    [Senate Hearing 114-597]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                          S. Hrg. 114-597

                        NOMINATION OF SUSAN GIBSON TO BE
                       INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL
                             RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                        SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

                                     OF THE

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                             TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2016

                                   __________

          Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    22-967 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2017

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
    http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
    U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
    E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

                        SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

               [Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong., 2d Sess.]

                     RICHARD BURR, North Carolina, Chairman
                  DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, Vice Chairman

    JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon
    DANIEL COATS, Indiana                BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
    MARCO RUBIO, Florida                 MARK WARNER, Virginia
    SUSAN COLLINS, Maine                 MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
    ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  ANGUS KING, Maine
    JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
    TOM COTTON, Arkansas
                     MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio
                         HARRY REID, Nevada, Ex Officio
                        JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Ex Officio
                      JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio
                                  ----------
                          Chris Joyner, Staff Director
                     Michael Casey, Minority Staff Director
                      Desiree Thompson Sayle, Chief Clerk

                                    CONTENTS

                                  ----------

                                  JUNE 7, 2016

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    Burr, Hon. Richard, Chairman, a U.S. Senator from North Carolina.     1
    Feinstein, Hon. Dianne, Vice Chairman, a U.S. Senator from
      California.....................................................     2

                                    WITNESS

    Gibson, Susan, Nominated to be Inspector General of the National
      Reconnaissance Agency..........................................     3
        Prepared statement...........................................     6

                             SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

    Letter dated June 3, 2016, from Benjamin A. Powell to Senator
      Richard Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein......................    26
    Letter dated June 6, 2016, from Stephanie Barna to Senator
      Richard Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein......................    28
    Letter dated June 4, 2016, from John C. Inglis to Senator Richard
      Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein..............................    30
    Letter dated June 3, 2016, from Robert S. Litt to Senator Richard
      Burr and Senator Dianne Feinstein..............................    32
    Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees............    34
    Additional Prehearing Questions..................................    49
    Letter dated April 25, 2016, from the Office of Government Ethics
      to Senator Richard Burr........................................    67

                        NOMINATION OF SUSAN GIBSON TO BE
                       INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE NATIONAL
                             RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2016

                                           U.S. Senate,
                              Select Committee on Intelligence,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m. in Room
    SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard Burr
    (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
        Committee Members Present: Senators Burr, Feinstein, Risch,
    Rubio, Collins, Blunt, Cotton, Wyden, Heinrich, King, and
    Hirono.

       OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, CHAIRMAN, A U.S.
                      SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA

        Chairman Burr. I'd like to call the hearing to order.
        Ms. Gibson, congratulations on your nomination to be the
    first advised and consent Inspector General for the National
    Reconnaissance Office. You have an impressive background both
    within the intelligence community and the Department of
    Defense, which I believe will serve you well in your new
    assignment.
        I'd also like to welcome your husband Tim, who is in the
    audience today, and I thank him both for his support for you
    and his distinguished service to our country.
        In many cases, inspector generals are the eyes and ears of
    their respective agencies' leadership, and they can be for
    Congress as well. Through critical oversight of the Executive
    Branch operations, they can provide useful assessments of
    performance and identify areas for improvement. We need
    efficiency of effort across government now more than ever. I
    feel strongly that effective and independent inspector generals
    can help us achieve that goal.
        The NRO's classified budget is significant, and the NRO
    Inspector General plays a vital oversight role in detecting and
    hopefully deterring any fraud, waste, or abuse within the NRO.
    As we conduct our own oversight of the NRO, we may look to your
    office for its opinions on the programs that are functioning
    well or may need improvement.
        As the NRO's Inspector General, much of your work will of
    necessity be classified. This means that there will most often
    not be public airings of your assessments. As a result,
    Congress and the American people must have full confidence that
    your findings are objective, independent, and entirely
    supported by the facts.
        Ms. Gibson, I've reviewed the material provided by you
    prior to this confirmation hearing and have spoken with you
    personally. I'm confident that you're a person of high
    integrity and well qualified for this job. Thank you again for
    being here today, for your years of service to our country, and
    I look forward to your testimony.
        I now recognize the Vice Chairman.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, VICE CHAIRMAN, A
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA

        Vice Chairman Feinstein. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to congratulate our prospective Inspector General.
    I'd like to welcome her family, and maybe next time we'll get a
    smaller room. But we should all feel very comfortable; plenty
    of space.
        In 2013 this Committee included in the Intelligence
    Authorization Act a requirement for Senate confirmation of the
    inspectors general for the National Reconnaissance Office and
    the National Security Agency. So, Ms. Gibson, you're the first
    nominee to be considered by the Senate for the NRO position.
        This month the NSA Inspector General will be stepping down,
    and the CIA has been without a Senate-confirmed inspector
    general since January of 2015. Given the importance of IGs, I
    believe these gaps in service are unacceptable. Last June I
    wrote to the President to urge him to nominate an IG for the
    CIA. Today I renew this request and ask him to ensure NSA does
    not languish without a Senate-confirmed IG.
        Ms. Gibson, you and I recently had the opportunity to meet
    and discuss your nomination, and I want you to know that I
    personally appreciated our frank discussion, which demonstrated
    your understanding of the role of the IG and the need to be
    principled, objective, and effective in your oversight of
    virtually every aspect of the NRO.
        If confirmed, it will be your job to ensure that the NRO
    remains free of waste, fraud, and mismanagement, while avoiding
    politicization of the office. You will also have to support
    efforts to drive the organization toward more efficient and
    effective operations. I believe that you have the background to
    carry out this mission.
        It's also important that you recognize, which I believe you
    do, your responsibility to keep this committee fully and
    currently informed about the concerns you may identify at the
    NRO. I don't want to sugarcoat it, but this is really a big
    job. It's a big job in part due to NRO's size and the
    complexity of its mission. You're going to be required to dig
    deep into some very technical and complicated programs,
    including some of the most classified and also expensive
    programs.
        But it's also a big job because it comes with an extra
    responsibility of conducting oversight of an organization in
    which most activities are conducted in secret. The duty to the
    American public cannot be overstated here. This committee is
    charged with ensuring the intelligence community operates in a
    manner that's legal, efficient, and abides by the values of the
    American people. This requires effective and independent
    inspectors general to support us in this task.
        So it's our expectation that, if confirmed, you will make
    full use of the authorities provided to you as an inspector
    general and keep this committee clearly advised. So I will ask
    in my question time how you intend to do our oversight, so that
    the committee can understand your vision for this office.
        So congratulations on the nomination and thank you for
    being here. I look forward to our discussion.
        Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Burr. Thank you, Vice Chairman.
        Ms. Gibson, I'm going to ask you to stand and raise your
    right hand.
        Do you solemnly swear to give this committee the truth, the
    full truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
        Ms. Gibson. I do.

