General Counsel

3 8/23/10 8/25/10

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Title

Decided by

Vote of

Date

Transmitted

Certied

Date

Fiscal Year 2010 Tally Votes

59 Approval of UOCAVA Pilot Program Testing Requirements 8/25/10 9/2/10

Approve the Renewal Charter for the Technical Guidelines Development Committee and Publish

Notice of the Charter Renewal In the Federal Register

3 8/31/10 9/2/10

Approve the Appointment of Candidate B as the U.S. Election Assistance Commission's General

Counsel for a Term of Four (4) Years

3 9/1/10 9/3/10

Approve the Cover Letter That Will Accompany the Report Free or Reduced Postage for the

Return of Voted Absentee Ballots

3 9/3/10 9/8/10

Approve the Notice of Funding Availability for the 2010 Voting System Pre-Election Logic and

Accuracy Testing & Post-Election Audit Initiative

3 9/7/10 9/9/10

64 Recipient for 2010 Voting Technology and Accessibility Research—Military Heroes Initiative 3 9/16/10 9/21/10

65 Approval of U.S. Election Assistance Commission's (EAC) FY 2012 Legislative Proposals 3 9/16/10 9/20/10

66 Approval of U.S. Election Assistance Commission's (EAC) FY 2012 Budget Justication 3 9/16/10 9/20/10

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Appointed by First Name Last Name Title City State

National Conference of State Legislatures Thomas Upton Reynolds Mississippi State Representative Charleston MS

National Conference of State Legislatures Sue Landske Senator – Asst. Pres. ProTem Indiana State Senate Cedar Lake IN

National Governors Association Chris Nelson South Dakota Secretary of State Pierre SD

National Governors Association Mary E. Herrera New Mexico Secretary of State Albuquerque NM

National Association of Secretaries of

State

Trey Grayson Kentucky Secretary of State Frankfort KY

National Association of Secretaries of

State

Matthew Dunlap Maine Secretary of State Augusta ME

National Association of State Election

Directors

Christopher Thomas Director of Elections, State of Michigan Lansing MI

National Association of State Election

Directors

Linda H. Lamone Maryland Administrator of Elections Annapolis MD

National Association of Counties Wendy Noren Boone County Clerk Columbia MO

National Association of Counties Helen Purcell Maricopa County Recorder Phoenix AZ

National Association of County Recorders,

Election Ofcials and Clerks

Neal Kelley Registrar of Voters, Orange County, CA Santa Ana CA

National Association of County Recorders,

Election Ofcials and Clerks

Jan Kralovec Director of Elections, Cook County Chicago IL

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Vacant

Election Center Doug Lewis Executive Director, Election Center Houston TX

Election Center Ernie Hawkins Former Registrar of Voters, Sacramento County Elk Grove CA

United States Conference of Mayors Frank Ortis Mayor, City of Pembroke Pines

Pembroke

Pines

United States Conference of Mayors Vacant

International Association of Clerks,

Recorders, Election Ofcials and

Treasurers

Robert T. Saar

Executive Director, DuPage County Election

Commission

Wheaton IL

International Association of Clerks,

Recorders, Election Ofcials and

Treasurers

Bill Cowles Supervisor of Elections, Orange County, FL Orlando FL

Architectural and Transportation Barriers

Compliance Board

Ron Gardner

Director of Field Services, National Federation of

the Blind of Utah

Bountiful UT

Architectural and Transportation Barriers

Compliance Board

Phillip Jenkins

Accessibility Consultant, Business Development

Consultant and Senior Engineer, IBM Human

Ability and Accessibility Center

Austin TX

Chief, Public Integrity Section, Criminal

Division, U.S. Department of Justice

Richard C. Pilger

Director, Election Crimes Branch, U.S. Department

of Justice

Washington DC

Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights Division,

U.S. Department of Justice

Chris Herren

Chief, Voting Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S.

Department of Justice

Washington DC

Director, Federal Voting Assistance

Program, U.S. Department of Defense

Bob Carey

Director, Federal Voting Assistance Program, U.S.

