[Senate Hearing 115-908]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-908
TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATION OF THE HONOR-
ABLE HEATHER A. WILSON, TO BE SECRETARY
OF THE AIR FORCE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
March 30, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-156 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma, Chairman JACK REED, Rhode Island
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi BILL NELSON, Florida
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
TOM COTTON, Arkansas JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
JONI ERNST, Iowa RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
THOM TILLIS, North Carolina JOE DONNELLY, Indiana
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia TIM KAINE, Virginia
TED CRUZ, Texas ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
BEN SASSE, Nebraska ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
LUTHER STRANGE, Alabama GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
Christian D. Brose, Staff Director
Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________
march 30, 2017
Page
To Consider the Nomination of the Honorable Heather A. Wilson, to 1
be Secretary of the Air Force.
Members Statements
McCain, Senator John............................................. 1
Reed, Senator Jack............................................... 3
Witness Statements
Thune, Senator John.............................................. 5
Rounds, Senator Mike............................................. 6
Wilson, The Honorable Heather A., to be Secretary of the Air 7
Force.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 45
Questions for the Record....................................... 66
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 92
Biographical Sketch............................................ 93
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 95
Signature Page................................................. 104
(iii)
This hearing is printed to include all available
information
requested or required to be inserted for the
record.
(iv)
TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE HEATHER A. WILSON, TO BE
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 30, 2017
United States Senate,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:29 a.m. in room
SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator John McCain
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators McCain, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton,
Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Perdue, Graham, Sasse,
Strange, Reed, McCaskill, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal,
Donnelly, Hirono, Kaine, King, Heinrich, Warren, and Peters.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN McCAIN, CHAIRMAN
Chairman McCain. Good morning. The Senate Armed Services
Committee meets today to consider the nomination of Heather
Wilson to be the 24th Secretary of the Air Force.
Dr. Wilson, we thank you for joining us this morning. We
are grateful for your years of distinguished service to our
Nation and for your willingness to serve once more.
We also welcome your family and friends here with you
today. As is our tradition at the beginning of your testimony,
we invite you to introduce those who are joining you today.
It is the standard for this committee to ask certain
questions in order to exercise its legislative and oversight
responsibility. These are the standard questions that we ask
every nominee.
It is important this committee and other appropriate
committees of Congress be able to receive testimony, briefings,
and other communications of information. Have you adhered to
applicable laws and regulations governing conflicts of
interest?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Chairman McCain. Will you ensure that your staff complies
with deadlines established for requested communications,
including questions for the record in hearings?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Chairman McCain. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses
and briefers in response to congressional requests?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Chairman McCain. Will those witnesses be protected from
reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Chairman McCain. Do you agree, if confirmed, to appear to
testify upon request before this committee?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Chairman McCain. Do you agree to provide documents,
including copies of electronic forms of communications, in a
timely manner when requested by a duly constituted committee or
to consult with the committee regarding the basis for any good-
faith delay or denial in providing such documents?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Chairman McCain. Have you assumed any duties or undertaken
any actions which would appear to presume the outcome of the
confirmation process?
Dr. Wilson. No.
Chairman McCain. I would like to mention to our members
that we are going to have a 10 o'clock vote, so we will not
stop the committee. Senator Reed and I will bounce back and
forth in order to make the votes. We have two votes at 10, so
we will bounce back and forth, and continue the hearing to make
sure that all members have appropriate time to ask questions.
The next Secretary will lead America's Air Force in
confronting the most diverse and complex array of global crises
since the end of World War II--the threat of terrorism and
instability emanating from North Africa to the Middle East to
South Asia, advanced potential adversaries like Russia and
China, and rogue states such as North Korea and Iran.
The world is on fire, and now, more than ever, our Nation
is counting on the global vigilance, global reach, and global
power that are the hallmarks of Air Force capabilities.
However, in recent years, your predecessor has informed this
committee that America's Air Force is now the oldest, smallest,
and least ready in its history. I repeat: America's Air Force
is now the oldest, smallest, and least ready in its history.
Dr. Wilson, if confirmed, it will be your mission, in
partnership with Secretary Mattis and the Congress, to change
that fact. That starts by recognizing how we got here. Twenty-
five years of continuous deployments, troubled acquisition
programs, and frequent aircraft divestments have aged and
shrunk the Air Force inventory. The combination of relentless
operational tempo and the self-inflicted wounds of the Budget
Control Act and sequestration have depleted readiness.
Meanwhile, potential adversaries are developing and
fielding fifth generation fighters, advanced air defense
systems, and sophisticated space, cyber, and electronic warfare
capabilities that are rapidly shrinking America's military
technological advantage and holding our aircraft at greater
risk over greater distances.
In short, we have asked a lot of our Air Force over the
last 25 years, and the demands placed on the service continue
to grow, but we have not met our responsibility to give our Air
Force the resources, the personnel, and the equipment and
training it needs to succeed. We are placing an unnecessary and
dangerous burden on the backs of our airmen, and we cannot
change course soon enough.
Restoring readiness, recapitalizing our combat aircraft
fleet, and modernizing to sustain our overmatch will require
the strong personal leadership of the next Air Force Secretary.
Dr. Wilson, I look forward to discussing the challenges you
will face, if confirmed, and how you plan to tackle them.
For example, the Air Force is facing a massive bow wave of
modernization investment programs, and the bills will all come
due over the next 10 years. Just consider the list of Air Force
modernization priorities: F-35A fighters, KC-46A tankers, B-21
bombers, JSTARS, Compass Call, AWACS, and a new trainer
aircraft, not to mention a modernized nuclear force, including
the ground-based strategic deterrent B-61 gravity bomb and the
long-range standoff weapon.
There is simply no way all of these important yet expensive
modernization programs will fit into the Air Force budget as
constrained by the Budget Control Act. It will be your task to
develop and make the case for a path through this tremendous
budget crunch.
As you do, you also will have to be willing to challenge
conventional wisdom and reevaluate how the Air Force is shaped.
You will need to take an informed look at an optimal mix of the
long-range and short-range combat aircraft, manned and unmanned
systems, ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance],
space and cyber capabilities, and key joint enablers, and you
must also closely examine how the Air Force provides ready and
capable forces to our combatant commanders.
Furthermore, as this committee has emphasized over the last
2 years, no matter how many dollars we spend, we will not be
able to provide our airmen the equipment they need with a
lethargic defense acquisition system that takes too long and
costs too much.
Like all the services, the Air Force has a troubled history
with major acquisition programs. That is why you can expect
this committee will exercise close and rigorous oversight of
Air Force acquisition, particularly on programs like the B-21
bomber.
Today, I will be keenly interested in hearing how you will
streamline and accelerate Air Force acquisitions, deliver
needed capabilities on time and at cost, and meet our
commitments to both our warfighters and the American taxpayers.
Finally, this committee honors the service and sacrifice of
the outstanding men and women of the United States Air Force.
At the same time, we recognize that high operational tempo,
manning shortfalls, reduced readiness, and lucrative
opportunities outside the Air Force continue to drive some of
our best and brightest to leave the service. This is only
exacerbating problems such as the 800 fighter pilot shortfall
you noted in your response to advanced policy questions.
I am interested in hearing your plans on how to mitigate
such manpower shortfalls, improve quality-of-life and quality-
of-service of all airmen, and incentivize them to remain in the
service of their Nation.
Dr. Wilson, we look forward to hearing your testimony and
how you intend to lead the Air Force to a stronger future.
Senator Reed?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate Dr. Wilson's willingness to serve the Nation
and appear before the committee as the nominee for the
Secretary of the Air Force, and there is no doubt that Dr.
Wilson has many of the necessary qualifications to serve in
this position. She is a graduate of the United States Air Force
Academy, a Rhodes scholar, a former member of the national
security staff for President George Herbert Walker Bush, and a
former Member of the House of Representatives who served on the
House Armed Services and Intelligence Committees.
However, I believe it is incumbent upon this committee to
ask some questions that have been raised regarding Dr. Wilson's
nomination. Failure to do so could be an abdication of our
oversight responsibilities and a disservice to the airmen and
civilians that Dr. Wilson will lead, if she is confirmed.
First, Heather Wilson and Company LLC, founded by Dr.
Wilson following her tenure in Congress, had contracts with
four National Nuclear Security Administration laboratories,
Sandia National Laboratories, Los Alamos National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and a Nevada national security
site. From January 2009 through part of 2011, Dr. Wilson's
company received $464,000 in payments from these laboratories
for consulting services.
However, due to claims of contracting irregularities
involving her company, the Department of Energy (DOE) inspector
general conducted two investigations into this matter. As a
result, the contractors who operate the laboratories on behalf
of the Government paid back at least $442,877 to the Department
of Energy with respect to payments made to Dr. Wilson's
company. The rationale for the repayments was the absence of
any appreciable evidence of work product.
Furthermore, Lockheed Martin, which operated Sandia
National Laboratories, agreed to an overall settlement of $4.7
million for the management failures.
Let me be clear. Dr. Wilson was not found culpable of
wrongdoing. Nevertheless, the allegations that were levied are
serious and directly involve her company. I do think that the
situation merits closer scrutiny.
Second, in October 2006, Dr. Wilson contacted a sitting
United States Attorney, David C. Iglesias, regarding the status
of Federal corruption cases in New Mexico while she was serving
as a member of the House of Representatives. As a former Member
of the House myself, I have concerns about this action in terms
of House ethics rules and the possibility a Federal prosecutor
may have felt pressured by Congress in an ongoing
investigation.
Mr. Chairman, I raise these issues today because we have
been asked to confirm Dr. Wilson to a high-level position in
the Department of Defense, and that has implications for our
national security. But equally important, we are confirming her
to a position of public trust, and we hold all of our
servicemembers to the highest standards of conduct, and I
believe the individual confirmed to lead these brave men and
women must be held to the same standards.
Thank you.
Chairman McCain. Thank you.
I note that we have two undistinguished Members of the
United States Senate here this morning who would like to make
brief comments. You are certainly welcome, Senator Thune and
Senator Rounds. I take it because of your advanced age, you
would want to begin, Senator Thune.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN THUNE
Senator Thune. Thank you, Chairman McCain, Senator Reed,
and members of the committee, for the honor of introducing to
the committee Dr. Heather Wilson to be the next Secretary of
the United States Air Force.
I have known Heather for nearly 20 years and submit that
President Trump could not have selected a more qualified
candidate to lead the Air Force in these challenging times.
I first worked with Heather in the House of Representatives
when she was elected in 1998. But most recently, I have had the
pleasure of working with her as she leads an exceptional
engineering and science university in our State, the South
Dakota School of Mines and Technology.
Throughout her pathway to this nomination, Heather has
repeatedly demonstrated her leadership abilities and her
commitment to duty. Not only is she a distinguished graduate of
the Air Force Academy, but she continued to earn her master's
and doctorate degrees as a Rhodes scholar at Oxford University
in England.
If confirmed, she will become the first Air Force Academy
graduate in history to serve as Secretary of the Air Force.
Heather served as an Air Force officer in Europe during the
Cold War, in the United Kingdom, and at the United States
Mission to NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] in
Brussels.
Upon leaving the Air Force, she served on the National
Security Council staff for President George H.W. Bush, working
on NATO and conventional arms control.
She later moved west to marry her husband, Jay Hone. Within
a few years, she started her own company working with the
national labs and large defense and scientific companies.
However, she was soon called back to public service, and she
headed the Child Welfare Department for the State of New
Mexico.
After her election to Congress, where she served for a
decade, she quickly became one of the go-to Members on national
security issues. Heather was not afraid to take on tough
issues, ranging from oversight of the President's terrorist
surveillance program that led to the reform of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act or sexual assault at the Air
Force Academy.
In a town where whoever speaks the loudest often gets
heard, people would get quiet when Heather spoke because they
knew that she had ideas that were worth listening to.
Now, as president of the South Dakota School of Mines and
Technology, Heather has ushered in a new era of excellence, and
the school is well-positioned to remain a foremost engineering,
science, and research institution.
She is also a dedicated parent, adopting a son and raising
two children. I can remember her son, Josh, coming to the floor
of the House with his mom when he was about knee-high. Her
daughter, Caitlin, is in college, and I understand has about
five tests and a project due this week. Her husband, Jay, an
Air Force veteran himself, is in South Dakota today recovering
from shoulder surgery. We wish him a quick recovery. They are a
great, supportive family, and they will be good for the Air
Force.
Mr. Chairman, Heather has been a proven leader since her
days as a cadet. She is well-versed in national security policy
and nuclear deterrence. She understands the Air Force's key
capabilities of air and space superiority, global presence,
rapid global mobility, precision engagement, information
superiority, and agile combat support.
She understands the Air Force's tremendous responsibility
and role in our national security will be guided by the core
values of the Air Force: integrity first, service before self,
and excellence in all the Air Force does. She understands the
importance of not only rising to meet the challenges of the day
but to look ahead to defeat the threats of tomorrow.
Mr. Chairman, I am honored to be with you today and honored
to be able to highly recommend Heather Wilson to you and your
committee. Thank you.
Chairman McCain. Thank you very much, Senator Thune.
Senator Rounds?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR MIKE ROUNDS
Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Reed. It is my honor to join Senator Thune in supporting Dr.
Heather Wilson's nomination to be the next Secretary of the Air
Force.
Senator Thune talked about her record of achievement
throughout her life. I have known Dr. Wilson as a leader in
South Dakota during the most recent segment of her long and
distinguished professional life. She served in an outstanding
fashion as president of one of the most highly rated
engineering and science universities in the country for the
quality of its education and the success of its graduates, the
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology.
This school's success is exemplified by the average
starting salaries of its graduates, which is higher than the
corresponding figures for graduates of Harvard University, Yale
University, or the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. At a
time when our Nation faces the skyrocketing cost of college
degrees, tuition and fees for an out-of-state student at the
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology is less than
$15,000 a year, making it one of the best returns on investment
for college education in America.
Dr. Wilson became president of the School of Mines in the
summer of 2013. She has been a great leader and, if confirmed
to be the next Secretary of Air Force, she will leave some very
big shoes to be filled by her next successor. Under her
leadership, the School of Mines added new programs, expanded
research, raised funds to build and refurbish buildings,
started an honors program, and deepened the connections between
the school and the community.
People who work with her in South Dakota describe her as a
great manager and an inspiring leader, and a tireless advocate
for the school and her students.
A few years ago, Forbes magazine had a story on the
toughest leadership roles in America. They indicated, ``We
revere the skills of prominent CEOs, perhaps more than we
should,'' said one of the Forbes articles.
"But there's an underappreciated form of leadership that
requires far more skill than being a CEO does. It is the job of
a university president.''
Mr. Chairman, Dr. Wilson brought such leadership and skill
to her position as president of one of the finest science and
engineering schools in the Nation.
General Mattis knows her quality. This explains the
multiple requests he made to her to leave her position which
she today finds deeply rewarding and at which she exceled, this
to accept the President's nomination to be the Secretary of the
Air Force.
South Dakota's loss will be our Nation's gain.
I look forward to this hearing today and to the prompt
confirmation of Dr. Wilson as the next Secretary of the Air
Force.