    TESTIMONY OF SUSAN GIBSON, NOMINATED TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF
                   THE NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

        Chairman Burr. Please be seated. I'll ask you to answer the
    five standard questions the committee poses to each nominee who
    appears before us. They just require a simple yes or no answer
    for the record.
        One, do you agree to appear before the committee here and
    in other venues when invited?
        Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir.
        Chairman Burr. Two, if confirmed do you agree to send
    officials from your office to appear before the committee and
    designated staff when invited?
        Ms. Gibson. Yes.
        Chairman Burr. Three, do you agree to provide documents and
    any other materials requested by the committee in order to
    carry out its oversight and legislative responsibilities?
        Ms. Gibson. Yes.
        Chairman Burr. Four, will you both ensure that your office
    and your staff provide such materials to the committee when we
    request it?
        Ms. Gibson. Yes.
        Chairman Burr. And five, do you agree to inform and fully
    brief to the fullest extent possible all members of this
    committee of intelligence activities and covert action, rather
    than only the Chair and the Vice Chair?
        Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir.
        Chairman Burr. Thank you very much, Ms. Gibson.
        We'll now proceed to your opening statement, after which
    I'll recognize members by seniority for five minutes each of
    questions. The floor is yours.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you very much, Chairman. Good afternoon,
    Chairman Burr, Vice Chairman Feinstein, and distinguished
    members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to
    appear before you today as you consider my nomination to be the
    Inspector General for the National Reconnaissance Office. I
    also appreciate the opportunity I've had to meet with several
    of you and to hear your concerns for the NRO and for the
    intelligence community at large.
        I'm deeply honored that the President nominated me for this
    position and I'm grateful for the support of both Director
    Clapper and Director Sapp. If confirmed, I look forward to
    working with you, with Director Sapp, and with the fine women
    and men of the NRO and the NRO Inspector General's Office to
    further the NRO's mission.
        Before going any further, I would like to recognize my
    husband Tim, who joins me here today. A week from today is our
    36th wedding anniversary. Tim and I met in high school and both
    had full Army careers. We supported each other all along the
    way. It was very much a team. We had a great deal of fun and
    we've raised two amazing daughters, Katie and Joanna, who are
    both here in spirit, but have very busy, full, and interesting
    lives and couldn't make it, unfortunately.
        I'd also like to acknowledge publicly the support I've
    received from my parents, but particularly from my mother,
    Claudette Green. I'm the first person in my family, which
    includes my brother, my sister, and nearly 20 cousins, to
    graduate from college. I couldn't have accomplished this
    without the love and support of my remarkable mother, who's now
    80. But, like my daughters, she is still busy and leading a
    very full life and is unable to join us today.
        I would like to thank my friends, my co-workers, many of
    whom are here today--thank you--and my many mentors. Life is a
    team sport and so is public service. As one of my mentors,
    Stephanie O'Sullivan, says: ``There's no end to what we can
    accomplish if we don't care who gets the credit.'' I couldn't
    agree more, and I'm thankful for the wonderful team that helped
    me along the way.
        To briefly address my qualifications for this position, my
    22 years in the Army JAG Corps encompassed a broad legal
    practice, to include criminal law and investigations,
    government contracting and fiscal law, international
    agreements, domestic and international crisis response, human
    intelligence operations, and privacy and civil liberties. My
    time in the Army also impressed on me the importance of
    building and nurturing strong teams and effective teams.
        I joined the intelligence community while I was still
    wearing my Army colonel's uniform, first at the Defense
    Intelligence Agency and then as part of DNI Negroponte's
    original legal team. I later retired from the Army and joined
    the civilian ranks at ODNI. I've supported all four DNIs and
    have touched on virtually every aspect of the mission. I helped
    stand up the office, assisted with drafting multiple
    intelligence community policies, helped rewrite Executive Order
    12333, and regularly provided advice and counsel as we worked
    through many issues affecting the intelligence community.
        As a result of these experiences, I'm well grounded in
    intelligence law and policy and in many other areas of law
    relevant to the mission of the NRO and its Inspector General,
    to include fiscal law, whistleblower protections, ethics,
    procurement law, and procurement integrity.
        Most important, during my years in government I've learned
    and re-learned the importance of conducting a careful and
    unbiased analysis of the facts and the law, acting with
    integrity and honesty and proceeding with openness and
    inclusion. These are the foundations of good government and
    they are also foundational to conducting effective oversight.
        My experience at ODNI has made me acutely aware of the
    essential role of the NRO in the national security of this
    country. I'm also aware of the growing risks to NRO's mission.
        I recognize that if I'm confirmed this committee will have
    high expectations for my performance and for the performance of
    the NRO IG's office. I share those same expectations. If
    confirmed, I pledge to continue the office's legacy of
    excellence, to use my many years of experience to reduce risks
    and to improve the NRO's efficiency and effectiveness.
        Finally, I also recognize and indeed embrace Congress'
    oversight of the NRO. Congressional oversight is fundamental to
    the checks and balances established in our Constitution and the
    only way that the intelligence community can effectively
    operate in our open and democratic society. If confirmed, I
    will fully support the NRO IG's notification and reporting
    responsibilities and keep the NRO's oversight committees fully
    and currently informed.
        I'm under no illusion that fulfilling the responsibilities
    of this new position will be easy. If confirmed, I pledge to do
    my very best as I continue to serve my Nation.
        Thank you again for your consideration of my nomination and
    I look forward to taking your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Gibson follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Burr. Ms. Gibson, thank you. I thank your husband,
    your daughters, and, yes, I even thank your mother for the fact
    that she made sure you made it through the gauntlet of
    education and bring your expertise to a critical role at the
    NRO.
        With that, I'll recognize myself and then the Vice Chairman
    and then by seniority the members.
        I've met with the NRO leadership many times and stressed
    the need for the organization to streamline their processes to
    more rapidly and affordably field capabilities with the latest
    technologies. As is typically the case, it's difficult to have
    a large organization make fundamental changes in acquisition
    practices without sustained and constant oversight.
        Two questions: Can you describe how the IG currently
    reviews the acquisition of satellite systems at NRO? And how
    often are investigators reviewing program management to ensure
    resources are efficiently and effectively managed?