Department of Defense

Washington DC

House Speaker Lillie Coney

Associate Director, Electronic Privacy Information

Center

Washington DC

House Minority Leader Tom Fuentes Senior Fellow, The Claremont Institute Lake Forest CA

Senate Majority Leader Dr. Barbara Simons Researcher Palo Alto CA

Senate Minority Leader Sarah Ball Johnson

Executive Director, Kentucky State Board of

Elections

Frankfort KY

House Administration—Chair Stewart L. Cohen Attorney, Cohen, Placitella and Roth Philadelphia PA

House Administration—Chair Donald A. Jones Advocate Willingboro NJ

House Administration—Ranking Minority

Member

Jill LaVine Registrar of Voters, Sacramento County Sacramento CA

Fiscal Year 2010 EAC Board of Advisors

Board Rosters

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

The following former members of the EAC Board of Advisors served in scal year 2010: Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan; Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth

Pedro A. Cortès; Colucci & Gallaher, P.C. Attorney Joseph F. Crangle; U.S. Department of Justice Election Crimes Branch Director Craig Donsanto; Shawnee County, Kansas Election

Commissioner Elizabeth Ensley; City of Grand Rapids, Michigan City Clerk Terri Hegarty; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Commissioner Arlan D. Melendez; Cook County, Illinois Clerk

David Orr; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Vice Chair Abigail Thernstrom.

Appointed by First Name Last Name Title City State

Fiscal Year 2010 EAC Board of Advisors

House Administration—Ranking Minority

Member

Keith Cunningham Director, Allen County Board of Elections Lima OH

Senate Rules and Administration—Chair James C. Dickson

V.P. for Governmental Affairs, American Association

of People With Disabilities

Washington DC

Senate Rules and Administration—Chair Barbara Bartoletti

Legislative Director, League of Women Voters of

New York State

N. Greenbush NY

Senate Rules and Administration—

Ranking Minority Member

LuAnn Adams County Recorder/Clerk of Box Elder County Brigham City UT

Senate Rules and Administration—

Ranking Minority Member

Greg Bell Lieutenant Governor of Utah Salt Lake City UT

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

State Designee First Last Title City State

Fiscal Year 2010 Standards Board

Alabama State Beth Chapman Secretary of State Montgomery AL

Alabama Local Vacant

Alaska State Gail Fenumiai Director, Division of Elections Juneau AK

Alaska Local Shelly Growden

Election Supervisor Region III, Division of

Elections

Fairbanks AK

American Samoa State Soliai T. Fuimaono Chief Election Ofcer Pago Pago AS

American Samoa Local Taufete'e John Faumuina HAVA Manager Pago Pago AS

Arizona State Amy Bjelland Deputy Secretary of State Phoenix AZ

Arizona Local Reynaldo Valenzuela Assistant Director of Elections Phoenix AZ

Arkansas State Janet Harris Deputy Secretary of State Little Rock AR

Arkansas Local Crystal Graddy Boone County Clerk Harrison AR

California State Lowell Finley Deputy Secretary of State Sacramento CA

California Local Stephen Weir County Clerk, Contra Costa County Martinez CA

Colorado State Vacant

Colorado Local Russ Ragsdale City Clerk and Recorder Broomeld CO

Connecticut State Ted Bromley

Staff Attorney, Legislation and Elections

Administration Division, Connecticut

Secretary of State

Hartford CT

Connecticut Local Anthony Esposito Hamden Republican Registrar of Voters Hamden CT