I thank her for the honor of introducing her today.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCain. I want to thank both of you. I know,
Senator Thune, you have other responsibilities. Senator Rounds,
thank you for joining us.
We welcome Dr. Wilson. Please, Dr. Wilson, if you would
like to introduce your family members who are here, your son
here, we would be glad for you to, and proceed with your
statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HEATHER A. WILSON, TO BE SECRETARY
OF THE AIR FORCE
Dr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My son, Joshua, is
here with me today, as is my brother-in-law, Mike Hone. As
Senator Thune said, my daughter is otherwise detained, and my
husband is recovering from surgery in South Dakota.
Chairman McCain. Terrible place to recover.
Dr. Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Reed,
and members of this committee, for so graciously welcoming me.
Thank you also to Senator Thune and Senator Rounds. The
people of South Dakota are known for being hardworking and
humble and kind, and I think they are well-led in both of you.
Mr. Chairman, without objection, I would like to put my
whole statement in the record and then just summarize for you.
My nomination was unexpected. I did not anticipate
returning to Federal service. I really enjoy being a university
president, being the president of the South Dakota School of
Mines and educating the next generation of young engineers and
scientists, and making a contribution to the community in which
I live.
I live a blessed life. We all do. We enjoy the blessings of
our liberty because volunteers step forward to protect the rest
of us. If confirmed, it would be my honor to lead and serve
them.
As Senators in this committee, you know well that America's
vital interests continue to be threatened, and I will not
belabor the list of threats that we face, but I think we
sometimes take for granted American dominance in air and space
power.
The last time that an American ground troop was killed by
enemy aircraft was April 15, 1953, during the Korean War. Two
legs of the triad have deterred our enemies and helped to keep
the peace for over 70 years. For 26 straight years, the United
States Air Force has been involved in combat operations.
But dominating the high ground is not a sure thing, and
there is cause for concern. We have a mismatch between our
strategic objectives and the military means we have available
to deter and confront threats. The Air Force is too small for
what the Nation expects of it.
Since the Budget Control Act of 2011, the number of airmen
has declined, but the demand for air and space power has
increased. Leaders of the United States Air Force have
testified that less than 50 percent of the conventional Air
Force is ready for all of the missions assigned to them, and I
have no reason to doubt that estimate.
We are short over 900 fighter pilots--900 fighter pilots
short of the missions that we need to fly and fight. The Air
Force is not currently ready to fight against a near-peer
competitor, and that should concern all of us.
Our equipment is aging in the Air Force. The average
airplane today is the Air Force is 27 years old, and the next
Secretary of the Air Force will modernize fighters, tankers,
bombers, intelligence platforms, the nuclear deterrent,
ammunitions, space capabilities. If confirmed, I will work with
the Secretary of Defense and the United States Congress to
restore the readiness of the force.
I will also work with the Congress to address constraints
imposed by the Budget Control Act so that the Air Force can be
cost-effectively modernized.
As a leader, I tend to be values-driven and mission-
focused, but I am also people-oriented. The quality of our
leaders, particularly at the squadron level and the wing level,
really sets the culture of the United States Air Force. I look
forward to working with the Chief of Staff to bring renewed
focus to training and educating airmen, particularly focused on
the quality of command.
While our airmen of today have to face the fight of today,
this committee and the other defense committees in Congress,
and the Secretary in particular, really have to prepare for the
future. I hope to review and further develop the research and
development priorities for the Air Force to be able to look to
the long term so that we are not only able to dominate today,
we are able to face our adversaries for tomorrow.
In sum, if confirmed, I intend to focus on readiness,
modernization, the quality of command, and research and
development for the future.
On a personal note, several of you know that my roots in
aviation are quite deep. My grandfather lied about his age and
joined the Royal Flying Corps in the First World War, the
predecessor to the RAF. He flew sub search over the Irish Sea,
and he helped to integrate propeller arcs with machine guns and
synchronize them, which sounds like a good idea to me.
After the war, there was no work in Scotland, so he came to
America, and he was a barnstormer, and he opened little
airports all around New England. In the Second World War, he
flew for his new country. He flew for the United States of
America.
My father started flying when he was 13 years old, and he
enlisted in Air Force after high school, and he became a
mechanic and a crew chief. He was a crew chief on the hottest
jet in America at the time, the F-84 Thunderjet, and he was
stationed at Walker Air Force Base in Roswell, New Mexico, and
Otis Air Force Base in Massachusetts, and Selfridge Air Force
Base in Michigan.
When he got out of the Air Force, he went home. In the
1950s, when a lot of women did not even drive, he taught my mom
how to fly. They rebuilt an airplane together. Then he was a
commercial pilot and built experimental airplanes, including
inside our 1,600 square-foot house. My mother was a very
tolerant woman.
We live in a remarkable country, and when I, at the age of
17, went into the United States Air Force Academy, I became the
third generation in my family to serve. My husband is also a
30-year retired Air Force, Guard, and Reserve Judge Advocate
General.
We are served by innovators and intrepid airmen who take
great risks on our behalf. I have been called back to service
in a role that I did not seek and did not expect. If confirmed,
I will do my best to do my duty.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Heather Wilson follows:]
Prepared Statement by Dr. Heather Wilson
opening statement
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Heather Wilson, the President of the
South Dakota School of Mines & Technology and the nominee to be the
twenty-fourth Secretary of the Air Force.
I want to thank you, Chairman McCain, Ranking Member Reed, and the
members of this committee for taking time to meet with me before
today's hearing. In our meetings, I learned more about each of your
interests and concerns about the future of the Air Force. I appreciate
your willingness to give me so much of your time and, should I be
confirmed, I look forward to our continued conversations.
I want to thank Senator Thune and Senator Rounds for introducing me
this morning, and for their support and friendship. The people of South
Dakota have a reputation for being hard working, humble and kind. I
have found that to be true, and they are well represented in both of
you.
My nomination to this position was unexpected; I did not anticipate
returning to federal service. I thoroughly enjoy being a university
president, educating the next generation of engineers and scientists,
and making a difference in the community in which I live.
I live a blessed life. We all do, and we have the liberty to enjoy
our blessings because thousands of America's best citizens volunteer to
protect the rest of us. It would be my honor to serve them to the best
of my ability.
As Senators on this committee, you know well that America's vital
national interests continue to be threatened. China is rapidly
developing new military capabilities funded by an economy that will
rival our own in within a decade. Russia has used limited conventional
force in Crimea, Ukraine, and Syria to achieve its political
objectives. Iran is a destabilizing force in the Middle East and
beyond. The Stalinist North Korean regime is willing to starve its own
people to threaten neighbors and will sell weapons to any buyer with
cash. Terrorism festers in weak states that cannot preserve order.
We live in a dangerous time, and I think we sometimes take for
granted American dominance in air and space power. The last time an
American military member on the ground was killed by enemy aircraft was
April 15, 1953--during the Korean War. Two legs of the nuclear triad
operated by the United States Air Force have quietly deterred enemies
and helped to keep the peace for over 70 years. Our Air Force has been
continuously engaged in combat operations for 26 straight years.
But dominating the high ground is not a certain thing, and, having
spent some time over the past 3 months getting reacquainted with
national security matters after several years in higher education,
there is cause for concern.
We have a mismatch between our strategic objectives and the
military means we have available to deter and confront threats. The Air
Force is too small for what the nation expects of it.
Since the passage of the Budget Control Act in 2011, the number of
Airmen has declined significantly while the demand for air and space
power has increased. Senior Air Force leaders have testified that less
than 50% of the conventional air force is ready for all of the combat
missions assigned to them. I have no reason to question that estimate.
With only 55 Active, Guard and Reserve fighter squadrons and a
shortfall of over 900 fighter pilots, the Air Force is unable to
sustain today's fight and, at the same time, effectively train. While
the Air Force has rightly made support for the counterterrorism mission
and nuclear deterrent operations a priority, the Air Force is not fully
ready to fight against a near-peer competitor.
While the size of the service is too small, its equipment is also
aging. The average Air Force aircraft is now 27 years old, and while
life extension programs and skilled maintainers have kept them in
reasonably good shape, the cost of continuing to extend the life of old
airplanes is very high. The next Air Force Secretary will be
modernizing fighters, tankers, bombers, intelligence platforms, space
capabilities, munitions and our nuclear deterrent.
If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of Defense and the
Congress to restore the readiness of the Air Force so that it can
defend the vital national interests of the United States.
I will also work with Congress to address the constraints imposed
by the Budget Control Act so that the Air Force can be cost effectively
modernized to meet a range of threats now and in the future. Working
with my colleagues in the other services and under the guidance of the
Secretary of Defense, I will seek to bring business-minded reforms to
the Air Force to get high quality capabilities at the best price for
the taxpayer.
While, as a leader, I am values driven and mission focused, I am
also people oriented.
The strength of the United States Air Force is in its people. The
quality of our leaders at the squadron level will set the culture in
the Air Force. Working with the Chief of Staff, I intend to bring
renewed focus to the training and education of Airmen, and particularly
the quality of command. If every Airman has a First Sergeant and
Squadron Commander whom they trust to lead them, and do the right
thing, we will continue to have the finest Air Force in the world.
Finally, the Air Force Secretary and the defense committees also
have to prepare for the future. If confirmed, I will review and further
develop Air Force research and development priorities to ensure we are
investing in basic and applied research that will keep the Air Force
ahead of adversaries for the long term.
To summarize, the Air Force is too small and not prepared for all
of the threats we face as a nation.
If confirmed, I will focus on readiness, modernization, quality of
command, and research for the future. To do that, I will have to work
with each of you to fix the budget so that we can defend the country
that we love.
On a personal note, several of you know that my roots in aviation
are quite deep. My grandfather flew for the Royal Flying Corps--the
predecessor to the RAF--in the first World War. He flew sub search in
the Irish sea and helped to synchronize machine guns with propeller
arcs. There was no work in Scotland after the war, so he came to
America. He was a barnstormer and opened airports in New England in the
1920s and 1930s. In the Second World War he flew for the United States,
towing targets and ferrying parts for the Army Air Corps.
My father started flying when he was 13 and enlisted in the Air
Force after high school. He was a crew chief for what, at the time, was
the hottest fighter in the world--the F-84 Thunderjet. After leaving
the service, he was a commercial pilot and built experimental
airplanes. When I joined the Air Force at 17, I became the third
generation of my family to serve. My husband, also an Air Force
veteran, retired after 30 years of Active, Guard and Reserve service.
My grandfather started flying shortly after the Wright brothers and
he lived to see a man walk on the moon.
We live in a remarkable country, served by innovators and intrepid
Airmen who take great risks on our behalf. I have been called back to
service in a role I did not seek and did not expect. If confirmed, I
will do my best to be worthy of those who serve.
I look forward to answering your questions.
Chairman McCain. Thank you, Dr. Wilson.
Senator, if I could ask the indulgence of committee
members, Senator Tillis has to attend the funeral of a dear
friend, and I would ask the indulgence of the committee to
allow him to go first, and then we will go through regular
order.
Senator Tillis?
Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chair. He is actually a
highly decorated marine who died just shortly after he retired,
and we are going to be over at Arlington, so thank you for your
indulgence. I will try to be brief.
Dr. Wilson, I look forward to voting for your confirmation,
and I fully expect that you are going to be confirmed. We need
strong leadership at a time when--we were in a committee
hearing yesterday where we had three lieutenant generals tell
us that we only have four out of over 50 squadrons that are at
their highest level of qualifications. We are more than 1,000
pilots short, about 800 of them are fighter pilots. I could go
down the list. We have already talked about the smallest Air
Force in our history.
So when you think about those deficits, they are deficits
in what is the smallest Air Force in history, and the oldest.
So I appreciate your courage and willingness to take on
this task. We need to hurry up and get you confirmed so that
people can hear the chairman's concerns about a CR that does
not give you the certainty to start fixing some of the
structural problems in the Air Force and all the lines of
service.
So I appreciate your courage in taking on the task. I think
you are eminently qualified.
I am going to briefly touch on a parochial issue, but I am
not going to ask you to respond to it.
Last year, and I have to agree with the chair, something
that I was trying to do at Pope Army Airfield, a place where
Senator Reed has a lot of fond memories of the Green Ramp, has
a unique mission in the global response force. I was trying to
do something that I do not think the chair liked, and he is
probably right, and that was to really fix the 440th down
there, because I do feel like a physical presence down there is
important to account for all the other kinds of things,
weather, illnesses, mechanical problems, the way that they are
trying to help fulfill the training mission down there for the
82nd Airborne.
But I think, on reflection, I realize that I almost became
a part of the problem because what I was doing was a
legislative fix. What I was doing was constraining what you all
need to do to optimize the resources and complete the missions
and support, in this case, the mission down at Fort Bragg.
But we really need feedback from you in terms of the things
that we have done in the past that would take the 440th and put
it on the top of the list of six other places that the Air
Force deemed were more appropriate reductions that they could
do to meet their cost-cutting goals--in other words, BRAC and a
couple other legislative actions that would have been similar
to the one that I was trying to take. Those sorts of barriers
need to be removed.
Can I get your commitment to go back and look at things
that Congress has mandated on the Department that you think are
not helpful and are actually hindering you to be able to
achieve the other mandate that we gave to you, which is
reducing costs and optimizing? Can I get your commitment to,
fairly early in year tenure, to go after these things and tell
Congress they need to act so that we can help you achieve these
efficiencies that we are also expecting you to achieve?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I am very happy to work with you on
those kind of mandates.
Senator Tillis. There are a lot. You know, Dr. Wilson, we
can absolutely give you the specific use case of what resulted
in the 440th decision as an example of things that we have to
change, if we are really going to put you in a position to
succeed in your mission.
This is the last thing I am going to talk about. That right
there is actually something that started in the Air Force about
10 years ago. It is a 680-page RFP for the next generation
handgun. It started in the Air Force. It then went to the Army.
It took 10 years to complete. Just over the last year--39
pages, incidentally, are all the pages that are specifications.
But almost a 700-page RFP to define a handgun. That does
not make sense to me. In fact, we should probably already be
iterating through the next handgun.
Can I also get your commitment on acquisition reform, that
we start figuring out why in the hell we spent 10 years and 700
pages for the next generation handgun, and go look at that and
maybe work with me to figure out how we can streamline and to
what extent Congress has to get involved to do that?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir.
Senator Tillis. Thank you. I look forward to your
confirmation.
Chairman McCain. I thank you, Senator Tillis. It brings to
mind the incredible injection of enthusiasm, reform, and
intellect that the newer members on both sides of the aisle
have brought to this committee.
Dr. Wilson, I understand that after you left Congress in
2009, your consulting company did work for Sandia National
Laboratories, SNL. Later, SNL and Sandia Corporation, which
operates the labs, were the subject of two Department of Energy
inspector general investigations. Sandia Corporation then
reached a settlement with the Justice Department to resolve
allegations related to lobbying activities.
What was the nature of your work for Sandia National
Laboratories?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I worked for the laboratories after,
on a consulting basis, after--actually, before I was elected to
public service and elected to Congress, based on my background
in the military and national security policy.