        Ms. Gibson. Chairman, as we discussed briefly before this
    hearing, I think we both share the same concerns about
    acquisition and the need to streamline acquisition to stay
    ahead of the curve in technology and keep our edge in this
    world, where technology is driving things more and more.
        It is something that I have given a great deal of thought
    to, as to how to go about doing this at the NRO. I think it is
    the same in many other areas. Effective oversight would include
    the audits, the inspections, being present, being there, being
    receptive to the sorts of complaints and concerns that people
    bring to you, and by being a partner oftentimes in the mission
    and taking problems and taking recommendations to the
    leadership often.
        I quite frankly am not familiar yet with how often they're
    doing these inspections and audits. NRO has passed its audits
    for the last several years, which is encouraging and something
    I hope to continue and encourage as the IG. But it's something
    that I think would be clearly a priority and a focus if I was
    confirmed to be the IG at the NRO.
        Chairman Burr. Good.
        Would your office be ready and willing to support our
    efforts to identify organizational or procedural changes
    required to help the NRO become more agile and cost-competitive
    in their acquisition process?
        Ms. Gibson. Certainly, sir.
        Chairman Burr. Great. With that, I'll turn to the Vice
    Chairman.
        Vice Chairman Feinstein. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Gibson, a key purpose of this hearing is to ensure that
    the nominee understands the independent role of the IG in a
    secret organization like the NRO, and that Congress depends on
    an independent, impartial IG to pursue allegations of
    malfeasance such as the NRO has faced in the past.
        The now-retired previous NRO IG, Lanie D'Alessandro, has
    been quoted in the press as saying, and I quote: ``If you're
    going to do this job, well, you risk your future job
    aspirations. It's best you take the job as a swan song before
    you retire.'' End quote.
        From your knowledge, do you agree with this statement? And
    what impediments to your independence do you foresee, and how
    would you ensure your complete independence, upon which this
    committee relies?
        Ms. Gibson. Vice Chairman Feinstein, it's hard to say
    whether I agree with that statement, not having been in the
    position. I think I'm more comfortable answering for you how I
    would keep my independence and sort of my own personal views on
    independence.
        For better or worse, I am at that part of my career where
    this may well be my swan song, so I can start there. However, I
    don't think that's necessary. I've been an attorney, a deputy
    general counsel, for many years. I've given a lot of advice to
    people, advice that they didn't necessarily want to hear. My
    experience has been if you're open, if you're honest, if you're
    unbiased, and if you're giving advice and overseeing things in
    the correct spirit, to improve things, to find efficiencies,
    not to grind axes, that people are more than willing to listen
    to you, even when they find it difficult.
        They may grumble at you. They may not be happy to see you
    come into their office as the ethics official for an agency.
    I've had this happen several times. People aren't necessarily
    happy to see you come through the door.
        But if you give them a day or two, they'll almost always
    thank you for your honest advice. And that's been my
    experience, and I think much of it has to do with your own
    personal integrity and how you approach the position.
        I think the structures of the NRO's IG office are set up
    well for that independence. I think the fact that you have a
    potential appointed Inspector General before you today adds to
    that independence, and I believe that that is a lot of the
    reason that you set up this position that way. I think it will
    add to that independence and the ability to be independent.
    It's something that I will guard and grow, I hope, for the
    office.
        Vice Chairman Feinstein. Thank you.
        In your pre-hearing questions you noted that the current
    staffing allocation for the office--and I quote--``may limit
    its ability to recruit and retain personnel with the skills
    necessary to fully perform its mission.'' Could you expand on
    that comment and describe how the current NRO staffing
    allocations are limiting personnel recruiting and retention in
    the IG's office?
        Ms. Gibson. Yes, ma'am. As you know, the NRO has instituted
    a new system of cadre employees. I was surprised to find out
    how few of the personnel in the NRO IG's office are cadre, as
    opposed to detailees from other agencies.
        My answer said it may be an impediment. I don't have yet
    enough information to know for sure, but I think it's one of
    those things that as the NRO sort of matures this personnel
    process, the IG's office itself needs to take a good hard look
    at that and figure out what we need for cadre, what is
    appropriate to have on maybe a rotational basis or as
    detailees.
        I also think that the NRO across the board and the NRO's IG
    office to perform effective oversight needs some skill sets
    that are sometimes hard to come by. It's very high technology
    fields. Auditors are also sometimes in short supply. So the
    sorts of incentives you need, the sorts of professional
    development you need to ensure that people's skills stay
    current and sharp and to ensure that they have the skills
    needed to oversee these highly technical programs, are
    something that are going to require constant nurturing if I'm
    confirmed as the IG.
        Vice Chairman Feinstein. Let me just quickly point out that
    I think you have raised the Achilles' heel of these agencies,
    and that's rotating people in and rotating them out, because
    when they go out they go back to certain--a certain agency in
    the intelligence community, and that may limit their ability to
    really be fully invested in openness and honesty no matter what
    the cost.
        So I appreciate your knowledge of that and will be very
    interested to see what you will do and how you handle this
    issue.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, ma'am.
        Chairman Burr. Senator Collins.
        Senator Collins. First of all, Ms. Gibson, I want to
    congratulate you on your nomination and your willingness to
    accept this important responsibility.
        I would like to hear your views on how you would propose to
    deal with, and indeed welcome, the input of whistleblowers
    within the agency? Recently there have been press reports that
    suggest that whistleblowers in the U.S. Central Command have
    brought forth complaints about how certain intelligence reports
    were treated. In addition, we have seen cases from the VA in
    which whistleblowers appear to have been the subject of
    retaliation and the individuals against whom they were bringing
    complaints were rewarded with bonuses and promotions.
        What would you do to ensure that whistleblowers have easy
    access to your office and that their complaints are carefully
    scrutinized, screened, and when appropriate acted upon?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator Collins, I think you frame it well in
    your question. It's really a two-part process. One is making
    sure that people are encouraged to reach out and that they have
    the information they need to find you to reach out, and that
    you make it as easy as you can for them to reach out to you, in
    confidence if necessary. So I think on the front end, if I were
    confirmed, one of the first things I would do is look at all
    the policies and processes that are in place to both inform the
    workforce, to include the contractor employee workforce, which