Delaware State Elaine Manlove Commissioner of Elections Dover DE

Delaware Local Howard G. Sholl, Jr. Deputy Administrative Director Wilmington DE

District of Columbia State Rokey Suleman

Executive Director, DC Board of Elections

& Ethics

Washington DC

District of Columbia Local Vacant

Florida State Donald Palmer Director, Division of Elections Tallahassee FL

Florida Local Lori Edwards Polk County Supervisor of Elections Bartow FL

Georgia State Wes Tailor Assistant Secretary of State Atlanta GA

Georgia Local Lynn Bailey Executive Director Augusta GA

Guam State Gerald A. Taitano Executive Director Hagatna GU

Guam Local Vacant GU

Hawaii State Scott Nago Section Head Honolulu HI

Hawaii Local Lyndon Yoshioka Kaua’i County Election Administrator Lihu’e HI

Idaho State Timothy A. Hurst Chief Deputy Coeur d'Alene ID

Idaho Local Dan English Kootenai County Clerk Boise ID

Illinois State Daniel W. White Executive Director Springeld IL

Illinois Local Richard Cowen Chicago Board of Election Commissioners Chicago IL

Indiana State Brad King Co-Director, Indiana Election Division Indianapolis IN

Indiana Local Shelly Parris Sullivan County Circuit Court Clerk Sullivan IN

Iowa State Sarah Reisetter Director of Elections Des Moines IA

Iowa Local Janine Sulzner Jones County Auditor Anamosa IA

Kansas State Ron Thornburgh Kansas Secretary of State Topeka KS

Kansas Local Donald Merriman Saline County Clerk Saline KS

Kentucky State Sarah Ball Johnson Executive Director Frankfort KY

Kentucky Local Kevin Mooney Bullitt County Clerk Shepherdsville KY

Louisiana State Angie LaPlace Louisiana Commissioner of Elections Baton Rouge LA

Louisiana Local H. Lynn Jones, II Calcasieu Parish Clerk of Court Lake Charles LA

Maine State Julie L. Flynn Deputy Secretary of State Augusta ME

Maine Local Lucette Pellerin City Clerk Saco ME

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

State Designee First Last Title City State

Fiscal Year 2010 Standards Board

Maryland State Nikki Baines Trella Election Reform Director Annapolis MD

Maryland Local James Massey, Jr.

Election Director, Harford County Board of

Elections

Forest Hill MD

Massachusetts State William F. Gavin Secretary of the Commonwealth Boston MA

Massachusetts Local John McGarry Executive Director, Election Commission Brockton MA

Michigan State Susan McRill

Administrative Manager, QVF Help Desk &

Field Services

Lansing MI

Michigan Local Tonni Bartholomew Troy City Clerk Troy MI

Minnesota State Gary Poser Director of Elections St. Paul MN

Minnesota Local Sharon K. Anderson Cass County Auditor-Treasurer Walker MN

Mississippi State Heath Hillman Assistant Secretary of State – Elections Jackson MS

Mississippi Local Robert Harrell Circuit Clerk, Clay County West Point MS

Missouri State Leslye Winslow Senior Counsel to Secretary of State Jefferson City MO

Missouri Local Richard T. Struckhoff Greene County Clerk Springeld MO

Montana State Jorge Quintana Chief Legal Counsel Helena MT

Montana Local Charlotte Mills Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder Bozeman MT

Nebraska State John Gale Secretary of State Lincoln NE

Nebraska Local David Dowling

Cedar County Clerk & Election

Commissioner

Hartington NE

Nevada State Matthew Grifn Deputy Secretary of State for Elections Carson City NV

Nevada Local Harvard L. Lomax Clark County Registrar of Voters North Las Vegas NV

New Hampshire State Anthony Stevens Assistant Secretary of State Concord NH

New Hampshire Local Robert Dezmelyk Moderator, Town of Newton Newton NH

New Jersey State Robert Giles Director Trenton NJ

New Jersey Local Linda Von Nessi Clerk of the Board Newark NJ

New Mexico State Mary Herrera Secretary of State Santa Fe NM

New Mexico Local Bob Bartelsmeyer Dona Ana County Election Supervisor Las Cruces NM

New York State Jeffrey Pearlman Assistant Counsel to the Governor Albany NY

New York Local Vacant

North Carolina State Gary Bartlett Executive Director, State Board of Elections Raleigh NC

North Carolina Local Deborah J. Bedford Director of Elections Rutherford NC

North Dakota State James Silrum Deputy Secretary of State Bismarck ND

North Dakota Local Michael M. Montplaisir Cass County Auditor Fargo ND

Ohio State Brandi Seskes

Counsel to the Ohio Board of Voting

Machine Examiners

Columbus OH

Ohio Local Dale Fellows Member, Lake County Board of Elections Willoughby Hills OH