When leaving the Congress, the president of Sandia talked
to me about working full time and joining Sandia. It did not
seem to me that there was the right fit there, that there was a
position that was a good fit, and I was not ready to make that
commitment. But what we did agree instead was that I would work
for them about a quarter time, about 50 hours a month for the
president and vice presidents of the labs.
After working that way for about 18 months, a position
opened, and they interviewed a number of people for it. In
February 2011, Sandia offered me the position of vice president
over all of the nonnuclear defense and intelligence programs,
about 1,400 employees and about 30 percent of the labs' work. I
declined that offer in order to run for the United States
Senate.
With respect to the things that I did for the lab, I
served--well, I did work for four laboratories.
At the Nevada test site, I served on the president's
advisory panel. I also was asked to review some special
classified programs.
At Oak Ridge National Lab, I served on their Global
Security division advisory board with respect to intelligence
programs.
At Los Alamos, I did most of my work there, again, with the
intelligence directorate and looking at field intelligence
element operations and alignment, special program reviews,
cognizance of national security policy, and matters related to
the decline of thought leadership on the nuclear weapons
program, as well as advice and support to a new vice president
for intelligence matters.
At Sandia, I served also on their intelligence advisory
board. I helped them I think a great deal with respect to
strategic planning, on nonproliferation and their
nonproliferation advisory board with respect to nuclear
materials. I did numerous program reviews, helped with
cybersecurity in their new cyber program. There were some
special satellite programs at Sandia I also assisted in.
Chairman McCain. You will have to summarize your answer,
Dr. Wilson. I have other questions.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, there was a wide variety of national
security things that I did.
I also served, although not directly, with the
congressional affairs office. I was always available to them to
answer the vice president's and president's questions
concerning the general operation of the United States Congress
and the Federal bureaucracy.
Chairman McCain. Did you contact any Member of Congress or
Federal official concerning a contract extension for Sandia
Corporation?
Dr. Wilson. No.
Chairman McCain. Did you recommend that Sandia Corporation
take the position that competition of its contract was not in
the best interest of the government?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Chairman McCain. Why?
Dr. Wilson. Because it was not. It is my view that the
national laboratories are special assets. They are government-
owned assets, and we have had very long tenure and stability in
those national laboratories. MIT Lincoln Lab, for example, has
had MIT as its operator since 1963.
These are nonprofit government laboratories that have a
management and operating contractor, and they are of very long
tenure.
Chairman McCain. If confirmed, will you advocate for the
competition of Air Force contracts?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, when it is in the best interest of the
government.
Chairman McCain. Were you disciplined or cited for a breach
of ethics in connection with your consulting work for Sandia?
Dr. Wilson. No.
Chairman McCain. Were you investigated or charged with
violating any law in connection with your consulting work for
Sandia?
Dr. Wilson. No.
Chairman McCain. Do you view that your work for Sandia in
any way would pose a conflict of interest as far as the
assumption of your duties as Secretary of the Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. No.
Chairman McCain. Thank you, Dr. Wilson.
Senator Reed?
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just continue.
As I indicated in my opening statement, at the request of
the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Department of
Energy IG reviewed certain consulting agreements awarded to
Heather Wilson and Company LLC, whether they were appropriately
administered and managed. Essentially, that was a sole
proprietorship, as I understand it.
Two significant issues were identified in this review. It
appears that you may have charged as many as four different
government-owned and contractor-operated sites for the same
consulting services for which you received approximately
$450,000.
The IG noted that, under the Federal Acquisition
Regulation, fees for services rendered are allowable only when
supported by evidence of the nature and scope of the service
provided. The IG concluded that you did not comply with this
requirement, nor was it enforced by the contracting officials
involved.
While the contracting official did not enforce the Federal
Acquisition Regulation to the contract, were you aware of the
requirements to provide evidence supporting your 50 hours of
work for $10,000 a month for Sandia and Los Alamos?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I did the work. I complied with the
contract. The review found no fault with me. The DOE auditors
never even talked to me.
Senator Reed. But were you aware, my question is, of the
need to maintain work product and evidence of your work for
accounting purposes?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I submitted substantial work product
and worked directly for the laboratories for no less than 50
hours a month.
Senator Reed. Do you have records showing that you were
spending 50 hours a month doing that?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, if the DOE auditors had bothered to
talk to me, I would have been able to help them with that when
this matter occurred 7 years ago now.
Senator Reed. So your position is that you had no knowledge
of the requirement to maintain records, and that whatever
records were required are no longer in your possession?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I complied with the contract and
provided the work that Sandia National Laboratories and the
other laboratories asked of me.
Senator Reed. Did versions of those contracts contain
language requiring recordkeeping? Did you reject those versions
of the contract before you signed it?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I do not believe so. I do not recall
anything like that.
Senator Reed. So you do not recall drafts of contracts that
were offered to you that required, according to FAR
regulations, that you would maintain records of your work so
that they could be validated? You do not recall that?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the contracts that I signed were
pretty standard contracts provided by Sandia and Los Alamos and
so forth.
Senator Reed. Did you review contracts before you signed
the final contract and made comments?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, Senator.
Senator Reed. So there was a negotiation about what would
be in the contract and what would not be in the contract?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, mostly with respect to the statement
of work, yes.
Senator Reed. In that negotiation, did you cause or agree
to the deletion of the requirement to maintain records at all?
Dr. Wilson. I do not recall that at all, sir.
Senator Reed. Just let me ask a question which is much more
pertinent today, which would be, if you, as Secretary of the
Air Force, discovered an invoice paid by a laboratory under
your management which simply said, ``Consulting services, 8/1/
2010 to 8/30/2010, $10,000,'' would you accept that?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I would expect the people who are
managing that contract to manage it well. In this case, I was
in very close contact with the people at Sandia. They knew
exactly what I was doing. We worked every--often several times
a week together on things that they wanted me to do. I fully
complied with the contract, and I did the work.
Senator Reed. Why would Lockheed reimburse the government
$440,000 or more for work which the government could not find
nor could Lockheed find evidence and not try to reimburse or
ask you to reimburse monies?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, you would have to ask Sandia that.
Senator Reed. So if you were Secretary of the Air Force,
you would not probe down to the actual contractor or
subcontractor to determine what was done and see if they were
culpable for anything?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, as I understand it, at least
initially, Sandia rejected the conclusions of the Department of
Energy audit as well.
Senator Reed. Let me shift quickly. In 2008, a report of
the Department of Justice indicated that you contacted David
Iglesias, the United States attorney for New Mexico, to inquire
about the prosecution of certain public corruption cases.
The House ethics manual in effect at the time provided that
a request for background information or a status report from a
Federal attorney ``may in effect be an indirect or subtle
effort to influence the substantive outcome of a proceeding,''
and further states that the best way to communicate is in
writing and make it part of the proceedings.
Why did you call Mr. Iglesias about the public corruption
cases?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, let me correct one of your assumptions
there. I did not call him about particular cases or any
particular person.
This matter was reviewed by two independent groups, both
the Department of Justice and the House Ethics Committee. The
House Ethics Committee interviewed Mr. Iglesias and chose not
to even start an investigation of me.
With respect to why I called him, it is because public
corruption was a serious problem in the State of New Mexico,
and an individual, a constituent, with knowledge of ongoing
investigations told me that the U.S. attorney was intentionally
delaying corruption prosecutions, and I felt as though I had to
address that allegation in some appropriate way.
Senator Reed. So you did not call about corruption cases
specifically but you called him about corruption cases, which I
think, logically, people would infer or he would infer were
those cases that were pending before his Federal attorney's
office. Is that a fair assumption?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, sadly, there, at the time, were a very
large problem with public corruption in New Mexico and a large
number of investigations underway.
Senator Reed. You said you called in response to an inquiry
by someone. Who was that person?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, someone trusted me to do the right
thing with information that concerned them, and I did not
betray them then, and I am not going to betray them now.
Senator Reed. Well, I think it is important because it adds
to sort of the motivation for the call. If this was a random
constituent, that is one factor. If this was someone who had an
issue or a motive to bring the cases or not bring the cases,
that, I think, would cast this call in a much different light.
So I think it is very unhelpful to not be able to indicate.
If this was an innocuous call about the general status of
prosecutions in the State, of your home State, prompted by an
innocuous contact by someone, I do not see why you would be
reluctant to indicate who urged you to call.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I did not betray them then, and I am
not going to betray them now.
I do think that the issue here--and you and I come from a
very similar background; you came from West Point, and I came
from the Air Force Academy--that one of the appropriate ways to
resolve an allegation of impropriety is to talk to someone
about it. That is what I did with David Iglesias, who is a
personal friend. He gave me his word, and I took him at his
word.
Senator Reed. So you called a Federal official in his
Federal role to make an inquiry about pending cases, maybe not
specifically, based on an anonymous contact that you received?
Dr. Wilson. It was not about--Senator, I called him to
resolve an allegation of impropriety made against him. You and
I both know that, in some ways, ethically, the most difficult
questions to ask yourself or to deal with are not about what
you do as a person but whether you tolerate other behavior. I
had an allegation that the U.S. attorney was intentionally
delaying corruption prosecutions. In some way, I had to resolve
that, and I chose to resolve it by calling him and asking him
about it. He denied it, and I took him at his word.
Senator Reed. [Presiding.] Well, I find it still very
unsettling. Thank you.
Senator Inhofe?
Senator Inhofe. Dr. Wilson, I think we covered it pretty
well in your opening statement and the questions that were
asked previously, but it is worth restating. I think it is very
important, because people out there do not know what our
situation is. Now you stated, and you stated again in your
opening statement, we have a mismatch between our strategic
objectives and the military means that we have available to
deter and confront threats. That kind of says it all. It is a
very good statement.
But then within that, we hear from others, General
Goldfein, for example, said the most pressing, that was to this
committee, challenge for the U.S. Air Force is the rise of peer
competitors with advanced military capabilities rivaling our
own.
Now, what he is saying is, it is not like it used to be, we
are automatically better at everything. Those days are behind
us.
Hopefully, that will change. But nonetheless, that is a
problem that we have.
Now, we are faced now with looking at some new equipment
coming in, and some of the problems that we learned from the
past. I will quote General Carlisle. He said: We do not have
enough of F-22s. It is a fact of life. We did not buy enough.
That is because we were shortsighted. We curtailed the F-22
procurement to just 187 when it started off to be 781.
Now some of the same arguments used to end that program are
now used in reference to the F-35 and the B-21. I would hope,
and I know that you have studied these causes and the problems
that we had in the past, that you could use our past failures
to avoid another problem coming up.
Does that make sense to you?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, Senator. It does.
Senator Inhofe. Last month, we had a Readiness
Subcommittee. I chair the Readiness Subcommittee. We had all
four Vices in there, including another Wilson, and he did a
very good job. During that time, he talked about the problems
that are facing us right now, and I know that you have already
studied that.
The only thing I wanted to get to was this morning I saw
that the Air Force Times had an article by Gina Grosso, who is
the personnel chief of the Air Force. In here, she points out
the very good case on the pilot problem.
I have been active and still am an active commercial pilot,
so I talk to a lot of these guys and gals who are out there and
are faced with a problem that she points out vividly, and that
is that we have a high optempo on the ones that are actually
flying out there, but the ones that are not flying, are not out
in front, are not getting the hours. I will not quote all of
the statistics that we have, but I know that you understand
that is the case.
I would hope--it seemed like she was stressing the idea
that you can go from 25 to 35 on a reenlistment bonus and
somehow solve the problems. I do not think that is going to be
enough. I think we are going to have to do something about the
training of these guys and allowing them to fly hours, because
right now, they are flying about one-fourth of the hours that
they were prior to over the last 10 years.
So I would like to ask that you get involved in that end of
the argument, and that you and I can talk about this, because I
see this as a pretty serious problem that we have.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I look forward to that.
Senator Inhofe. That is good, and I look forward to
supporting you.
Thank you.
Senator Reed. Senator Peters, please, on behalf of the
chairman.
Senator Peters. Thank you, Senator Reed.
Thank you, Dr. Wilson, for being here. I enjoyed our
conversation in the office and appreciated the opportunity to
kind of dig deeply into a number of issues that are confronting
the Air Force, and I appreciate your appearance here today.
I have kind of a broad question I want to start with, and
then I want to drill down to some things more specific to my
State of Michigan.
I want to talk a little, hear a little bit more about your
thoughts on R&D [research and development]. You mentioned that
in your opening statement, that we have to think about the face
of warfare years ahead, and those changes are happening a lot
quicker than many of us anticipated.
As a Senator from Michigan and being intimately involved in
self-driving vehicles, soon we are going to have self-driving
vehicles here before us much sooner, and we expect the same
thing when it comes to autonomous flying vehicles as well. UAVs
will likely transform the face of warfare, as well as a lot of
other areas.
It also may address things like pilot shortages, although
we have to deal with that now. That does not relieve us of very
significant challenges that we are facing right now.
But what do you see for the future of airpower going
forward? What sort of R&D work do we need to do. I have had
some folks tell me that we may have constructed the last
fighter aircraft with a human pilot in it, that it is going to
change dramatically. Just kind of generally your thoughts.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I look forward to working with the
scientists and engineers to help identify what are the most
important vectors to pursue. But there is one thing that is
very clear, and that is that the pace of change is going to
accelerate. We are either going to have to rapidly accelerate
ourselves and be able to spin on innovation into the service,
or we are going to be left behind. But it is things like
autonomous systems, network systems, advanced materials. I
think there are a wide array of things.
But one of the things that concerns me is the low
percentage of the Air Force budget that is actually spent on
R&D. That concerns me because if you look at--my grandfather
started flying shortly after the Wright brothers. He lived to
see a man walk on the moon.
The pace of innovation in this field is stunning, and we
are either going to continue to innovate or we are going to get
left behind.
Senator Peters. Right. That is accelerating as well, that
pace, as you rightly portray.
Dr. Wilson, I would like to talk a little bit about
Selfridge Air National Guard Base, a base that you know very
well because of your father's service there. We are very proud
that he served at our base in Michigan. As you know, they
currently host the A-10 fighter aircraft and the KC-135
tankers.
When the Air Force planned to retire the A-10 sooner than
they are planning to do now, the mission of record for
Selfridge listed removing the A-10s and doubling the tanker
mission, adding additional KC-135s in fiscal year 2021. For the
airmen that fly and maintain these platforms, more certainty
and clarity about the future of that mission at installations
like Selfridge is certainly very important to them.
Now that we know that the Air Force will not be retiring
the A-10 in the near term, will you review the mission of
record of bases that have A-10s like Selfridge? Would we expect
that kind of review coming forward?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, first, the Chief of Staff in the Air
Force has committed to keep the A-10s. I think it is out
through 2020.
The Air Force has a strategic basing process to look at
basing and planning. What I will commit to you is it will be
straight. There will not be any thumbs on the scale. We will
have the Air Force do things based on the best interests of the
country and the Air Force. That also often means that where one
Senator may be, in the end, very happy, there are 49 who are
not, or 49 States that are not.
But I will commit to you to be open and transparent and to
be fair.
Senator Peters. Related to that is the strategic basing
process for the F-35. We currently have five candidate bases
that have been determined through that process. I would hope
that we would continue to move that process forward without any
type of modification and hopefully have your commitment to do
that.