    is such a big part of NRO's mission, to inform them of their
    ability to come to the IG's office with any complaints or
    concerns, and then to make sure that all of the mechanisms for
    receiving those complaints and concerns are easy to find, easy
    to use, and confidential when necessary.
        So I think that's the front end of it, is to encourage
    those sorts of complaints and concerns and that they be brought
    to us. Once they come in, then it's crucial that you handle
    them appropriately, that you look into them quickly, and that
    they are a valid complaint, that they're fully investigated, as
    many of the items that you listed with the VA and Central
    Command IG's are now looking into those. I think that's very
    important, for people to know that when once a complaint is
    brought forward something happens to it. Someone really looks
    at it and looks at it fully and fairly and takes care of it.
        If there are reprisals or threats of reprisal for people
    who bring forward these complaints, as you know, under the IG
    Act that's considered an urgent concern and it's a very serious
    matter, and that would require immediate reporting to the
    Director of the NRO and within seven days to the oversight
    committees, because it's that serious if there's reprisals or
    threat of reprisals against potential whistleblowers. I think
    quick action to take care of anyone who starts a reprisal
    action or threatens a reprisal action also then feeds the
    willingness of people to come into the system in the front end
    and make those complaints and take care of things if that's
    simply not tolerated on the back end.
        Senator Collins. Thank you.
        Some inspectors general have experienced problems in
    getting access to documents that they need in order to conduct
    and complete their investigations. Should you encounter that
    sort of stonewalling or noncooperation with an investigation,
    would you report that to this committee?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator Collins, if something like that
    happened--and it's one of the first things I actually asked the
    staff at the NRO when they briefed me a few weeks ago, and they
    assured me that they haven't had those problems there, and I
    think that says a lot about the office itself.
        But it's certainly something I would guard against, and if
    I felt like I wasn't getting the information that I needed I
    would first try to resolve it at the lowest level. It's
    typically the best way to go. Sometimes it's a
    misunderstanding. And I'd bring it to the leadership of the
    NRO. I'd advise them to work with their general counsel to get
    advice on whether it was proper to withhold the information.
        If it came down to it, I would certainly inform this
    committee and seek whatever assistance I needed, use subpoena
    authority if appropriate and if necessary. There are many ways
    to make that happen. And I would certainly inform this
    committee and request any assistance I thought I needed.
        Senator Collins. Finally, since my time has almost expired,
    I would just urge you to focus on NRO's acquisition policies
    and major acquisitions. In my experience as head of the--when I
    was Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, which was and
    is the major oversight committee in the Senate, we found that
    the IGs were invaluable in identifying acquisition problems,
    often before they resulted in cost overruns or contract
    failures, particularly in the information technology area.
        So I will write a question for the record on that to submit
    to you. But I would urge you to give that area your attention.
    Thank you.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of publication.]
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, Senator.
        Chairman Burr. Senator Wyden.
        Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Gibson, thank you for being here and for your many
    years of public service. I share the view of the Chair and the
    Vice Chair. This is a really important job. In particular, your
    office is in the position of awarding very large government
    contracts in secret. So it's absolutely essential to have
    oversight from a strong inspector general.
        Now, my colleague from Maine has, as is usually the case,
    asked very good questions on this issue of whistleblowers, and
    I want to just follow it up in one regard. Chairman Grassley is
    the chair of the Whistleblowers Caucus. I am the vice chair. As
    you know, there have been these press reports over the years
    alleging retaliation against whistleblowers by senior
    officials.
        I'm not asking you to confirm the reports, but I think that
    any NRO employee who read those press reports might conclude
    that going to the Inspector General to warn that taxpayer
    dollars are being ripped off could be hazardous to their
    career.
        Just two questions: Do you understand why employees would
    feel that way?
        Ms. Gibson. Certainly, sir. If they read reports like that,
    I can understand why they might.
        Senator Wyden. I'd like to know whether, if confirmed--I
    believe you will be confirmed; I've heard only good things
    about your service. When you're confirmed, are you going to
    have a meeting with the employees and inform them about how
    they will be protected from retaliation? Because I think that's
    really one of the keys when there's a history, that somebody
    new comes in, brings them all together, and says: This is how
    you will be protected from retaliation. Will you do that?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator, I'll make it a priority.
        Senator Wyden. Can't ask for more than that.
        One last question with respect to kind of policy issues. I
    think what I've learned over the years is it's typically easier
    for inspector generals to investigate cases of wrongdoing by a
    single individual than it is to look at these systemic problems
    in major programs, because when you look at the bigger problems
    you often run into resistance. You've got the sort of status
    quo kind of crowd.
        How do you plan to ensure that your investigators aren't
    afraid to ask hard questions and to really look at the big kind
    of problems, which historically is where you bump up against
    most resistance? And I think that's what the Vice Chair was
    talking about with the comments, and I've got a whole sheaf of
    these comments. How do you think you can help to set the
    climate so that the big problems are going to be investigated?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator, I believe that it would start with how
    you develop your workplan every year. The Investigations
    Section would be where I would look to for those sort of single
    bad actor sorts of investigations that you mentioned. I think
    it's the Inspections and Audits Sections that I would actually
    look to for these larger, potentially systemic issues.
        I think speaking with all of the stakeholders, coming to
    this committee to get your views on things that you may be
    seeing that you'd like looked into, having an open mind,
    sitting down and taking the time to sort of step back and get
    out of the daily grind for a while you work on this long-range
    plan and think strategically about what the larger problems may
    be. And I think they've set up a pretty good process for that
    at NRO that I've seen for developing their work plan. It's
    something I would want to look into more and perhaps refine
    after I got there, if I'm confirmed, and roll along as the year
    goes.
        I believe they're in the middle of a work year now, so
    there should be some opportunity coming into the next work year
    to effect that plan. But I would certainly also look to this
    committee and the other oversight committees for any systemic
