Congress examines NSA official’s part-time job |

Congress examines NSA official’s part-time job

WASHINGTON — A Senate committee and an outspoken congressman are seeking further information about a deal under which a top National Security Agency official is being permitted to work part-time for a private company run by the spy agency’s former director.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has requested a copy of an “internal review” that NSA said last week it had opened into an arrangement under which Patrick Dowd, the spy agency’s chief technical officer, is being allowed as many as 20 hours per week for IronNet Cybersecurity Inc., a congressional official said.

IronNet is a venture established by retired Gen. Keith Alexander, who left as NSA director in March.

Under the arrangement, IronNet, not NSA, will pay for the time Dowd spent working for the firm. It could not be determined whether Dowd has actually begun working for Alexander.

The arrangement, which current and former officials said was approved by top NSA managers, raised questions about the blurring of lines between government and business.

The Senate intelligence panel will not decide whether action is necessary until after it has examined NSA’s internal review, said the congressional official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Rep. Alan Grayson, a Florida Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he would “request an investigation” of Dowd’s deal.

Grayson accused the ex-NSA chief of being “promiscuous in his unscrupulousness,” and suggested that his company’s arrangement with Dowd was “an obvious violation of the standards of ethical conduct for employees of the Executive Branch.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.