It has been a good process. It needs to continue as it has
been spelled out, I believe.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, as I understand it, the Air Force is
moving forward with that and--they are obviously doing a review
directed by the Secretary of Defense with respect to the F-35,
but I have heard nothing yet about any change to its strategic
basing plan.
Senator Peters. Right. Thank you very much. I appreciate
your answers.
Chairman McCain. [Presiding.] Dr. Wilson, I would hope
that, as part of your new duties, you would call Colonel Graham
back to Active Duty.
Colonel Graham?
Senator Graham. Thank you. We do not want to help the
enemy, so I would recommend you do not do that. But I did enjoy
my time.
So about basing of the F-35, would you agree with me that
the strategic basing initiative was based on fewer F-35s with a
declining budget, the idea that we are not going to have as
many F-35s as we like because of sequestration?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, there is no question that
sequestration is placing great constraints on the force, and we
need to fix this.
Senator Graham. Would you agree with me that if we had more
F-35s, we need to probably look at more bases in terms of where
to deploy them, if the budget numbers change?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, if the budget number changed and there
were more aircraft, you have to have a place to put them.
Senator Graham. Okay. I would urge you to do that, because
I am not so sure the first product was that well thought out.
But the bottom line is, a continuing resolution from April
of this year to September of this year would be a disaster for
the Air Force. Do you agree with that?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir. I do.
Senator Graham. So if this body cares about the military at
all, we would not pass a continuing resolution.
Dr. Wilson. That is correct.
Senator Graham. So we actually need a budget.
Do you agree with me that the amount of money we are
spending on the Department of Defense in terms of GDP is a
virtually historic low?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I have not seen the most recent chart,
but I will accept that.
Senator Graham. Do you agree with me that the threats to
this Nation are growing, not lessening?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Graham. When it comes to North Korea, I know you
are new to the job, and you will be an excellent Secretary of
the Air Force. I congratulate the President. It is stronger for
choosing you because you understand the Air Force. You
understand the challenges that we face.
Do you see, without some change, North Korea developing a
missile that can strike the American Homeland with a nuclear
weapon on top of it? Do you think that is inevitable without
change?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I have not had a classified briefing
on North Korea for some time, but based on what we are seeing
in the public press, there is serious cause for concern.
Senator Graham. Would you agree with me that that is a bad
news day for America, when North Korea can reach our Homeland
with a nuclear-tipped missile, and we should avoid that, if at
all possible?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. Airpower may be necessary to avoid that. Is
that correct?
Dr. Wilson. Sir, I have not seen any kinds of plans or had
a classified briefing, but I think airpower and strong airpower
is necessary for just about any operating----
Senator Graham. When you look over the arc of time, the
next 10 or 20 years, it seems to me that Iran is marching
toward nuclear capability. In terms of assets available to the
President of the United States to deter Iran from going
nuclear, to deal with an aggressive Russia and China, we need
to modernize our force as quick as possible.
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. Okay. When it comes to the airmen who serve
so well, do you agree with me that the war on terror is taking
the Air Force in new directions never envisioned, where airmen
are out there basically doing infantry jobs because of the
shortage in the Army?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. Driving trucks, doing things that----
Dr. Wilson. We drive trucks too.
Senator Graham. Yeah, but I mean, really combat----
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir. We have battlefield airmen who have
always been battlefield airmen doing Air Force jobs on the
ground.
Senator Graham. I would say that there are more battlefield
airmen today than any time since World War II. I would urge you
to capture that and preserve it, because as we talk about
technology changing the Air Force, the one thing we will always
need is brave young men and women. The more versatile our Air
Force, the more able it is to meet the threats of the future, I
think the better off we are.
When it comes to asymmetrical warfare, what role do you see
the Air Force playing? Can you think of a better platform than
the A-10 for the moment against the fight we have against ISIL
[Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] and other asymmetrical
threats?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, 40,000 munitions have been put on the
ISIS target since 2014. Ninety percent of them have been
delivered by the United States Air Force. That is an air
commander who has to decide at the moment what platform he
needs to do a particular job at a particular place. Whether
that is an F-16 or whether that is in F-18 or an A-10 just
depends on the job. We need to make sure that that air
commander has all kinds of opportunities to defeat and kill the
enemy.
Senator Graham. Final question. On the asymmetrical
battlefield against radical Islam, we play an important role in
the Air Force. But part of the Air Force's duties is to offer a
nuclear deterrence and deter nation-states from ever getting in
a fight with the United States.
Do you believe that our ability to deter war has suffered
because of sequestration and that the best way to deter war is
to make the enemy think they cannot win the war, and you are
going to need more money and more people to do that?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
Chairman McCain. Senator Fischer?
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Wilson, in your responses to the committee's advanced
policy questions, you answered a question about the necessity
of maintaining a nuclear triad and you stated that, ``We must
maintain a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear deterrent. The
deterrent has been effective for over 70 years. The air and
ground legs of the triad are a core mission of the Air Force
and will continue to be a core mission.'' You also mentioned
that briefly in your opening statement.
I appreciate your statement that the nuclear mission is a
core mission of the Air Force, and I understand that, if
confirmed, you will only be responsible for the air leg and the
ICBMs [intercontinental ballistic missiles]. But is it your
personal view that we need to maintain the entire triad?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I do think we need to maintain the
entire triad.
Senator Fischer. Where do you believe we are right now with
regard to modernization for that triad, and specifically the
two legs that, if confirmed, you will be responsible for?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, based on the publicly available
information that I have had access to over the last 3 months,
it seems to me that the Minuteman is a 1970s missile. The Air
Force does not believe they can extend the life of it any
further. Likewise, we need to modernize the air-based
deterrent, and the V-21 is being designed from the beginning to
be nuclear-capable.
We also need to modernize the command, control, and
communications system for the control of our nuclear deterrent.
So modernization is needed across-the-board, and there is
only so much you can do with 70-year-old materials, and I think
it is time to say we have to replace them.
Senator Fischer. Have you had an opportunity yet to look
into the debate that is going on about a possible third site
for missile deployment? If so, do you have an opinion on that?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I have not had an opportunity to look
at that.
Senator Fischer. Thank you.
Doctor, I also would like to ask you about the UH-1N Huey
helicopters that are currently performing the nuclear security
and the continuity of government missions.
Last year, we saw General Robin Rand, who commands the Air
Force Global Strike Command, testify that, ``We will not meet
the emergency security response with the present helicopter.''
Admiral Haney, who was then the United States Strategic
Command (STRATCOM) Commander, went into greater detail before
this committee, stating that the current helicopters ``do not
have the lift capability, speed capability, to meet the
requirements that have been approved and validated through a
number of studies, as well as Mighty Guardian exercises.'' He
went on to describe the need for a replacement as urgent, and
that was a year ago.
Despite the clear need, the Air Force replacement program
continues to be delayed time and time again. Just last month,
the Air Force withdrew the draft RFP and changed the
acquisitions strategy.
If confirmed, I would like your commitment to ensure that
the Air Force moves forward as soon as possible to replace this
aging fleet. Are you ready to give a commitment at this time?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I will look at the UH-1N program. It
is something that I have just looked at the very top level at
this point, but it is one of the many modernization programs
that I am sure I will be looking at very closely.
Senator Fischer. But I know you do understand the
importance of making sure that those fields are protected and
there is limited capability of doing so.
Dr. Wilson. Absolutely.
Senator Fischer. Thank you.
When you and I met in my office, we discussed the Air
Force's troubled history with its nuclear mission, and that was
particularly stemming from a lack of senior leader interest in
the area. To its credit, the Air Force has made this a high
priority in recent years.
I hope that we would have your commitment to continue to
make this area a high priority and that you will be an advocate
for the needs of our nuclear forces. That includes space. It
includes the command and control system that we depend upon.
Could we have that commitment at this time?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Fischer. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCain. Senator Rounds?
Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I am just very happy to have you here in
front of us today, and I look forward to a very speedy
confirmation process for you.
I am just curious, when you have the opportunity, and I
would suspect that you are going to have lots of opportunities
in the future, what is your elevator speech regarding the
effects of the sequester, the BCA, on the United States Air
Force?
Dr. Wilson. I think it needs to be repealed, and there are
a variety of ways that Congress might do that, but it is
hurting the Air Force and our ability to defend ourselves. More
importantly, the most immediate issue that Congress is going to
face is the possibility of a continuing resolution.
If there is a continuing resolution for this year, we will
make all of the problems that we are talking about here so much
worse. We will have to stop noncombat flying hours in the Air
Force. The pilot exodus would increase. The aircraft will not
be going to depots to be maintained. There will likely be a
freeze on a civilian hiring.
We cannot operate this way. We need to get beyond the
Budget Control Act and get back to normal operations for
budgeting.
Senator Rounds. As you know, there is a dispute within our
party regarding the right balance between increased defense
spending and deficit reduction. Where do you come down on this
issue?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the debt is also an issue for our
country, but I think this is a country that can afford to
defend itself.
Senator Rounds. A matter of priorities, perhaps?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, Senator.
Senator Rounds. You are about probably a third of the way
through your hearing today, I would suspect. I am just curious,
with regard to the questions that have come up so far today,
are there any questions that you perhaps have not had the time
to answer fully? Anything that you would like to add to any of
the questions, or clarifications on any of the questions that
have been in front of you so far?
Dr. Wilson. No, sir. Not at this point.
Senator Rounds. Very good.
Let me talk a little bit about how we are going to move
forward in the Air Force with regard to technology and the need
to upgrade the entire system.
We have peer competitors. I think everybody would recognize
both China and Russia have been moving forward not only with
the development of new aircraft but with new aircraft with
large numbers.
How do we move forward in regard to fourth gen. We have
some fifth gen, not enough. What is the right mix between our
fourth generation aircraft, which are clearly mature, clearly
can have some upgrades added to them? But with the changing
environment, how do we add? What we do in terms of upgrading
the technologies so that the men and women that we send into
battle have absolutely no question the best equipment, and that
every single fight they ever get into is not a fair fight, one
in which they clearly have the technological advantages? How do
we move forward? Where do we go? Do we keep fourth gen around?
What we do?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, there will be fourth generation
aircraft around for a long time. As to what is the right mix, I
would have to defer to the uniform military as well as to the
civilian folks in the Air Force, whom I have not yet really
been fully briefed on what they are looking at for plans. The
Air Force is always planning.
But I would say this. I think it is really important to get
capabilities from the drawing board to the flight line faster.
The cycle of innovation has to be faster. You have to fix
requirements; move forward; get small, focused project
management teams, and get things out the door, because unless
you do, you will always be left behind.
Long procurements have changes in requirements, and costs
escalate, and the people in the field do not get what they need
to do the job. So I think those things--I am very interested in
becoming more familiar with the experimentation and prototyping
authorities that the Congress has put in the last defense
authorization act.
Of course, I think it needs to be easier to buy commercial
products, particularly in the areas of very rapid--where there
is very rapid innovation, where we need to make sure that the
military has access to high-quality services and capabilities
that may have been developed for a nondefense purpose.
Senator Rounds. Prepared to take comments from individual
organizations that contract with the government on how to
provide a lot of these pieces of equipment, these new
technologies in terms of what they see as the most efficient
way to move forward with new acquisition plans and so forth,
recognizing that they have to fit our need but also recognizing
that sometimes the folks who are living within those fields are
sometimes some of the best places to get good advice about ways
to expedite and streamline a very broken process today?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I am very open to all kinds of ideas.
Senator Rounds. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Reed. [Presiding.] Thank you.
On behalf of Chairman McCain, Senator Wicker, please?
Senator Wicker. Thank you very much, Senator Reed.
Dr. Wilson, it is wonderful to have you back here, and I
look forward to you serving in government again. You were a
terrific colleague in the House.
We talked about retention of pilots. We talked about the
pilot shortage. Part and parcel to that is the retention
problem we have. They are so well-trained, they are so
talented, they are so marketable, that the private sector wants
to hire them.
So speak to that, if you will. But also, do we have the
same problem with the cyber work force in the Air Force? What
are we going to do about that, because these folks are so
skilled and so smart and the demand for them is so keen out
there?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, let me take those in reverse order.
With respect to the cyber work force, you are right. The demand
is very high outside of the Air Force for folks with those
capabilities.
One of the things that you put in the defense authorization
act last year was to allow the services to explore some other
direct commissioning programs, and I would like to kind of turn
to the Air Force and kind of ask them whether that provision
might be used in the area of cyber and particularly whether
there are opportunities for National Guard and Reserve units in
cyber that we could locate in places where there are
concentrations of highly technical people. I would be
interested in turning to the Air Force and to ask them that and
working with you all on it because it is going to be an issue.
They are just too highly valuable to not be taken away.
With respect to the pilot issues, there are a couple
things. I was very pleased yesterday to see General Grosklags'
testimony concerning targeted bonuses, so it is not across-the-
board. It is more of a negotiation to try to keep as many
pilots as we can and a lot of flexibility there with respect to
trying to retain a pilot.
But it is not just about the money, because we will never
be able to compete with the commercial airline industry. It is
going to be about the quality of service and being able to do
the job, and that is readiness. If a pilot can go out and fly
today, if the aircraft is ready today, it is maintained, they
have enough jet fuel and enough flying hour time, you are much
more likely to keep them.
I think there are a lot of additional duties that get added
in for people who are here to fly and fight. We need to try to
make sure that their experience of flying in the Air Force is
something no one in their right mind would ever give up.
Senator Wicker. Is it partially about bonuses though? I
wonder how much we are talking about spending.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, there are some bonuses that General
Grosklags testified about that yesterday, and you all have
authorized some additional pilot retention pay.
What I was pleased to see, and you all authorized, was the
Air Force testified yesterday about using those dollars
flexibly so that we do not just say, across-the-board, if you
are a pilot, then you get this X bonus for Y number of years.
But as private industry does, make this a bit of a negotiation
and certainly try to keep pilots in the areas where we are most
short, particularly we know we are having a problem with
fighter pilots. Allowing the same amount of money as a bonus
for somebody who is not a fighter pilot does not make a lot of
sense to me.
Senator Wicker. So we can agree that it is a matter that
needs attention both with the fighter pilots and the cyber
force.
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir.
Senator Wicker. Now you mentioned on page 2 of your
testimony the quality of leaders at the squadron level and also
education of airmen and the quality of command. You talked
about this in the answers to the questions that you answered in
writing.
So what are the specific concerns about the quality of
command at the squadron and wing level?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I think it is that the squadron level
where you really set the culture for the Air Force. If an
airman has confidence in their first sergeant and their
squadron commander that they will do the right thing, they will
treat them fairly, and that they care about them, you have a
great, well-led Air Force.
Senator Wicker. We have been deficient there?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, it is not so much that we have been
deficient, but we always have to be developing those young
leaders. The Air Force does it differently than the other
services, and it is really driven by the way we do our mission.
Someone is put in a cockpit, and they are flying and
mastering that weapons system with very little responsibility
for people until they become a commander. As I understand it,
there is about a 1-week training course, and then you are on
the job. I think that perhaps we can learn something by taking
a step back, looking at how the other services develop their
commanders or even other countries, the RAF, the Israelis, or
whomever, to see what we could do better.
