Washington ( CNN ) -- Members of Congress focused on the Army 's soldier-performance review and promotion process Wednesday , questioning the chief investigators behind a Pentagon report examining November 's shootings at Fort Hood , Texas . `` This guy was a walking time bomb , '' said Rep. Loretta Sanchez , D-California , referring to Maj. Nidal Hasan , an Army psychiatrist and the alleged shooter in a rampage that killed 13 people and wounded 43 . Sanchez and other members of the House Armed Services Committee questioned Togo West Jr. , former Army secretary ; and retired Navy Adm. Vernon Clark , who explained their review of the shooting . Committee members asked about issues surrounding the incident , including protection for soldiers on base , emergency response policies and efforts to recognize soldiers exhibiting erratic , radical or violent behavior . But many on the committee wanted to know specifically about the Army 's performance evaluation process , including whether performance reviews are watered down in an attempt to shift problem employees elsewhere . `` I am particularly concerned about the system of officer evaluation in the Army and other services , '' said committee chairman Ike Skelton , D-Missouri . `` The performance reports ... must accurately reflect the strengths and weaknesses of officers . Problems must not be passed from one assignment to another . '' Hasan was promoted to the rank of major in May despite weak performance reviews and reports that he was becoming increasingly radical . Sanchez acknowledged that one of the most difficult things about being a manager is firing or demoting employees and dealing with subsequent legal issues . `` It does n't make any of us feel good , '' she said . `` We tend to move them on . '' Sanchez said including poor performance reviews in a soldier 's file can have far-reaching implications , and managers often consider `` how much you can damage the career of someone who has made the military their career . '' Like other committee members , she asked the panel about military constituents who have sought psychological help , only to have their careers negatively affected by doing so . Clark paused before responding . `` I wish to goodness that I was not constrained from talking about this , '' he said , referring to the classified parts of the report he was n't allowed to discuss publicly . Hasan 's commanders `` were responsible for developing him and educating him and training him in the field of medicine , and as an officer in the United States Army . Our impression -- and the words in our report are as straightforward as we can say them -- it needed work . '' West , who is also a former secretary of Veterans Affairs , sympathized with the difficulties commanders face when writing performance reviews . He described what basically amounts to a fine line between `` damaging careers with hasty judgments , '' or conversely , simply passing off a sub-par employee . He said there 's `` tension '' for commanders regarding when to act on information versus when not to , and what should be passed along versus what should n't be . But , he said , `` Evaluations make a difference , and we ca n't do the job of leading or protecting against threats if honest evaluations are not done by those who have the duty , the information , and the authority to do so . ''
Army panel question chief investigators in Texas shootings . Many wanted to know specifically about House Armed Services 's performance evaluation process . Members ask if reviews watered down in attempt to shift problem employees . Case of Maj. Vernon Clark , Army psychiatrist accused of killing 43 , prompts questions .