    issues that you're seeing to feed into that work plan for
    inspections and audits.
        Senator Wyden. I'm planning to support your confirmation
    and look forward to your service. Thank you.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir.
        Chairman Burr. Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
    for holding this hearing today.
        I want to say congratulations, Ms. Gibson, on your
    nomination. Thank you for joining us today for one of our rare
    open hearings.
        I see from your record that you not only have a
    distinguished legal career, but a long and distinguished
    military career as well. So thank you for your continued
    service to our country, and I certainly wish you well.
        The role of the Inspector General is critical. We rely on
    them and their staffs to conduct robust, independent review and
    oversight of agency activities, and to give us assurances that
    federal agencies are meeting the letter and the spirit of the
    law in carrying out their duties.
        For these reasons, I'd like to state for the record my
    concern that the Administration has not nominated a new
    Inspector General for the CIA in almost a year and a half, ever
    since David Buckley left the office in January of 2015. A
    position of such importance should not be vacant and I am
    disappointed that the Administration has not made this the
    higher priority.
        As I noted, the independence of the IG in any agency is
    central to our confidence that the investigations are conducted
    objectively and fairly. This benefits both the complainant and
    the target of an investigation. It's also why this committee
    took steps to make the NRO IG a presidentially appointed and
    Senate-confirmed position. In fact, you will be the first NRO
    IG to be Senate-confirmed, a distinction that I am sure has not
    been lost on you.
        Being able to raise difficult issues with senior officials
    and agency directors is a prerequisite, a necessary quality for
    an IG. So in your opinion, what are the measurable indicators
    of real independence for an IG? And more specifically, what
    actions would you take if a senior IC official sought to
    somehow prevent you from conducting an adequate audit or
    investigation?
        Ms. Gibson. Sir, if I thought that someone, a senior
    official or anyone, at NRO or in the intelligence community was
    seeking to impede an investigation or an audit, I would first
    have a conversation with them if it was a senior official,
    straight up have that conversation. The Secretary of Defense is
    the only person that I read about in the statute who has the
    authority to do that, and only for a vital national security
    interest, after consultation with the DNI. If it were that sort
    of a reason, that requires then a notification to the
    committees that that investigation or audit has been stopped
    for those reasons.
        Otherwise, I would come to this committee if I couldn't
    resolve it myself, if there weren't ways to work through it. I
    think oftentimes it's just a matter of having open and honest
    conversations. I'm reminded, quite frankly, of my time in the
    JAG Corps, which typically we weren't on the firing line and in
    the front lines, although that's changed over time,
    unfortunately. We used to talk about those moments as a ``JAG
    Purple Heart moment,'' where you would go into the office and
    you just stand up and say what you had to say and take the hits
    if you took the hits. And like I said, eventually, a day or two
    later, they would usually come around and say: Thank you; I
    needed to hear that, and let's work through it.
        I don't have a problem doing that when I need to, and I
    think I've had lots of practice at it. And if I need to do it,
    if I'm confirmed as the IG, I'm ready to do it.
        Senator Heinrich. I think we all appreciate your candor.
    It's critical for this role.
        Although the NRO IG is independently appointed and
    confirmed, you're still accountable to the IC IG and to the
    Department of Defense IG. What is your view of those
    relationships and how will you manage potential disagreements
    with either entity?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator, I can't think of a better experience
    for learning how to deal with the interface between the
    intelligence community and the DOD than my nearly 11 years at
    the ODNI, particularly having come out of DOD. I find the more
    that I deal with these issues, there are rarely conflicts that
    can't be resolved. Typically, when you get to the bottom of any
    issue or problem, if you're looking at it in a good government
    way and a way where you can make helpful progress moving
    forward, people's interests start to align. That's what I tend
    to look for when I start seeing those conflicts, as I start
    looking for where the interests align, and bring both parties
    to the table and have that open and honest discussion to find
    those areas.
        I've found typically, if you do that, you can and you can
    make progress and move forward in a cooperative way. That's
    what I would seek to do.
        Senator Heinrich. I just want to say thank you for your
    willingness to serve in this position. It takes a lot to put
    yourself out there, and I think we all appreciate it very much.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
        Chairman Burr. Senator Rubio.
        Senator Rubio. Thank you.
        Ms. Gibson, in your opening statement you take credit for
    helping stand up the Office of the Director of National
    Intelligence and to rewrite Executive Order 12333. Can you
    describe--and perhaps you have, and I apologize; I had another
    committee meeting--your role and how you wrote this order?
        Ms. Gibson. Initially there was a team of two, me and the
    Chief of Policy at ODNI, who were given the task of starting to
    look at, if we were going to update EO-12333--which had not
    been updated since the IRTPA, which passed in 2004--how would
    you update it to recognize sort of these new roles, the new
    interfaces? Much of the executive order had not been updated at
    all for many, many years. So the missions of the various
    intelligence community elements.
        We went into it with an idea of making those updates, with
    the knowledge that we would make very few changes to Part 2 of
    the order, which dealt with the privacy and civil liberties
    protections, and we made very, very few changes to that.
        We then did what has worked so well in so many other
    instances. We got the leadership of the intelligence community
    together and said: Please take off your element hats and tell
    us what needs improving in this executive order for a more
    smoothly running intelligence community?
        We got those inputs and we started drafting. We spent a
    long time drafting the proposed language. It was very much like
    my prior experience in negotiating international agreements,
    quite frankly, by the time we worked our way through. But that
    was my main role and, quite frankly, it was most of what I did
    for approximately a year of my time at the ODNI.
        Senator Rubio. The inspector generals serve an important
    role in our system in terms of the oversight and ensuring that
    safeguards are in place. It's crucial that people be able to
    trust them. So if you're confirmed, can you describe a little
    bit what you think the best way is to communicate to your
    workforce that the safeguards afforded to potential
    whistleblowers are such that any potential whistleblowers would
    feel comfortable reaching out to the Office of Inspector
    General?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator, I think there's two things that an
    inspector general or anyone can do in those sorts of
    circumstances. The first thing is you have to say it and you
    have to say it often, and you have to communicate it well and