Because if we have well-trained, well-educated, well-
prepared squadron and wing commanders who are first sergeants,
we will set the culture in a positive way for the United States
Air Force.
Senator Wicker. Put your thinking cap on. We look forward
to having your thoughts.
Dr. Wilson. Thank you, sir.
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Reed. Thank you.
On behalf of Chairman McCain, Senator Sullivan, please.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Wilson, welcome. Thank you for your great service to
our Nation. Very, very impressive.
My State, the great State of Alaska, has been called by the
father of the Air Force, Billy Mitchell, the most strategic
place in the world. Right now, we are the hub air combat power
for the Asia-Pacific. With the F-35s coming, we will have over
100 fifth generation combat coded fighters. We have an entire
strategic airlift and mobility command and control with C-17s,
KC-135s, AWACS, a whole host of air assets. Of course, we have
JPARC, which General Welsh referred to as the crown jewel of
air-to-air combat training anywhere in the world, an airspace
the size of Florida.
So can I get your commitment, if you are confirmed, to come
to Alaska with me and see this critical State, critical
strategic location for the U.S. Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, any day in the field is better than a
day in the office. I look forward to coming out to Alaska and
to a lot of other places and seeing where we are. Yes, I would
love to come to Alaska.
Senator Sullivan. Great.
With regard to last year's NDAA, there was a provision that
talked about characteristics and principles that the Air Force
should be looking at with regard to the OCONUS basing of the
KC-46. A lot of those characteristics actually look like
Alaska.
When General Goldfein was up for his nomination, he gave me
his commitment that he would look at those characteristics hard
and give Alaska a very, very hard look at the strategic basing
of the KC-46s, which, when you are up there, I think you will
see how much sense that makes.
Can I get your commitment as well to take a hard look at
Alaska, following what the NDAA put in last year on the basing
of the KC-46s?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I will take a hard look, and I will
take a look at those criteria in the NDAA.
Senator Sullivan. Then there has been a lot of talk--
actually, a number of us sat in on a Readiness Subcommittee
hearing in Armed Services just yesterday with a number of the
top generals in the Air Force testifying on the issue of
readiness, on the issue of ranges.
When you are up in Alaska, I would like to get your
commitment to take a look at JPARC and again at some of the
upgrades. In the testimony yesterday, it was widely
acknowledged that, given the size of that training area, it is
what we are going to need with fifth-generation training
because the stand-off of the fifth-generation aircraft are so
dramatic.
Can I get your commitment to take a look at that as well?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I look forward to that when I get up
to Alaska.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Let me ask about the F-35. You
know, there was a lot of discussion in the press. President
Trump took a lot of interest in it. I think he actually, from
what I can tell, just reading in the papers, I think done a
good job helping drive down the cost. But at one point there
was a discussion about, well, heck, maybe we can just replace
the F-35 with a souped-up F-18.
Can you enlighten us on whether you think forgoing a fifth
gen upgrade to our Air Force and Navy and Marine Corps--would
it make sense to just rely on a souped-up F-18? How important
is that aircraft to the future of the Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the Secretary of Defense has directed
a review of the F-35, and that is underway. But as a general
matter, the real thing I do not think you could do with an F-18
or F-15 or F-16 is give it stealth capability retroactively.
Senator Sullivan. So from your perspective, would we be in
a fair fight with our potential adversaries if we souped up F-
18s versus move forward with F-35s with adversaries are
developing their own fifth-generation aircraft capabilities?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, just what I have seen in the public
press, the defense news kinds of things on Chinese
capabilities, they are developing stealth capability. I do not
see how we can stop modernizing and expect to win a near-peer
fight. I would rather have that fight be unfair and on our
side.
Senator Sullivan. Well, I think with the cost reductions
and the increase in the number of aircraft being produced, that
will also drive down to the cost. It is important to try to
keep the F-35 deployments that are already laid out by the Air
Force to different areas across the globe and across the
country on time.
Can I get your commitment to focus on making sure we are
trying to get these aircraft out, produced, in a cost-effective
manner, but also in a manner that gets them fielded in a way
that helps the national security of our Nation?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, there is a review underway that
General Mattis has directed with respect to the F-35. But I do
take your point that it is important to continue to get cost-
effective equipment into the field on schedule.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will have additional questions
for the record, Dr. Wilson. Thank you.
Senator Reed. Thank you, Senator.
On behalf of Chairman McCain, Senator Warren, please.
Senator Warren. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for being here, Dr. Wilson.
I would like to associate myself with the comments of the
ranking member and the chairman, and echo some of their
concerns around ethics issues. I will be submitting some
questions for the record on that.
But right now, I would like to focus on another issue, and
that is, I know that the Air Force wants a lot of new F-35s,
but whether you think we should spend more or less money on the
overall military budget, it seems like we are going to need to
use and maintain our current aircraft for a long time to come.
That is why I was surprised to hear that the Air Force is
considering retiring the F-15 C and D variants. I was
disappointed to learn that this decision is being considered
even before a cost and capability analysis has been completed.
So, Dr. Wilson, I want to ask, if confirmed, will you defer
this decision until the committee has been provided with an
analysis that purchasing new F-16s instead of servicing
existing F-15s will provide the same level of capability and
actually save taxpayer money?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I saw the article in the paper that
you are referring to. It was either testimony here or over in
the House. I have not been fully briefed on that particular
program. But I can say that the Air Force, as it should, is
always doing out-year planning and what-if kind of planning. I
will also commit to you to be fully transparent about----
Senator Warren. Listen again to my question. I want to know
that you are going to defer the decision until the committee
has been provided with an analysis that purchasing new F-16s
instead of servicing the current F-15s is going to give us the
same capability and actually save taxpayer money. I want to
make sure we get that analysis before you make that decision.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, my problem is that I am not sure that
it was an F-16 substitute, so I have not been briefed on what
their actual planning excursion was that they were trying to
evaluate and that came out in a hearing here. So I feel a
little bit at a loss that I have not been briefed on what they
are looking at for options or life extension versus something
else. I do not know what the something else was, which is my
problem. But what I will commit to is that I will be very
transparent with you on what we are doing, whether it affects
you or it affects anyone else.
Probably even more, I think it is important to gather ideas
and share analysis as it is being done sometimes as
hypotheticals, not just after a decision has been made.
Senator Warren. I appreciate that, Dr. Wilson, but I really
do want to bear down on this point. So let me ask you another
question.
Can you give me a commitment that the Air Force will
consult with the Air Guard and specifically with the adjutants
general in States with Air Guard F-15 wings before any
decisions are made?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Warren. Good.
So I would like to move to another topic, if I can, that is
very important to me, and that is science.
The Air Force has requested $28 billion for research,
development, test, and evaluation, RTDE, in fiscal year 2017. I
am concerned, however, that too much of this funding is going
to the development and testing part, the later stages of
scientific progress, and not enough to basic research. As you
know, basic research is the science that provides the building
blocks of our most important technological developments, like
stealth and precision weapons and GPS and even the Internet.
The Air Force has asked to cut funding for basic research
for the third year in a row. That is a more than 7 percent
decrease in funding for basic research since fiscal year 2015.
I am also concerned that the Department is not doing everything
it can to keep up with advances in commercial technology.
So, Dr. Wilson, if you are confirmed as Secretary of the
Air Force, will you prioritize funding for basic and applied
research?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Warren. Good.
How will you work with the commercial technology sector and
universities so they can help you tackle the Air Force's
greatest military challenges?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, this is an area where I think you and
I have very common interests in not only identifying
technologies that have been developed in commercial areas that
can be spun onto the military but making it easier for
commercial companies and universities to provide those
capabilities to the Defense Department and particularly the Air
Force.
In the area of basic and applied research, you are
absolutely right. The things that we invest in today result
in--sometimes it is very hard to predict which ones or which
vectors are going to be the ones that lead to the breakthrough.
It was Hanscom Air Force Base in World War II where they
developed radar, revolutionized the protection of this country
and of the United Kingdom.
What is the next one? We have trouble sometimes imagining
how basic research can lead to innovation. But if you do not do
it, you will not have innovation, and that is why I am so
concerned about it.
Senator Warren. Good. Thank you very much, Dr. Wilson. I
find your answer very encouraging.
Our adversaries are investing heavily in research and
development, and doing whatever they can to exploit advances in
commercial technology for their own interests. I want to see us
do the same. I think it is a matter of national security, so
thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCain. Well-said.
Senator Ernst? Colonel Ernst?
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Admiral.
Thank you, Dr. Wilson, very much. I appreciate your
testimony today and the fact that you are willing to take on
this very, very great and grave responsibility.
Before I begin, I would just like to ask you some simple
yes or no questions.
Dr. Wilson, number one, do you commit to cutting wasteful
spending and making it a priority?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Ernst. Two, do you commit to working with me to
combat and prevent military sexual assault and retaliation in
the Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Ernst. Three, will you provide me with advanced
notice should changes to the gender integration policies be
considered?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Ernst. Finally, given your previous work with the
defense contracting industry, do you commit to upholding an
unbiased approach throughout the acquisition process?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Ernst. Thank you for those answers.
Dr. Wilson, when Secretary Mattis was commander of United
States Central Command (CENTCOM), he initiated Combat Dragon
II, an innovation experiment designed to rapidly introduce
highly lethal, low-cost capabilities to the battlefield.
As part of this experiment, United States Special
Operations Command (SOCOM) borrowed two mothballed Vietnam-era
aircraft from NASA [National Aeronautics and Space
Administration]. They outfitted them with advanced commercial
ISR systems and precision weapons, which cost less and, in many
cases, provided more capabilities than traditional ISR and
strike aircraft combined.
During a 3-month deployment, the SOCOM unit achieved a 99
percent sortie completion rate and was able to find, fix, and
finish highly sensitive missions by employing 63 precision-
guided rockets on 41 different targets.
Can you speak to the benefits of a high-low mix of combat
capabilities? Specifically, how can we leverage the lessons of
Combat Dragon to rapidly provide new capabilities to the
warfighter without overburdening our American taxpayers?
Dr. Wilson. Thank you, Senator.
I think that is probably a good example. I was aware of
some OV-10s that were recently brought back to service. I do
not know if that was the Combat Dragon program.
But I do think that there are ways to innovate. I have been
involved in a few of them myself when I was on the National
Security Council staff trying to get some very new capability
to the warfighter.
We always have to be sensitive to the fact that sometimes
our great ideas in the world of science and engineering have to
be operated by an 18-year-old with minimal training in a very
highly stressed situation. So we always have to be sensitive to
those things and the total cost of maintaining and all of those
things.
But I think, particularly the Air Force, we are supposed to
be the innovators. We are supposed to be the can-do, fix it,
get it there, duct tape and bailing wire kind of service, in a
way. I think I am very open to those kinds of experiments.
Senator Ernst. Very good. Do you see other ways that you
can use innovation in the Air Force to really protect the
taxpayers? Are there other programs that you think should be
looked at?
Dr. Wilson. There are a wide variety of innovation
programs. I do think that thinking about how we engage the
scientific and technical community, because we are all short of
scientists and engineers, so how do we better engage them to
try to move us forward, and also to try to be aware of what our
adversaries might be doing?
Our entire intelligence system since Pearl Harbor has been
set up for indications and warning. It is to prevent surprise
attack. In the area of science and technology, preventing
surprise attack is detecting what our adversaries might be
doing with respect to scientific and technical advancement, and
what implications that might have for us.
So their development of stealth technology--the best
examples are the development of the jet engine in World War II
or the V-2 rocket or Einstein's letter to the President about
the potential for a nuclear weapon.
How are we systematically assessing scientific and
technical development to prevent surprise at the scientific and
technical level? I think there may be some things that we can
do today that were not even possible to do 10 years ago because
of the ability to link scientists and engineers who otherwise
would not have known each other.
Senator Ernst. I appreciate that very much and will
continue to look for innovation.
Something I heard not long ago, which I think really plays
into the Combat Dragon II, is a comment that was made: Why do
we spend our millions and millions or even billions of dollars
on aircraft and munitions to destroy a $10,000 pickup in the
middle of the desert?
So I think there are ways that we can refine what we do
with innovation and make it very cost-effective as well for our
armed services.
I want to thank you again for being here today and taking
on this challenge. Thank you, Dr. Wilson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman McCain. Senator Heinrich?
Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wilson, welcome. Congratulations on
your nomination.
Two of the President's nominees for civilian leadership
posts in the military services have now dropped out, so I think
it is incredibly important that the administration nominates
and that the committee considers qualified nominees as quickly
as possible, and you certainly have impressive qualifications
for this post.
As you know well, New Mexico's men and women in uniform are
proud to take the lead in addressing many of the challenges
that you would face as Secretary, and Holloman Air Force Base
in New Mexico has already proven to be critically important in
addressing the Air Force's shortfall for both RPA and F-16
pilots.
As Secretary of the Air Force, you will be responsible for
growing and retaining our pilot and our maintainer forces. When
selecting an installation for these purposes, can you talk a
little bit about what criteria you would most value, given the
constraints that the Air Force is currently under?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the strategic basing initiative for
every mission comes up with a set of criteria for that mission,
and there is at least an interim decision with respect to
Holloman and training there. There has not been a final
decision on a final location. But as I mentioned to Senator
Peters, when those decisions are made, we will not put any
thumbs on the scale. We will try to make those straightforward,
direct decisions in the best interests of the country.
Senator Heinrich. Can you talk a little bit about some of
the particulars that that decision basing system is based on
and what the Air Force is looking for in those cases?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, with respect to a particular weapons
system, I probably could not, but I think with every weapons
system and with every mission, there is a set of things that
the Air Force decides are really important to them, for
example, airspace to be able to conduct training operations or
particular kinds of electronic practice areas, those kinds of
things. For every mission, it is probably slightly different.
Then they just rank those in order.
Senator Heinrich. I was looking at your preliminary hearing
questions and you said that you strongly support rapid
prototyping, experimentation, and using rapid acquisition
authorities to provide new capabilities to the warfighter.
Last year, the Senate Armed Services Committee granted
rapid acquisition authorities for directed energy weapons
systems.
As Secretary, would you look to use those authorities for
directed energy? Would you support transitioning these systems
to the warfighter more quickly?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I do support transitioning systems
very quickly to the warfighter. With respect to an acquisition
strategy for a particular procurement, I would look for advice
from the acquisition community before I would make any
particular decision.
Senator Heinrich. In light of the current administration
hiring freeze, one of the things I am concerned about is the
military's ability to meet mission requirements under those
pressures. Military leaders have explained that, by not hiring
civilians, more pressure is shifted onto military workers to
finish those jobs, and, in some cases, they are now being asked
to do additional duty as a result.
At Air Force Research Lab in Albuquerque, there are a
significant number of vacancies for civilian positions that
actually carry out critical missions for the military.
Can you talk generally a little bit about how important you
believe civilians are to the overall mission of the Air Force
and what steps you might take or what things you would look to
as Secretary to be able to fill those vacancies and ensure that
the mission requirements are being met?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, we do have the hiring freeze in place.
There are exemptions and work through position by position. It
is my understanding the Air Force is operating under that at
this point.