Oklahoma State Thomas Prince Chairman, State Election Board Edmond OK

Oklahoma Local Doug Sanderson Secretary, Oklahoma County Election Board Oklahoma City OK

Oregon State Steve Trout Director Salem OR

Oregon Local Tamara Green Baker County Clerk Baker City OR

Pennsylvania State Chet Harhut

Commissioner, Bureau of Commissions,

Elections & Legislation

Harrisburg PA

Pennsylvania Local Regis Young Butler County Election Director Butler PA

Puerto Rico State María D. Santiago Rodríguez First Vice President San Juan PR

Puerto Rico Local Nestor J. Colόn Berlingeri Second Vice President San Juan PR

Rhode Island State Robert Kando Executive Director, State Board of Elections Providence RI

Rhode Island Local Vacant RI

South Carolina State Marci Andino Executive Director Columbia SC

South Carolina Local Marilyn Bowers Executive Director Charleston SC

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

State Designee First Last Title City State

Fiscal Year 2010 Standards Board

South Dakota State Kea Warne State Election Supervisor Pierre SD

South Dakota Local Patty McGee Sully County Auditor Onida SD

Tennessee State Mark Goins State Coordinator of Elections Nashville TN

Tennessee Local Marshall McKamey Campbell County Election Commissioner LaFollette TN

Texas State Ann McGeehan Director of Elections Austin TX

Texas Local Dana DeBeauvoir Travis County Clerk Austin TX

Utah State Mark J. Thomas Ofce Administrator Salt Lake City UT

Utah Local Robert Pero Carbon County Clerk Price UT

Vermont State Kathleen DeWolfe Director of Elections Montpelier VT

Vermont Local Melissa Ross Hinesburg Town Clerk Hinesburg VT

Virgin Islands State John Abramson, Jr. Supervisor of Elections Kingshill, St. Croix VI

Virgin Islands Local Corinne Halyard Plaskett Deputy Supervisor of Elections Kingshill, St. Croix VI

Virginia State James Alcorn Condential Asst. Policy Analyst Richmond VA

Virginia Local Allen Harrison, Jr. Chair, Arlington County Electoral Board Arlington VA

Washington State Nixon Handy Director of Elections Olympia WA

Washington Local Kristina Swanson Cowlitz County Auditor Kelso WA

West Virginia State Layna Valentine-Brown HAVA Coordinator Charleston WV

West Virginia Local Jeff Waybright Jackson County Clerk Ripley WV

Wisconsin State Nathaniel Robinson Election Division Administrator Madison WI

Wisconsin Local Sandra L. Wesolowski Franklin County Clerk Franklin WI

Wyoming State Peggy Nighswonger State Election Director Cheyenne WY

Wyoming Local Julie Freese Fremont County Clerk Lander WY

The following former members of the EAC Standards Board served in scal year 2010: Colorado Voting Equipment Certication Program Manager Stephanie Cegielski; Deputy Chief

of Staff to the Utah Lieutenant Governor Michael Cragen; Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel; Mississippi Assistant Secretary of State – Elections John Helmert; Clay County,

Alabama Judge of Probate George M. Ingram; Lincoln County, Oregon Clerk Dana Jenkins; Iowa Deputy Secretary of State – Elections Linda Langenberg; Oregon Elections Director

John Lindback; District of Columbia Former Board Member Jonda McFarlane; West Virginia Elections Division Special Assistant Susan Silverman; Campbell County, Kentucky Clerk

Jack Snodgrass; Westchester, New York Board of Elections Commissioner Carolee Sunderland; Boone County, West Virginia Clerk Gary Williams; Yellowstone County, Montana Elec-

tion Administrator Duane Winslow; Texas Voting System Security & Certication Manager Juanita Woods.