    you have to make it so that people can come to you and feel
    like they are actually welcome to come to you.
        Then, once they come to you, you have to follow through
    appropriately: with an investigation if an investigation is
    warranted; if there are reprisals or threats of reprisals, by
    dealing with those promptly and effectively. That creates then
    a cycle that feeds on itself and that continues to encourage
    people to come forward.
        So it's both the communication and the follow-through,
    which you hope will bring more communication.
        Senator Rubio. You stated in your response to a prehearing
    question that there weren't any challenges facing the NRO IG.
    However, from open press accounts from 2014 it appears there
    were significant cultural impediments to the independence of
    the Office of Inspector General. I'm looking at one article in
    particular, the 28th of October, regarding the deputy director
    of the National Reconnaissance Office.
        If you're confirmed, how do you intend to maintain the
    independence of your office and that of your staff from some of
    the issues that have been outlined in those 2014 cases?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator, I think if I were confirmed the fact
    that I am a Senate-confirmed IG would also add to my
    independence in that position. I think that was part of the
    reason for this being made a Senate-confirmed position. So I
    think that would help, to start with.
        I think that the office, from what I've seen--and I don't
    have all the facts of those earlier allegations, but from what
    I've seen recently--they've already made great strides forward.
    They have a very strong personnel system that they run internal
    to the IG, so that others in the NRO can't make personnel
    decisions that affect the office, but it's the leadership of
    the IG's office making those decisions. I think that's
    important.
        I think it's important for your people to know that if
    they're feeling those sorts of pressures that they can come to
    you as the IG and bring those concerns to your attention so
    that you can deal effectively with them. I think oftentimes for
    an IG, much like for a general counsel, your role is to be that
    layer that protects your people from undue influence so that
    they can accomplish the job that they need to, and I would look
    to do much the same if I were confirmed as the IG.
        Chairman Burr. Senator King.
        Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Ms. Gibson, who appointed you to this job?
        Ms. Gibson. I have not been appointed yet, sir.
        Senator King. Who nominated you for this job?
        Ms. Gibson. President Obama nominated me.
        Senator King. I think that's a very important point. You
    weren't nominated by the head of the NRO or the head of the IC.
    Everybody has said this, but I want to put a really fine point
    on it. You have one of the most important jobs in the United
    States Government, particularly because of the nature of the
    intelligence community, which is immune from much of the
    scrutiny of the public in many ways that the Department of
    Agriculture, the Department of the Interior is, with outside
    groups and lobbying groups and press and everything else.
    Therefore we have to have--it's an IG-squared job in my view,
    that you have to be fiercely independent.
        I hope you will take that. You use one word in your
    testimony that made my ears prick up, which was ``partner.'' I
    don't want you to be anybody's partner over there. I want you
    to be--my high school football coach used to say he wanted us
    agile, mobile, and hostile. That's where you have to do this,
    because this committee can't function without a truly
    independent IG in these intelligence community agencies that is
    responsible to the President of the United States and to this
    Congress.
        Can you reassure me on this point?
        Ms. Gibson. Sir, I can assure you that I'd do my very best.
    I believe that I would be independent. As you state, the
    nomination from the President, confirmation and appointment if
    I'm confirmed, would add to that independence.
        As I mentioned early on, I truly do expect this to be my
    swan song, so I don't need to be anyone's friend in order to
    accomplish this job and move on to another job when I finish.
    I've retired once already, from the Army, and I hope to not
    retire more than twice, and I hope to do it in the not too
    distant future.
        So I don't foresee any problems with independence. I would
    certainly hope that if you saw any of those problems as the
    committees who would also help me oversee, that you would let
    me know that you were concerned about that, because I would see
    you as a partner in that, sir.
        Senator King. That's a partnership I approve of. Thank you.
        Let's move on to the question of contracts. You talked
    about the limitations on staff and the fact that the NRO
    administers huge contracts, a lot of taxpayer dollars. How
    about a force multiplier called the GAO? Do you feel there's a
    role for the GAO to monitor and assess some of these contracts,
    just as they do in exactly the same kind of procurement
    situations in the Department of Defense?
        Ms. Gibson. Sir, I believe there's a role for the GAO. I
    know that we've worked out in the intelligence community a lot
    of that interface in recent years. I think it's a role where
    you have to complement and coordinate. Otherwise you're wasting
    resources, oversight resources. So I think it's something that
    you would want to make sure that you found the appropriate
    balance.
        Senator King. But you mentioned in your testimony you need
    auditors, you need engineers, you need people that are contract
    administrators. I assume you don't have all of those resources
    and assets within your office?
        Ms. Gibson. I do, sir.
        Senator King. You have all of the resources to adequately
    assess billion-dollar contracts?
        Ms. Gibson. From what I have been able to ascertain, I have
    a very qualified staff. If I am confirmed and I get in and I
    think I don't have the resources I need, the statute does
    require that I come to the committees and request the resources
    that I think are appropriate.
        I think the one thing that the NRO IG's Office has that is
    unique is it has the expertise and it has the understanding of
    the mission, and it does have technical expertise that doesn't
    reside perhaps elsewhere in the oversight mechanisms. So I
    would hope that the committee would come to the NRO IG to look
    at these problems first, and if there were gaps in expertise
    that were needed, there are also ways to pull in other experts.
        So again, I think, as I said in my opening, much of
    oversight is a team sport. The important thing is to make sure
    that you're putting the right player on the right problem.
        Senator King. I would urge you to think about and learn
    about the capacities of the GAO. Senator Coburn and I sponsored
    an amendment a year ago that allowed the GAO for the first time
    to play a role in the intelligence community on facilities.
        I think we need to think further. Again, you're talking
    about efficiency and resources. We've got an agency that is
    very capable of doing this function and I urge you to make that
    a part of your toolkit as you move forward in this position.
        Finally, I want to compliment you as well, and I'm
    delighted that you're taking on this challenge. Given your
    experience both in the JAG Corps and at the IC, I think you're
    the right person for the right job at the right time. But human
    nature being what it is, we all want to be friends and popular
    with our coworkers. You've got to be willing to be difficult
    and very aggressive, because again this is different from the