Almost half of the people that serve in the United States
Air Force are civilians. Many of them were prior military, but
many were not, and they make significant contributions to the
mission. They are part of the team, and I treat them as part of
the team.
I would say with respect to the pressure on the force, the
worst thing we can have happen right now is to have a
continuing resolution for the last 5 months of the year that
would probably result in a complete hiring freeze with no
exemptions and will exacerbate the pilot shortage. We will have
to stop, likely, if confirmed, we would have to stop a lot of
the new starts that we have going, and we will dig the hole
deeper.
So with respect to civilian employment, I think that is the
biggest issue before us all.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
Chairman McCain. Senator Perdue?
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Wilson, thank you for your stellar career and your
willingness to take this on. I have two quick questions today.
I grew up in Warner Robins, Robins Air Force Base, and I am
very proud that that base has morphed over time from being a
SAC base to a MAC base, and today is a major depot for the U.S.
Air Force. But at a time when we have the smallest and oldest
Air Force, I am very concerned.
General Levy is in charge of the Air Force supply chain, a
great lieutenant general and has a stellar career of his own.
But he has been educating me about the difficulties. Half the
employment of the Air Force are civilians, as you just
mentioned, and yet it takes 148 days, according to General
Levy, because of Air Force rules, to onboard a new employee.
At a time when we are competing for cyber talent,
mechanics, engineers, scientists, programmers, and so forth, as
we talked privately, I am very concerned that we are not
competitive in trying to reach out and retain and attract the
best and the brightest for the Air Force in these civilian
jobs.
So can you address how you would prioritize that, if you
are confirmed?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, there are a lot of rules and
regulations that sometimes--they are trying to prevent us from
doing bad things, but they keep us from doing good things. I
think, obviously, there are rules and regulations that are
there for a reason. We all want to drive on the right side of
the road in the morning and have everybody else do the same
thing.
But sometimes, and you just identified one, if it is that
hard to hire someone, talent is going to be taken out from
under you.
So I would be happy to take a look at those kinds of
things. If there are particularly priority regulations that
others have identified that need to be looked at, I am very
open to what those should be.
Senator Perdue. Personally, as one example, two-thirds of
our F-18s are not airworthy today. This is an all-hands-on-deck
issue.
Would you pledge to work with the committee and bring us
those idea to break through those regulations that we can help
with to become more competitive?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I would, and I would ask you to do so
and help me.
Senator Perdue. Absolutely. You have it.
The second thing, I want talk about something we do not
talk much about here, and that is space.
The Vice Chief of the Air Force, General Wilson, provided
written testimony recently at one of our last subcommittee
hearings on readiness that, ``In the not too distant future,
our potential adversaries will have the capability to hold all
of our military space capabilities at risk.''
Dr. Wilson, those are strong words. Do you agree with those
words? How would you propose to make changes in the national
security space policy and programs, if you are confirmed?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, one of the things I am most looking
forward to about this job is being potentially the senior
adviser to the Secretary of Defense with respect to space and
chairing the Defense Space Council.
There is no question that space will be a contested domain
in any future conflict, and I was actually serving on the House
Intelligence Committee at the time the Chinese successfully
launched an antisatellite weapon, and I do not expect that
things have slowed down since then.
There are a variety of things I think we need to do. There
are launch issues we are going to have to deal with. But I
think rethinking the way in which we think about space as a
contested domain has to be part--it is the development of
strategies and techniques and capabilities to be able to fight
through, to be resilient, to be as crafty and as successful in
space as we are in air, and that is a very big change for the
country, to be starting to think that way.
I think there are some elements in the Air Force that
already are starting to develop those thoughts. I look forward
to working with them and, of course, our national partners and
partners in other agencies.
Senator Perdue. Thank you. The last question I have is, at
the very time that you are considering this responsibility and
we are considering your confirmation, it looks to me like all
the major platforms of the Air Force are maturing to the end of
their expected lives and beyond at the same time. At the very
time that they are expiring, the ramp-up of new programs to
replace them, through delays and regulations and whatever
funding, we are building a gap and it is a significant gap. The
B-21, KC-46, the F-35, the JSTAR platform, all of these have
projected gaps in capability between the time that the existing
platform rolls out and expires and the new platforms are
available.
Have you had a chance to look at that yet? Would you pledge
to us to help educate us about that growing gap in the Air
Force?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, when we talk about what is the risk or
the Air Force talks about what is the risk of things like the
Budget Control Act, that is a very good example of one.
Senator Perdue. But it is bigger than that. I am sorry, Dr.
Wilson. It is actually bigger than that. This is a multiyear
issue that has to do with our debt position and the fact that
we will not face up to our responsibility as Congress and how
we spend money. We are not fulfilling one of the major
responsibilities we have as a unified government, and that is
to defend the country.
So I welcome your input, and I pledge to you our support. I
am out of time, but I would love to work with you to make sure
we fill that gap. It is very concerning.
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir.
Senator Perdue. I fully expect your confirmation. Thank
you, again, for being willing to do this.
Dr. Wilson. Thank you.
Chairman McCain. Senator Donnelly?
Senator Donnelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Dr. Wilson.
I wanted to ask you about a discussion we had in my office.
Your predecessor made a commitment to continue the heritage of
the 122nd Fighter Wing in Fort Wayne, Indiana, by maintaining a
manned combat mission there at the base, replacing the A-10s
with either F-16s or F-35s.
Will you honor that commitment that has been made to us?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I am not familiar with the particular
commitment that has been made.
Senator Donnelly. I asked you this a month ago.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I cannot commit to a future mission
today, in part because I am not privy to a lot of the internal
discussions in the Air Force because I cannot be because I am
before my confirmation. So there are a lot of things.
The Air Force can provide me all of the things that have
been publicly available, but not anything behind it. So I am
still kind of outside of the door in that way.
Senator Donnelly. I know you are referring to the strategic
basing process, but I am not talking about making a new basing
decision. This one has already been made, and all I am asking
you to do is to honor the commitment of the person who went
before you.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I will tell you this. If a commitment
has been made, we will stand by it.
Senator Donnelly. Thank you.
Dr. Wilson. I need to understand what the commitment was a
little bit more before I feel comfortable, and I cannot know
that until I walk in the door of the office.
Senator Donnelly. Well, let me ask you about mental health
as well. I appreciate your commitment to prioritizing that. It
is a readiness issue. It is a matter of maintaining the
strength of our force.
In 2014, this committee passed legislation providing a
mental health assessment for every servicemember every year. It
was named after a constituent of mine, Jacob Sexton, who was
lost to suicide in 2009. Each of the service chiefs has
testified to this committee that the mental health assessments
required under this act will be fully implemented by the end of
this year.
If confirmed, will you ensure the Air Force keeps to that
schedule?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Donnelly. Thank you.
In regards to our nuclear arsenal, we are undertaking a
tremendous and necessary effort to modernize our nuclear
deterrent. We have put it off for a long time, and as a result,
we have a heavy bill coming due. But we are going to need to
implement acquisition practices across-the-board to succeed,
and that means doing a better job of promoting collaboration
and commonality.
So what I am also asking is, will you be committed to
commonality as a means to modernize and maintain the triad and
reduce the cost of risk?
The Navy has a lot of parts of this. The Air Force has a
lot of parts of this. We want to try to work together so we are
not in separate stovepipes here, so we are not reinventing the
wheel every time we start a new system
Dr. Wilson. Senator, yes. There are some times where that
is appropriate. There are some times where it is actually more
costly to force systems to use common parts. But where it makes
sense, obviously, you bet.
Senator Donnelly. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCain. Senator Cotton?
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
Dr. Wilson, congratulations on your nomination. You have a
big job with a lot of big challenges ahead of you, some of
those we explored yesterday in a Subcommittee on Airland power
hearing with some of the deputy chiefs from the White House--or
from the Air Force.
One in particular was the pilot shortage. We heard
testimony yesterday saying the pilot shortage was up to 1,550
pilots as of yesterday.
I think there seems to be a mismatch between force
structure and strategy. If we continue down this road, are you
worried about creating a hollow force for our Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, yes, I am.
Senator Cotton. The Air Force has provided pilots with
bonuses. Those bonuses are increasing. We heard testimony
yesterday the Air Force anticipates seeking even higher
bonuses. But as you stated earlier, the retention crisis is
about more than just money.
Both General Goldfein and your predecessor committed to
reducing unpopular additional duties in squadrons, jobs that
take pilots away from their core mission. For example, this
committee has heard private comments from one frustrated young
F-10 pilot who said, ``I would give up my flight pay if it
meant getting a full-time squadron scheduler.''
Do you share the commitment to reduce this burden of
additional duties for our pilots and their squadrons?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Cotton. What are your thoughts on the best ways to
continue to bring down those burdens on our pilots?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, there are a couple things. I think,
again, this gets down to squadron leadership. But it is also,
every time something happens, there is another, well, we have
to train everybody, or there is another computer-based training
program that everybody has to sit through and push the yes, no,
and next buttons.
I think taking a complete review from the perspective of an
airman of what is the extra stuff you are being asked to do--
now, some of it is entirely appropriate. If you are asked to be
the squadron training officer, you should be the squadron
training officer. But there is a lot of other stuff that gets
added on that is really dispiriting, and I think we need to
take a look from their perspective on whether every one of
those things really is needed. Do we really need to do ladder
safety training again this year?
Senator Cotton. With those steps and with the additional
civilians that have been added in squadrons, do you think the
Air Force will have the remaining combat coded squadrons fully
manned by the end of the fiscal year?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I do not know the answer to that, but
I think it is probably--I do not know the answer to that.
Senator Cotton. Okay.
I would like to turn my attention now to nuclear
modernization. You spoke earlier about this with Senator Inhofe
on the B-21, learning some of the lessons about the B-2 and the
F-35 program. But I would like to ask about the stated goal of
the program to acquire 100 aircraft.
Do you believe that 100 aircraft are sufficient for our
National Security Strategy in the future, given the challenges
we are going to face from growing A2AD air defense systems in
places like Russia, China, Iran, North Korea?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, we certainly need to be able to
penetrate to hold targets at risk. I understand that the next
piece of the national military strategy at the classified level
was finished late last year. I have not yet seen that.
I believe threat drives strategy. Strategy drives force
posture. The force posture is dependent on that strategy, which
I have not yet been fully briefed on.
Senator Cotton. Okay, thank you.
You spoke with Senator Fischer about nuclear modernization,
specifically about the B-21, about nuclear command and control,
and about the ground-based strategic deterrent. I do not think
you touched on the long-range standoff cruise missile.
What are your thoughts on that missile?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the Air Force has it in its plan. We
need modernization across-the-board with respect to the nuclear
deterrent.
Senator Cotton. Do you support the LRSO program?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, sir. I do.
Senator Cotton. Now I would like to ascend from nuclear
modernization to modernization as a whole and the budget.
The Air Force has a lot of bills coming due, not only
nuclear modernization but the F-35 and the B-21 and the KC-46
and the JSTARS and the presidential aircraft replacement
program, among other things.
Have you received indications from the senior leadership in
the Department of Defense, the Office of Management and Budget,
and the White House that their budget request will fully
support the Air Force's modernization needs over the coming
years?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, as I understand it, there is a top
line for fiscal year 2018, and the Air Force and the other
services are working through what is the structure under the
fiscal year 2018 number. I think we all know we are not going
to get out of this in a single year.
Senator Cotton. Are you confident we will in the coming 5
years' defense program?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I am here to try to do that.
Senator Cotton. We will be here to try to help you and our
Air Force do that as well.
Thank you, Dr. Wilson. Congratulations again.
Dr. Wilson. Thank you.
Chairman McCain. Senator Gillibrand?
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Dr. Wilson, for being here, and for your
commitment to public service. We are all very grateful.
One of the good fortunes we have in New York is our
talented work force, and the Air Force Research Lab in Rome is
a perfect example of an installation that has benefited from
the State's ability to attract and concentrate high-skilled
workers.
Past Air Force leaders have visited Rome and have been very
impressed by the amazing work happening at the lab and its
leadership on cyber in the Air Force and beyond. I would love
to have you visit Rome and see this critical work firsthand.
Will you come to the Rome labs?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, as I mentioned with respect to Alaska
and others, I do like to get out of the office and up and out
and be where people are. I find that I learn a lot more that
way, and particularly in the area of research and development,
which is a focus for me. So, yes. All of this will depend on
timing.
Senator Gillibrand. Of course.
Dr. Wilson. But I do want to come.
Senator Gillibrand. It is just really impressive and very
inspiring. I think if you get to see what they are doing, you
will have more of an interest in supporting their work, so I
would like to extend that invitation.
The second issue I am interested in is the issue of PFCs.
The Air Force, including the Air National Guard, is dealing
with contamination of water supplies across the country as a
result of perfluorooctane sulfonates, PFOS, expelled by
firefighting units on these bases.
There are two known sites in New York, one at the 106th on
Long Island, which was quickly identified and immediately
cleaned up, and one at the 105th in Newburgh, which has moved
much slower.
My staff has been in constant contact with the National
Guard on this matter, and I know it is not unique to New York.
Do I have your commitment to address this crisis head on
and work with communities in New York and across the country to
ensure that all contamination is remediated in a timely manner
so our citizens can have access to clean drinking water?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you.
My last issue is about LGBTQ issues. As Secretary of the
Air Force, you will be responsible for running the Air Force
enterprise, including dealing with issues related to LGBT
airmen and civilians, and I am concerned by some of the things
you have said in the past about the rights and protections for
LGBT citizens.
Specifically, in 2012, you stated that you ``tolerate'' but
do not ``approve of'' LGBT individuals.
Do you still stand by that statement?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, it is not my intention to change any
of the policies currently in place with respect to sexual
orientation. I think the appropriate thing to do, as I do as a
university president, is to treat everyone with dignity and
respect.
Senator Gillibrand. Well, I appreciate that you make a
commitment to treat everyone with dignity and respect. I think
that is really important in a position of leadership and very
important as a public servant, because you must value all men
and women who serve underneath you regardless of their sexual
orientation.
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCain. Senator Strange?
Senator Strange. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, Doctor, here today. I appreciate your willingness
to serve, and I have a high degree of confidence that you will
do very well in this position.
I especially enjoyed our conversation and your background
as a graduate of the academy and a female in the Air Force. As
I mentioned, my aunt was one of the pioneering women aviators
in World War II, so I know she would be proud to see you in
this position, leading the Air Force.
We covered a lot of ground when we talked, and I
appreciated your answers. I just want to point out again the
importance of Dannelly Field Guard station in Alabama, one of
the installations I am very proud of in our State.
It is one of the five being considered, as you know, for
the F-35. That process is ongoing. I just want to confirm that
you are comfortable with the process and the timing for the
selection of one of the two facilities that will ultimately be
the destination for that program.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I know that that is underway. As I
mentioned, I do not have a very deep insight into what the
tradeoffs are, but I am sure I will be briefed on that, if
confirmed.
Senator Strange. Great. That is a very high priority for
me. I am proud of the service men and women that are there. It
is an excellent facility, and I look forward to working with
you in that process.
Mr. Chairman, that is really the only question I had. I
will yield back my time.