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Appointed by First Name Last Name Title City State

Director of NIST Dr. Patrick D. Gallagher

Committee Chair, Director of the National Institute of Standards and

Technology

Gaithersburg MD

Standards Board Donald Palmer Director, Division of Elections, Florida Department of State Tallahassee FL

Standards Board Russell G. Ragsdale Clerk and Recorder, City and County of Broomeld Broomeld CO

Board of Advisors Linda Lamone Maryland Administrator of Elections Annapolis MD

Board of Advisors Helen Purcell Recorder, Maricopa County Arizona Phoenix AZ

Access Board Ron Gardner Director of Field Services, National Federation of the Blind of Utah Bountiful UT

Access Board Phillip Jenkins

Accessibility Consultant, Business Development Consultant and

Senior Engineer, IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center

Austin TX

ANSI Dr. David Wagner Professor, University of California-Berkeley Berkeley CA

IEEE Patrick McDaniel

Associate Professor of Computer Science and Engineering,

Pennsylvania State University

University Park PA

NASED Ann McGeehan

Director of the Elections Division, Ofce of the Texas Secretary of

State

Austin TX

NASED Paul Miller

Senior Technology Policy Advisor, Elections Division, State of

Washington, Ofce of the Secretary of State

Olympia WA

Other Tech/Sci Dr. Steven Bellovin Professor of Computer Science, Columbia University New York NY

Other Tech/Sci Dr. Diane Cordry Golden

Program Coordinator, Association of Assistive Technology Act

Programs

Grain Valley MO

Other Tech/Sci Dr. Douglas Jones

Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science, University

of Iowa

Iowa City IA

Other Tech/Sci Edwin Smith, III

Vice President, Compliance and Certication, Dominion Voting

Systems

Longmont CO

All of the former members of the EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee served prior to scal year 2010.

Access Board = Architectural and Transportation Barrier Compliance Board. ANSI = American National Standards Institute. IEEE = Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

NASED = National Association of State Election Directors. NIST = National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Fiscal Year 2010 Technical Guidelines Development Committee

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Commissioners’ Biographies

Ms. Gineen Bresso was nominated by President George

W. Bush and conﬁrmed by the U.S. Senate on October 2,

2008, to serve on the U.S. Election Assistance Commis-

sion (EAC). Ms. Bresso served as Chair of EAC in 2009.

Her term of service extends through December 12, 2009.

Before her appointment with EAC, Commissioner Bresso

was the minority elections counsel for the Committee on

House Administration. She previously served as a policy

advisor to former Maryland Governor Robert L. Ehrlich,

Jr., a position in which her primary area of focus was on

election law. She also served as an attorney-advisor for

the U.S. Patent and Trademark Ofﬁce, where she reviewed

and prosecuted applications for federal trademark

registration. She also served as a judicial law clerk for

the Honorable Arrie W. Davis in the Maryland Court of

Special Appeals.

Ms. Bresso received her Juris Doctor from Western New

England College School of Law (1999), where she was

a member of the Law Review. In 1995, she received a

Bachelor of Arts in political science from the University of

Massachusetts at Amherst.

Commissioner Gineen Bresso

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 2010 Activities

Ms. Donetta L. Davidson was nominated by President

George W. Bush and conﬁrmed by unanimous consent

of the U.S. Senate on July 28, 2005, to serve on the

U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC). She was

reappointed to a second term on October 2, 2008. Ms. Da-

vidson was elected Chair of EAC for 2010. She previously

served as Chair in 2007 and Vice-Chair in 2008. Her

term of service extends through December 12, 2011. Ms.

Davidson, formerly Colorado’s secretary of state, came

to EAC with experience in nearly every area of election

administration—everything from county clerk to secretary

of state.

Commissioner Davidson began her career in election

administration when she was elected in 1978 as the Bent

County clerk and recorder in Las Animas, Colorado, a

position she held until 1986. Later that year, she was ap-

pointed director of elections for the Colorado Department

of State, where she supervised county clerks in all election

matters and assisted with recall issues for municipal,

special district and school district elections.

In 1994, she was elected Arapahoe County clerk and

recorder and reelected to a second term in 1998. The

next year, Colorado Governor Bill Owens appointed Ms.