    IG of another agency. This is one where there aren't that many
    people watching, and that puts a special responsibility, it
    seems to me, on the job of the IG within the IC.
        So I want to thank you and I look forward to working with
    you.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir.
        Chairman Burr. Senator Hirono.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you.
        Ms. Gibson, it's good to see you again, and I can echo the
    comments of my colleagues to say that your job is particularly
    important because you're dealing with a community of actors for
    whom transparency is not necessarily their number one priority.
        So let me ask you this. I know that ODNI has been working
    in recent years to enhance public understanding about the
    intelligence community, its authorities and oversight of its
    activities and programs. The ODNI recognizes that increased
    transparency in the IC will help increase trust that Americans'
    civil liberties are protected and that their taxpayer dollars
    are being well spent.
        What do you believe is the role of transparency in the
    Office of the NRO IG, and do you believe there is a way to
    create unclassified versions of reviews and audits and
    otherwise make the public more aware of the IG's work than has
    been done in the past?
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, Senator. I will say to start that
    I'm a firm believer in transparency and have been fully behind
    the efforts at the ODNI to be more transparent. I agree that we
    can't always be transparent about exactly what we are doing,
    but we should be more and more transparent about how we are
    doing it and what the oversight mechanisms are that are in
    place to make sure that the authorities that the intelligence
    community has are not abused.
        So, first, I'm a proponent of transparency. How many of the
    IG reports could be released I think would depend on the topic.
    I think I would look for the topics that can be made public. I
    know that they've published several of their reports in the
    past, and I would look to continue to do that.
        Also, we have worked quite a bit to figure out how to write
    things so that you separate the classified from the
    unclassified and not tangle it up to the extent that once
    you've redacted it that it's hard to understand. So much of it
    comes with how you write the report and how you explain things.
    So I would look to continue those sorts of efforts that are in
    place and be more transparent wherever possible.
        Senator Hirono. I think that kind of commitment is very
    necessary as you do your audits and write your reports,
    because, as you say, if you write it in a way where redacting
    therefore results in making no sense that does not help the
    public.
        In 2012 a former NRO IG was quoted in a news article saying
    that he wasn't surprised by allegations against an NRO official
    regarding the handling of contracts. He noted that, and I
    quote, ``You're talking about a lot of money at this agency and
    a culture within the intelligence community that isn't really
    comfortable with the idea of transparency. Generally speaking,
    people in the agency are ethical, but there is a certain
    dependency on contractors and closeness with contractors that
    can create an awkward environment.'' End quote.
        Do you consider closeness with contractors a problem with
    the NRO IG and, if so, how would you prevent or minimize this
    problem?
        Ms. Gibson. Ma'am, I don't have enough experience yet to
    say whether there's a problem within the IG's office with
    contractors. If you're asking about the larger NRO, if
    confirmed it's certainly something that any IG would have to
    keep a very close eye on at the NRO.
        Contractors play a very important role there. They're
    essential to the mission. But at the same time, they are not
    government employees and you always have to keep in mind the
    idea of what is an inherently governmental function and what
    isn't and who's actually making the decisions, which is I think
    what's really important when you talk about those inherently
    governmental functions. The people making the decisions should
    be government employees and not contractors.
        So I think it's the sort of thing you would have to keep an
    eye on at all times.
        Senator Hirono. Well, human nature being what it is, those
    who deal with--the government officials who deal with
    contractors on an ongoing basis--and there's a lot of money at
    stake--I think that that kind of awkward closeness is
    particularly of concern. So that is an area that I would think
    that there should be enhanced scrutiny on your part, to make
    sure that these kinds of cozy relationships do not result in
    misuse of taxpayer money.
        Ms. Gibson. I share your concern, ma'am, and I'll make that
    a priority if I'm confirmed.
        Senator Hirono. I have a few more questions, but I think
    I'll stop here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Burr. Senator Blunt.
        Senator Blunt. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Ms. Gibson,
    thanks for being here with us today.
        The NRO has its feet both in the Title 10 and the Title 50
    world. In your statement for the record, you mention the
    growing risks that you believe are there for the NRO mission. I
    think a lot of people on this committee believe that better
    coordination between the space-related activities of the
    Defense Department and the intelligence community are needed.
        How do you see your office playing a role in improving the
    Title 10 and Title 50 relationships?
        Ms. Gibson. Sir, I see the main place where that
    relationship comes into play in the way that you're talking
    about in the requirements process as programs are conceived and
    plans are built for those programs. So I think the oversight of
    the IG as those processes work their way through, because those
    processes are so crucial for both the Title 10 and the Title
    50, which are very intertwined at NRO--it's an agency that
    supports a broad, broad range of requirements.
        So I think oversight of that requirements process is
    probably where the IG could be most useful. But I would
    certainly look for other ways, if I were confirmed, to get at
    any other connective tissue that really needed a good shaking
    out and a good look.
        Senator Blunt. Well, I'll just repeat. I think several
    people on this committee think that steps in newer directions
    aren't nearly as clear to us as they might otherwise be, and
    that would be a place where you could have a view of both
    departments, both the Title 10 and the Title 50 world, in ways
    that others don't.
        You know, you discuss also in your statement your
    involvement in establishing the Office of the Director of
    National Intelligence when that was set up and drafting several
    of the directives involved in setting that up. There are broad
    efforts, obviously, to foster greater sharing of what's
    acquired and integrating what we learn from that.
        What are some of the pitfalls you think face the NRO in
    accomplishing the tasks that were envisioned by the
    establishment of the DNI?
        Ms. Gibson. Senator, I actually think the NRO was probably
    affected, but not perhaps affected as much as some of the other
    intelligence community elements, and in the ways that they were
    affected it's ways that they have helped the change along.
        So one of the first couple of policies that I actually
    worked on when I started at the ODNI was the intelligence
    community directives on major system acquisitions. So this more
    flexible, spiral development process that was put in place for
    majority National Intelligence Program-funded major system
    acquisitions I think was something that the NRO supported, and