Chairman McCain. Senator Blumenthal?
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for your service, Dr. Wilson, and for being here
today.
I want to follow up on a couple questions that Senator Reed
asked. I know that with respect to most policy questions, you
said you need to be briefed, you need to learn more, you need
to be better acquainted with the policies and programs ongoing
at the Air Force. So there will be a time, I am sure, when we
will want to go into greater depth on those issues, if you are
confirmed.
But on the issue of the contract that Senator Reed cited,
my understanding is that you were cited by the Department of
Energy inspector general for lacking sufficient detail in your
own invoices. One of them I would like to place in the record,
if there is no objection.
Chairman McCain. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
The IG investigators noted that I think you attended a
single meeting on at least two separate occasions and billed
two individually owned labs for the exact same time and
service.
Because of the lack of detail in the invoices that you
submitted, it was difficult to discern what service you
provided to whom and when. The document that I just placed in
the record is an invoice, which I could show to you to read,
but there is nothing to read on it because it is virtually
blank except for your name and the invoice number, and an item
that says ``consulting services.''
So just as a matter of procedure and accountability,
because this is a profoundly important issue for defense
procurement, should there not be better oversight of contractor
billing and documentation?
Is this not a bad example--leadership is by example; the
best leadership is by good example--of how billing and invoice
submission should be conducted?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, in each of the months in which I
worked for the national laboratories, I did more than 50 hours
a month of work in close consultation with the people at the
laboratories.
I was working for them quarter time. I did the work. I
complied with the contract, a contract negotiated and signed by
the laboratories. The review found actually no fault with me.
The DOE auditors never even bothered to talk to me. If they
had at the time, I probably would have been able to reconstruct
what I did that month.
Senator Blumenthal. Assuming all of that is true, why not
invoice it?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the laboratories never asked for that.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, I am asking you, as a potential
Secretary of the Air Force, whether you will hold contractors
to a higher standard than is indicated by this document. It is
a forward-looking question. I am not asking you to reconstruct
in your testimony now what you did. But should we not expect
more from contractors than this kind of blank invoice?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I think we should expect contractors
to comply with the contracts which they signed with the
government. In this case, I did.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, you know, the answer to my
question is really a simple yes. That is the right answer,
don't you think? Because regardless of what you did, in the
future, looking forward, my hope is that we improve contracting
involving the United States Government and United States
taxpayer money by imposing a higher standard than is indicated
or reflected by this invoice.
There is no way of knowing from this invoice even vaguely
what you did.
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the people that I worked with were
supervising me and knew what I did and that I was doing the
work that they were satisfied enough with to offer me a full-
time position as the vice president of the laboratory. I did
the work. They were happy with the work. I complied with the
contract. I will expect anyone who has a contract with the
United States Air Force to comply with the contract as well.
Senator Blumenthal. Did it occur to you that maybe the
United States of America deserved a fuller accounting of your
services than this blank slate?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, the United States deserved my best
work, and that is what they got.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, they may have gotten your best
work, but I hope, if you are confirmed, that you will hold
contractors providing services to the United States of America
to a higher standard than this blank sheet of paper, which is
not the only invoice that is as vague as this one. It is in the
record, so it will speak for itself.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCain. Senator Shaheen?
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Wilson, I want to congratulate you on your nomination,
and I certainly appreciate your willingness to serve at this
difficult and complex time.
I also want to point out that you are a native of Keene,
New Hampshire, and we are very proud of you in the State. I do
not know if you saw earlier, but we had about 40 members of the
New Hampshire Army and Air National Guard who were here for the
early part of this hearing. They are here for their
professional development today, and it is a recognition of the
effort that you are taking on.
I want to start with a program that we are very concerned
about in New Hampshire, and that is the KC-46A. We have learned
recently that the delivery of the first aircraft to Altus and
McConnell Air Force bases is likely to miss the target date of
2017.
We are concerned about it because Pease is one of those
first bases that is supposed to get the new KC-46A. I
understand it is going to be delayed another 6 months to the
end of 2018.
There was a recent GAO report that identified Boeing, the
manufacturer of the KC-46A, and explained that it struggled to
meet scheduled milestones throughout the duration of the
program, and it is at least a year behind on most measures.
So I wonder if you could talk about how, if confirmed, you
would work to maintain the delivery schedule of aircraft and
prevent further delays, because, as we know, this is not the
only delay that we are seeing. I am not even going to get into
the F-35, though we discussed it when you were in my office.
But can you tell us how you might approach this problem?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, I think there are a number of things.
You have to set realistic schedules upfront, and you have to
have very good program managers who are authorized, and often
very small and focused program management offices of
exceptional professionals to manage these programs.
Then, of course, you hold people accountable for results.
Sometimes people set out schedules and timelines that are too
ambitious upfront, but I think getting those realistic upfront,
and then, finally, making sure that requirements do not change
in the process. Fix those requirements and build the system.
As a university president, the worst thing you can do is
start changing the design after you have started construction
in the laboratory or the building. You have to fix it up front
and then come in and build to print and get it on a tight
timeline. I think the same is true for most major weapons
systems.
Senator Shaheen. Should we be looking at--it is my
understanding that for a lot of these oversight positions that
people are in, that they are only in those positions several
years, and then they are moved on.
What kind of a challenge does that present as we look at
long-term projects that we are doing in terms of new aircraft?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, you are right. There is turnover in
that field. Developing the capability in the acquisition field
has been an issue in the past. It may well be an issue today.
But one of the other things is procuring things on a tight
time frame. I think the A-10 was procured on a very tight time
frame. The F-16 was certainly tighter than some of the other
aircraft that we built. Getting somebody as a program manager
and saying, ``All right, you are going to be in this assignment
for 4 years and here is what we expect you to accomplish. We do
not expect miracles. We do not want a 15-year program. We want
tight turns, and then we will iterate and innovate after
that.'' I think that generally has been more effective at
getting capability out to the service in a cost-effective way.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
We had an interesting hearing yesterday in the Emerging
Threats Subcommittee. One of the presenters talked about the
new challenges of the hybrid warfare, cyber warfare that we are
facing, and that we are not doing enough within our military to
develop ways to address that, that we are very focused on
conventional warfare and that we are not focused enough on the
unconventional warfare, which is much of what we are facing
today.
So I appreciate that we are still going to need the role of
the Air Force, but what should the Air Force be looking at as
you all are thinking about this unconventional warfare
challenge that we are all facing?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, when people say unconventional
warfare, sometimes they really mean guerrilla warfare, but I
think you are talking about cyber and----
Senator Shaheen. I am actually talking about a combination.
I am talking about cyber. I am talking about the kind of
efforts that we saw in Ukraine and Georgia, to some extent. I
am talking about what we are seeing with Russia.
So what else should we be thinking about?
Dr. Wilson. Senator, we need to be thinking about the full
range of potential conflicts, all the way from low-intensity
warfare through a near-peer adversary and nuclear deterrence. I
think there are new techniques, and cyber is one of them, that
can be used both by nation-states and by terrorists or
insurgents to achieve their political objectives. But we need
to be able to pay both offense and defense in all of those
realms.
Senator Shaheen. I am glad to hear that, because right now,
I do not think we have a strategy. We are playing defense, and
we are not playing much offense.
So thank you. I look forward to working with you.
Dr. Wilson. Thank you.
Chairman McCain. Dr. Wilson, I just want to mention to you
that one of the enduring frustrations, a source of anger and
discontent in this committee and amongst the American
taxpayers, is cost overruns and the way we do business and
acquire weapons systems.
I was just looking at, in 2001, where there was a proposal
for an F-35 that was going to cost $233 billion, and we were
going to build 2,800 of them. Today, they cost $391 billion and
about 400 less. The first trillion-dollar weapons system in
history. Four hundred thousand dollars for a helmet. Stuff you
cannot make up.
So we have tried to make some changes, and have in the
acquisition system here in the Armed Services Committee. But I
have to tell you, we have not gotten a lot of cooperation from
the Department of Defense.
We have made changes such as separating AT&L into two
different divisions. We got nothing but resistance.
So I agree with all of the comments that you have made and
that of my colleagues about the dire situation we find
ourselves in, and the absolute necessity of avoiding a
continuing resolution. But when you have scandals like this,
$233 billion to $239 billion cost of a weapons system, then it
is hard for us to make a case for more funds to defend the
Nation.
So there are a lot of challenges that we face, but I find
myself continuously frustrated by the cost overruns, whether it
be a $3 billion cost overrun on the Gerald R. Ford or whether
it be now we are having cost overruns associated with the
tanker.
It goes on and on, and it has to stop. We are pretty well
aware that we can do a lot, but we cannot do everything unless
we have a cooperative environment over where you work or will
be working.
So I hope that, if not the highest, the next highest
priority that you have is to address this broken acquisition
system.
Frankly, I grow tired of fighting with the Pentagon. I get
tired of seeing these scandals and calling people to account.
But the fact is, in reality, back on the F-35, to my
knowledge, not a single person has been held accountable for a
$160 billion cost overrun--not a single person that I know of,
certainly not the manufacturer who comes before this committee
and tells us what a great job they are doing.
So there either has to be accountability and truth in
contracting, and the American taxpayers get their investment,
or we are going to face further crises, such as we are facing
now.
One of the reasons why we have not got enough money is
because we have wasted it. We have wasted so much, so many
billions of dollars, time after time after time.
So my strong recommendation to you is that we start firing
some people. We start penalizing contractors. We break up this
iron triangle of the military-industrial-congressional complex.
I hope that you will devote some energy in that direction.
Senator Reed?
Senator Reed. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for holding
the hearing. I want to thank Dr. Wilson for her testimony
today. I presume there will be additional questions for the
record.
Senator Reed. Thank you, Dr. Wilson.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Whereupon, at 11:38 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
----------
[Prepared questions submitted to The Honorable Heather A.
Wilson, to be Secretary of the Air Force by Chairman McCain
prior to the hearing with answers supplied follow:]
Questions and Responses
department of defense reforms
Question. The Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act
included the most sweeping reforms since the Goldwater Nichols
Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986.
Do you support these reforms?
Answer. I am becoming more familiar with the reforms enacted in
this legislation and their impact on the Air Force. To the extent I
understand their broad outlines, I support them and will more fully
evaluate them if confirmed.
Question. What other areas for defense reform do you believe might
be appropriate for this Committee to address?
Answer. I have no recommendations for further reform at this time.
duties
Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
the Secretary of the Air Force?
Answer. The Secretary of the Air Force is responsible for all
affairs of the Department of the Air Force in accordance with title 10
of the U.S. Code, subject to the authority, direction, and control of
the Secretary of Defense. These functions include organizing,
supplying, equipping, training, maintaining, and administering the Air
Force.
Question. What recommendations, if any, do you have for changes in
the duties and functions of the Secretary of the Air Force, as set
forth in section 8013 of title 10, United States Code, or in Department
of Defense regulations pertaining to functions of the Secretary of the
Air Force?
Answer. None at this time.
qualifications
Question. The Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act
amended section 8013 of title 10, United States Code, to require that
the Secretary of the Air Force ``to the greatest extent practicable, be
appointed from among persons most highly qualified for the position by
reason of background and experience, including persons with appropriate
management or leadership experience.''
What background and experience do you have that you believe
qualifies you for this position?
Answer. I have 35 years of professional experience in a range of
leadership and management roles in the military, government, private
industry and higher education.
Since 2013, I have been the President of the South Dakota School of
Mines & Technology, an engineering and science research university
located in the Rushmore Region of South Dakota. As the chief executive
reporting to the Board of Regents, I have been responsible for all
matters related to the operation, performance, and financial management
of the university.
From 1998 through 2009 I was a member of the U.S. House of
Representatives, where I served on House Armed Services Committee and
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. While the Chair
of the Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence, the
Committee conducted a review of the nation's overhead intelligence
collection architecture and initiated oversight of the President's
Terrorist Surveillance Program, which lead to significant revisions to
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Before being elected to the Congress, from 1995 through 1998, I was
a Cabinet Secretary in New Mexico's state government where I
administered an agency with over 2,000 employees and a $200 million
budget responsible for foster care, adoption, juvenile delinquency,
children's mental health, and early childhood education.
From 1989 through 1991 I was the Director for Defense Policy and
Arms Control on the National Security Council Staff at the White House
responsible for advising the President through the National Security
Advisor on matters related to NATO and the negotiation of the
Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty.
I was an Active Duty Air Force officer from 1982 through 1989.
Following the completion of graduate education, I served at
Headquarters Third Air Force at RAF Mildenhall, England where I was
responsible for base planning and host country negotiations for the
arrival of nuclear capable cruise missiles at RAF Molesworth. I then
served at the United States Mission to NATO in Brussels, Belgium in the
office of Defense Plans, and briefly in Vienna, Austria at the
Conventional Forces in Europe arms control negotiations.
From 1991 to 1995 and again from 2009 to 2013 I worked as a senior
advisor and consultant to several national laboratories as well as
defense and scientific industry on a wide range of programs related to
nuclear weapons, non-proliferation, arms control verification,
intelligence and the defense industrial base. In 2011 to 2012 I was
also a candidate for the U.S. Senate.
I have served on the boards of two publicly traded corporations--
Peabody Energy (NYSE: BTU), and Raven Industries (NASDAQ: RAVN)--as
well as numerous advisory and non-profit boards including the CIA
advisory board on Biological Warfare, the National Security Agency
Research Advisory Board, and the Congressional Panel on the Nuclear
Security Enterprise.
I am a distinguished graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy and a
Rhodes Scholar with Masters and Doctoral degrees in International
Relations.
While I was not a military pilot, I am an instrument rated private
pilot. I am also the spouse of a retired air national guardsman, giving
me a deeper understanding of the guard and the important role of
families and family support for our airmen.
In sum, I am a seasoned and successful senior executive with very
broad administrative and national security experience and deep roots in
the United States Air Force.
major challenges and priorities
Question. If confirmed, what broad priorities will you establish?
Answer. While I have been away from federal service for several
years, my initial impression is that we must restore the readiness of
the Air Force so that it can defend the vital national interests of the
United States. In addition, I will work with Congress to address the
constraints imposed by the Budget Control Act so that the Air Force can
be cost effectively modernized to meet a range of threats now and in
the future. I intend to bring renewed focus to the training and
education of airmen, particularly with respect to the quality of
command at the squadron and wing level. Working with my colleagues in
the other services and under the guidance of the Secretary of Defense,
I will seek to bring business-minded reforms to the Air Force to get
high quality capabilities at the best price for the taxpayer. Finally,
I expect to review and further develop the Air Force research and
development priorities to ensure we are investing in basic and applied
research that will keep the Air Force ahead of adversaries for the long
term.
Question. In your view, what are the major challenges, if any, you
would confront if confirmed as Secretary of the Air Force?
Answer. Since the passage of the Budget Control Act in 2011, the
number of people in the Air Force has declined significantly while the
demand for air and space power has increased. During this period the
Air Force made supporting the warfighter a priority. In its 26th year
of continuous combat operations, the decline in readiness to fight peer
or near-peer adversaries and deferral of modernization is the greatest
risk and the biggest challenge we face.