Davidson as the Colorado secretary of state, and she was

elected to the position in 2000 and reelected in 2002 for a

4-year term.

She has served on the Federal Election Commission

Advisory Panel and the board of directors of the Help

America Vote Foundation. In 2005, Ms. Davidson was

elected president of the National Association of Secretaries

of State, and she is the former president of the National

Association of State Elections Directors. Before her EAC

appointment, Ms. Davidson served on EAC’s Technical

Guidelines Development Committee.

In 2005, Government Technology magazine named Ms.

Davidson one of its “Top 25: Dreamers, Doers, and

Drivers” in recognition of her innovative approach to

improve government services. She was also the 1993

recipient of the Henry Toll Fellowship of Council of State

Governments.

Ms. Davidson has devoted much of her professional life

to election administration, but her ﬁrst love is her family.

Born into a military family in Liberal, Kansas, she became

a Coloradoan shortly thereafter when her family moved

ﬁrst to Two Buttes then to Las Animas, where they settled.

Whenever possible, Ms. Davidson spends time with her

family: son Todd, daughter and son-in-law Trudie and

Todd Berich and granddaughters Brittany and Nicole.

Commissioner Donetta Davidson

2010 Activities U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Executive Director’s Biography

By unanimous vote of the Commissioners, Executive

Director Thomas Wilkey was reappointed to serve another

4-year term beginning June 20, 2009. Mr. Wilkey has served

in this position since 2005.

After his brief career as an elementary teacher, Mr. Wilkey

joined the Erie County Board of Elections (Buffalo,

New York) in November 1968 as an elections clerk. He

subsequently rose to the position of senior election deputy

before joining the New York State Board of Elections in

1979 as public information ofﬁcer.

In 1985, Mr. Wilkey was promoted to the newly created

position of director of elections operations, which was

formed to administer oversight of New York’s 57 county

boards.

Mr. Wilkey was appointed the second executive director of

the New York State Board of Elections in June 1992—

a position he held until August 2003.

During 1983, Mr. Wilkey and a small group of election

administrators from throughout the country pushed for

the creation of the International Center on Election Law.

Today, the Center represents more than 1,000 foreign,

state, county and local election ofﬁcials. His involvement

led to his appointment as chair of the Center’s Professional

Development Committee, which now runs the ﬁrst university-

based professional development program for election

ofﬁcials. In 1995, Wilkey was recognized for his service

by his appointment to the Board of Directors of the Center.

An early proponent of the creation of the National Asso-

ciation of State Election Directors (NASED), Mr. Wilkey

served as secretary, treasurer and vice-president and was

elected president for the 1996–97 term. In January 1997,

Mr. Wilkey was named chair of NASED’s Independent

Test Authority Accreditation Board, which reviews and

approves laboratories and technical groups for the testing

of voting systems under NASED’s national accreditation

program. He was reappointed as chair in February 2000.

An early and active promoter of the National Voter

Registration Act (NVRA), Mr. Wilkey has served as chair

of the NVRA Committee of NASED and as a member of

the FEC Ad Hoc Discussion Group for NVRA.

In 1998, the Ofﬁce of the Secretary of Defense’s Federal

Voting Assistance Program named Mr. Wilkey to its State

and Local Alliance Board. The Board advises the Federal

Voting Assistance Program about ongoing programs to

support and facilitate absentee voting requirements for

more than 6 million military and overseas voters.

Following the 2000 general election, Mr. Wilkey was

named to several national commissions to study election

reform, including those representing the National As-

sociation of Secretaries of State, National Association of

Counties, Council of State Governments and the Election

Center. In May 2001, the FEC asked Mr. Wilkey to help

draft revised federal Voting System Standards, due for

completion in April 2002. In addition, Mr. Wilkey was

actively involved with the development of HAVA, which

Congress passed and the President signed into law in

October 2002.

Executive Director Thomas R. Wilkey

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

Activities

U.S. Election Assistance Commission

1201 New York Avenue, NW

Suite 300

Washington, DC 20005

HAV[email protected]