    so it was a cooperative process, if you will, and I think they
    put a lot of that in place.
        I've seen a great deal of cooperation. I've seen a lot of
    maturity in the processes, with the Systems and Resource
    Analysis Office and the maturity of the cost estimates that are
    happening and are getting better and better as we go along.
    Then I'm very, very encouraged actually also by the analysis
    that's being done for--this is what you hoped to accomplish,
    these are the requirements you set in place, this is how you
    thought you would use it, and then to look at it on the back
    end and say, is that what happened, did you get what you
    thought you were going to get out of this? If not, why not?
        So this analysis that's happening between the ODNI in
    partnership with the NRO and with DOD I think has helped it
    progress toward more effective and efficient acquisitions. I'm
    not saying that there isn't still progress to be made. But I do
    think that they're moving in a hopeful direction there, and if
    I was confirmed as the IG it's something that I actually feel
    strongly about and would work diligently to continue improving.
        Senator Blunt. Well, I would think that it's a great place
    for the IG to do just exactly the kind of evaluation of what
    results are being produced versus the goals that were being set
    that you would have. And certainly your effort in establishing
    the DNI and working with that is clearly a great background for
    this job.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir.
        Chairman Burr. Senator Cotton.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        Ms. Gibson, thank you for appearing here today, and thank
    you for once again answering the call to service for our
    country.
        I want to associate myself with what Senator King, Senator
    Hirono, and Senator Blunt have said about the importance of the
    IG in the intelligence community in general and the NRO in
    particular because of the often secret nature of the work that
    you do. And, as Senator Blunt said, the NRO has a dual
    structure under both the military and the intelligence
    community.
        I am one of four members on this committee who also sits on
    the Armed Services Committee, the only Republican. I'd just
    like to get the same commitment that you gave to Senator King
    about this committee of keeping the Armed Services Committee
    informed where appropriate as well.
        Ms. Gibson. Absolutely, sir.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        You've received some very stellar letters of recommendation
    from esteemed individuals, such as Chris Inglis and Bob Litt.
    They say that your character and integrity are of the highest
    caliber and beyond reproach. I think that's evidenced by your
    up-front disclosure of a 1999 Army JAG professional
    responsibility inquiry, which I understand was dismissed as
    unfounded.
        Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir.
        Senator Cotton. Could you simply explain a little bit more
    about that matter in your own words, for those who have not had
    a chance to review the thorough explanation of it in writing?
        Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir. In the mid-1990s I was the Deputy
    Staff Judge Advocate at Aberdeen Proving Ground. While I was
    there--they actually sent me to Aberdeen, by the way, to get
    out of criminal law for a while. Aberdeen Proving Ground is
    where they try to break things and test things, and it tends to
    work on contracting instead of criminal law.
        So I was one of the few senior attorneys there who had much
    investigative or criminal law experience. While I was there, I
    was the primary legal advisor for the Ordnance Center and
    School, which had multiple allegations of sexual assault and
    sexual abuse of trainees by drill sergeants and instructors. It
    was a prolonged and very high-profile investigation.
        When the first round of courts martial were final months
    later, the Army Inspector General came in and did a thorough
    review. During that review there was an allegation made that I
    had inappropriately told investigators not to read rights to
    certain trainees, Article 31 rights, which are similar to
    Miranda but also have to include the crime that the person is
    suspected of.
        There was a full investigation of that. The Army Inspector
    General turned it over to the Army JAG Standards of Conduct
    Office. They conducted a very long and thorough investigation
    of that, and it was eventually dismissed as unfounded.
        Senator Cotton. Well, thank you for sharing that for us. I
    know it was a high-profile matter, and again I think it
    reflects very well on your character that you've disclosed it
    up front, as well as that it was dismissed as completely
    unfounded. And it's also reflected in the fact that the Army
    continued to put you in positions of greater trust and
    responsibility, as the intelligence community has as well.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Cotton. One final question. I note from question 12
    of your questionnaire that you are on the board of directors of
    the City of Fairfax Theatre Company and you are general counsel
    of Women in Technology. And in question 20 you say that you
    intend to resign both of those positions.
        Ms. Gibson. Yes, sir.
        Senator Cotton. Is that required by law or regulation?
        Ms. Gibson. It's something that the Administration asks of
    its nominees and appointees if they're confirmed, so that they
    can concentrate on the job at hand.
        Senator Cotton. Do you think being a volunteer member on a
    city theater company would distract you from your job?
        Ms. Gibson. I intend to keep volunteering with the theater,
    sir, but not be on the board.
        Senator Cotton. Well, I understand that there are some
    positions outside our work that might conflict with our work,
    but maybe this committee should examine whether or not we need
    to require government employees to resign from volunteer
    positions like boards of directors of volunteer theater
    companies. I think it's a good thing for government employees
    to be involved in their community.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you for your support, and I can get you
    tickets for ``The Music Man'' this summer.
        Senator Blunt. He can't accept them.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Cotton. I can't accept them probably, and probably
    the appreciation would be lost on me, I suspect. But thank you
    for again answering the call of service.
        Ms. Gibson. Thank you, sir.
        Chairman Burr. I thank my colleagues.
        If nobody seeks other questions, let me share with members:
    It is the Vice Chairman's and my intent to vote Ms. Gibson out
    of committee on Thursday. To our colleagues that are on Armed
    Services and to the one or two that are on Homeland Security,
    they also have a sequential process in this. The faster they
    can choose not to have a hearing, the faster we could get Ms.
    Gibson to the floor. It's certainly my intent to try to get Ms.
    Gibson's nomination in place as quickly as we can. So any help
    that you can be on other committees that have responsibilities,
    I'm grateful to you.
        With that, Ms. Gibson, thank you for your testimony today.
    Thank you for the sacrifices you've given, not only for the
    military, but in your career with government. We're grateful to
    the sacrifices your family have made. And the last thing, if
    you would today, you thank your mother for us.
        Ms. Gibson. I will, sir.
        Chairman Burr. This hearing's adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:33 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                             Supplemental Material
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                      [all]