Question. If confirmed, what management actions and time lines
would you establish to address these challenges?
Answer. While there is no instant fix to the readiness problem, we
must immediately start recovering this year. Over the next 5 years,
working with the Congress and the Secretary of Defense, I will seek to
steadily increase the size of the Air Force to fill the vacancies we
have for today's missions.
There are numerous modernization and procurement projects
underway--fighters, bombers, tankers, intelligence platforms, space
capabilities, and our nuclear deterrent. In each case, I will ensure we
systematically review timelines and costs to get the capabilities we
need in a timely way at the best possible price.
relations with congress
Question. What are your views on the state of the Air Force's
relationship with the Senate Armed Services Committee in particular,
and with Congress in general?
Answer. Based on pre-confirmation meetings, I believe the
relationship is good, but there is also room for improvement. I respect
the role of the Congress under our constitutional system of divided
power. If confirmed, I will seek to understand concerns and address
them directly. I will also be forthright about the challenges we face
and transparent in my recommendations to address those challenges.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
productive and mutually beneficial relationship between the Congress
and the Air Force?
Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to develop a relationship of
mutual respect based on trust and competence. I think it is important
to communicate frequently and frankly. I will listen carefully to your
ideas for reform and improvement.
A significant number of issues important to Members of Congress
happen at the local level and can be handled at the local level, and I
will seek to enable meaningful relationships between our Air Force
units and your local offices.
Question. The committee has experienced frustration with the
timeliness of responses from the Air Force on requests for information,
questions and inserts for the record, and reports required by law.
If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure such requests
from the committee are met in a timely manner, with comprehensive
responses and detailed information?
Answer. I will review recently instituted process changes intended
to improve the quality and timeliness of responses. I'll monitor
results and direct that adjustments be made accordingly.
Part of the solution to this problem is likely to be improved
responsiveness to informal requests for information so that formal
reports are not required. In that regard, I will review congressional
interaction guidance so that Congress gets accurate information in a
timely way.
torture and enhanced interrogation techniques
Question. Do you support the standards for detainee treatment
specified in the revised Army Field Manual on Interrogations, FM 2-
22.3, issued in September 2006, and in DOD Directive 2310.01E, the
Department of Defense Detainee Program, dated August 19, 2014, and
required by Section 1045 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92)?
Answer. Yes
air force military end strength
Question. Senior Air Force leaders have stated on many recent
occasions that the Air Force is the smallest size in its history, that
it cannot get any smaller, and has numerous manpower shortfalls,
particularly in the maintenance and fighter pilot career fields. While
the Air Force's fiscal year 2017 budget submission did not request an
increase in military end strength, the fiscal year 2017 NDAA authorized
an increase in Air Force Active end strength to 321,000. Subsequently,
the Chief of Staff of the Air Force made statements that the Air
Force's Active Duty military end strength should be increased to
350,000.
In your view, can the Air Force meet national defense objectives at
the end strength levels authorized in the fiscal year 2017 NDAA? Could
the Air Force meet those objectives at end strength levels in fiscal
year 2018 and beyond that would be necessary when a return to 2011
Budget Control Act discretionary spending caps is mandated?
Answer. My initial view is that we have a mismatch between our
strategic objectives and the military means we have available to
confront and deter threats. The Air Force is too small for what the
nation expects of it.
Unless the Air Force receives funds above the caps imposed by the
Budget Control Act, it will not be able to achieve the readiness,
modernization, and force structure required to meet emerging threats.
The 321,000 airmen authorized in this fiscal year is a step in the
right direction to restore the readiness of the force. The Air Force
has estimated that 350,000 airmen are required to perform today's
missions. I have no reason to question that estimate.
Question. Do you believe the Air Force needs additional force
shaping tools requiring legislation beyond those tools that Congress
has provided the past few years, to include extending the numerous
authorities that expire at the end of fiscal year 2018?
Answer. If confirmed, I will fully examine existing authorities in
order to determine which force shaping tools are necessary to recruit
and retain skilled airmen. I am unaware of additional force shaping
tools that are required at this time.
Question. What are your views on the appropriate size and mix of
the Active Duty Air Force, and the Reserve components?
Answer. In general, our assessment of threats and our national
security strategy to meet those threats should drive force structure--
including the mix of Active, Guard, and Reserve forces. Particularly in
the Air Force, Guard and Reserve units are highly capable and vital to
our national security. I don't have sufficient information to determine
the optimal mix of Active, Guard, and Reserve components at this time.
Question. What total force end strength should the Air Force field
to support the National Military Strategy?
Answer. I understand that the classified national military strategy
was updated in late 2016, but I have not yet been briefed on it. If
confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of Defense and the Air Force
Chief of Staff to guide an evaluation of the force structure needed to
support an updated military strategy.
Question. How would you, year over year, increase the Air Force's
end strength? How long would it take to build an Air Force of 350,000
regular airmen, and what would be the cost?
Answer. The Air Force estimates that expansion of 4,000 to 5000
airmen a year to an end strength of 350,000 is a sustainable growth
rate to recruit and train airmen with the skills and experience levels
required. At this time, I have no reason to question that estimate.
air force recruiting and retention
Question. The recruitment and retention of quality airmen, officer
and enlisted, Active Duty and Reserve, is vital to the Department of
the Air Force.
How would you evaluate the effectiveness of the Air Force in
successfully recruiting and retaining high caliber personnel during a
sustained period of increasing or decreasing end strength?
Answer. The Air Force reports that it continues to meet its
recruiting targets in both numbers and quality. Retention of highly
trained airmen, particularly in high demand career fields, is a
challenge and the Air Force is falling short on retention. This is
particularly evident for pilots, but also in other well compensated
specialties that are in demand outside the service.
Question. What initiatives would you take, if confirmed, to further
improve Air Force recruiting and retention, in both the Active and
Reserve components?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the current recruiting and
retention initiatives authorized by Congress and used by the Air Force
to evaluate their effectiveness. It is my view that one of the most
important things we can do to improve retention of pilots and
maintainers is to improve readiness--flying hours, spare parts,
aircraft availability etc. Readiness has a direct effect on morale and
retention.
Question. What do you believe will be the impact, if any, of the
new retirement system effective in fiscal year 2018 on recruiting and
retention in the Air Force?
Answer. I am unaware of any reliable estimates of impact at this
time. If confirmed, I will review available estimates of the impact.
pilot retention
Question. Anticipated increases in pilot hiring by commercial
airlines are likely to apply pressure on aviator retention for all the
services, but most acutely for the Air Force. The Chief of Staff of the
Air Force has recently described this impending pilot shortage as a
national problem, and not just limited to the armed forces. The U.S.
Government is not likely to ever match the salaries of commercial
airline companies, especially as shortages grow more acute and
compensation increases to attract a shrinking pool of eligible pilots.
If confirmed, what immediate steps would you take to retain the
necessary numbers of aviators in the Air Force?
Answer. While the bonus authority provided in the National Defense
Authorization Act is helpful, we will not be able to compete on a
purely monetary basis with commercial aviation over the next decade.
Increased readiness levels--particularly flying hours--will likely have
a direct effect on pilot retention. We will almost certainly have to
increase pilot production and review other retention initiatives
including reduced additional duty requirements, quality of service and
quality of life improvements.
Question. Do you agree that aviation incentive pays and bonuses
should be tailored to target communities experiencing shortfalls, and
not uniformly offered to every pilot at the maximum rate regardless of
platform?
Answer. Yes
Question. What other long-term initiatives would you use to provide
a more lasting solution to aviator retention in the Air Force?
Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate all options and their
effectiveness. In addition to monetary incentives, increases in
readiness and flying hours will likely have a positive impact on
retention and morale.
Question. Given the high cost of training new aviators, do you
believe the Air Force is subsidizing the airline industry with a
pipeline of ready-trained aviators at a fraction of the cost to the
airline? How would you recommend addressing this dynamic?
Answer. The demand for commercial pilots is significantly higher
than the supply, particularly for pilots with sufficient experience to
fly for the airlines. I expect the airline industry to continue to
recruit highly qualified pilots to meet their needs from all sources,
including from the Air Force. In a free market, when pilots have
completed their service obligation for the Air Force, I would not
describe this as a subsidy.
There is a national shortage of pilots. While there are a number of
private tuition assistance programs to increase the number of
commercial pilots, experienced Air Force pilots will continue to be in
demand.
Question. The Air Force states their most critical pilot shortages
are in the fighter aircraft career fields, where the Air Force is
currently 500 fighter pilots short of requirements. The Air Force
believes that shortfall could grow to more than 1,000 by the end of the
decade. One of the challenges is that the Air Force no longer has a
robust inventory of fighter cockpits sufficient to train all of the
newly graduated pilots that would be required to sustain an experienced
and combat ready Air Force.
What initiatives would you pursue to address the lack of training
opportunities that would mitigate fighter pilot manning shortfalls and
help sustain a healthy fighter pilot inventory?
Answer. In my discussions with the Air Force, the problem seems to
be less of a lack of training opportunities and more of a lack of
ability to train due to the small size of the force combined with high
operations tempo. With 55 fighter squadrons and a shortfall of
approximately 800 fighter pilots, the Air Force is unable to support
today's fight and, at the same time, effectively train.
We cannot assume that the demand for fighter squadrons will decline
in the near term. We need to increase manpower, ensure sufficient spare
parts and trained maintainers, reduce additional duty requirements not
related to flying and make as much time available as possible for
mission training and readiness.
readiness
Question. The Air Force Chief of Staff testified in March, 2016,
``Readiness remains both an imperative and a struggle for us. Less than
half of our combat aircraft are fully prepared for a high tech fight
against a capable, well equipped force.''
What is your assessment of the current readiness of the Air Force
to meet national security requirements across the full spectrum of
military operations?
Answer. Senior Air Force leaders have testified that less than 50
percent of the conventional air force is ready for all of the combat
missions assigned to them. While the Air Force has put a priority on
nuclear deterrent operations and support for counterterrorism, the Air
Force is not fully ready to fight against a near-peer competitor.
Question. What is your assessment of Air Force readiness to conduct
a mobilization in a national emergency?
I am not familiar with the specific readiness rates of Guard and
Reserve forces. If confirmed, I will be looking more closely at
readiness of different units, including the Guard and Reserve.
What specifically would a fully-funded whole ``ready'' force look
like, and how much time would it take to achieve?
Answer. A ready force would have adequate well trained airmen to
fight against a range of enemies in air, space and cyberspace. Airmen
would have sufficient well-maintained equipment and flying hours in
realistic situations to deter or prevail in any fight.
Question. What readiness-related accounts are you currently
executing at maximum capacity, and if you were given more funding
today, what would be the top near-term priorities in which you would
invest to restore full spectrum readiness as soon as possible?
Answer. I have not yet been briefed on the specific accounts and
the best path to recovery, but it seems clear that shortages of
maintenance manpower and pilots is a very important factor. If
confirmed, I will seek to understand more fully the priorities for
recovery in order to systematically restore readiness.
Question. The Air Force has difficulty articulating its readiness
levels because of the diverse missions it accomplishes, as well as its
large proportion of garrison-based capabilities such as space and
nuclear missile forces.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to more accurately measure
and articulate comprehensive Air Force readiness levels?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Chief of Staff of the
Air Force, the commanders of our Major Commands, and the Headquarters
Air Force staff to validate our readiness measures and report them
accurately.
federal hiring freeze
Question. Recently, Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work issued
implementation guidance on the civilian workforce hiring freeze
directed by the President. The guidance authorized exemptions for
``positions in shipyards and depots'' that ``perform direct management
of inventory and direct maintenance of equipment.''
For what types of workers and mission functions is hiring still
frozen by the President's order?
Answer. I have been told by the Air Force that it is fully
complying with the President's Executive Order and DOD guidance for
freezing all civilian vacancies regardless of funding source. The Air
Force is applying the authority to exempt specific positions as
necessary to meet national security and public safety responsibilities.
Question. If every year you are losing depot workers to retirement
and attrition, how are you going to be able to increase readiness if
you need more funding and end strength, yet are unable to hire more
civilians to work?
Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate the Air Force's exemption
process and determine if depots need additional exemptions within the
current authority granted to the Secretary of the Air Force.
Question. Which readiness-related functions are at the most risk
because of this hiring freeze?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review which readiness-related
functions, if any, are at risk.
acquisition issues
Question. The National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years
2016 and 2017 made many changes to defense acquisition processes,
including reinserting service chief influence and accountability into
acquisition processes.
Do you support the acquisition reform provisions in the Fiscal
Years 2017 National Defense Authorization Act?
Answer. We need to get good ideas from the drawing board to the
flight line faster and at lower cost. I am becoming more familiar with
the reforms enacted in this legislation--particularly experimentation
and prototyping--and will seek to identify early opportunities to use
these new tools. I support the intent of these changes.
Question. What roles do you see for developmental planning,
prototyping, and experimentation for fielding of future Air Force
capabilities?
Answer. Experimentation and prototyping are tools that can help get
good ideas into the hands of airmen faster and at lower cost.
Experimentation can help shift the culture from risk aversion to one
that celebrates and rewards productive failure. A willingness to ``fail
fast'', harvest lessons and continue to innovate should be celebrated
in a technically advanced Air Force.
Question. Do you agree the services should exploit non-
developmental or commercial off-the-shelf solutions to meet Air Force
requirements? Would this help put capabilities into the hands of airmen
more quickly?
Answer. Yes.
Question. How can the Department and the Air Force better access
and integrate commercial and military technology to remain ahead of its
potential adversaries?
Answer. Too many companies will not supply the Defense Department
or other federal agencies because it is too hard to do business with
the government. With private sector research and development exceeding
that done in the military, we have to be able to buy capabilities
developed in the commercial sector. If confirmed, I will work with the
Air Force Acquisition Office to identify more and better ways to buy
commercial products and services that are a good value for the Air
Force.
Question. What additional acquisition-related reforms do you
believe the Committee should consider?
Answer. I am not aware of additional reform authorities needed at
this time. If confirmed, I will advise the committee of any additional
acquisition reforms needed as I identify them.
Question. If confirmed, how will you synchronize your acquisition
responsibilities with the Chief of Staff of the Air Force?
Answer. While the Secretary focuses on budgets and acquisition, and
the Chief has authority for requirements, in reality, a close working
relationship is essential to make decisions that are the best for the
warfighter and get the best value we can for the taxpayer.
Question. What is your assessment of the size and capability of the
Air Force acquisition workforce?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the size and professional
development of the acquisition workforce. While it varies by program,
in general, I think we are well served by highly competent, empowered
program managers with focused exceptional teams of professionals
supporting the program manager.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
the Department of the Air Force has an acquisition workforce of the
size and capability needed to manage acquisition challenges?
Answer. If confirmed, I will assess the state of the acquisition
workforce and make appropriate adjustments to the organization,
operating guidelines and professional development.
Question. Recent press reports cite an email that you sent to a
major defense contractor in which you advised the contractor to take
the position that ``competition is not in the best interest of the
government'' in an attempt to avoid recompeting an existing contract
with the Department of Energy.
What is your view about the value of competition for Department of
Defense contracts?
Answer. Competition generally improves the quality and price of the
things we buy and can drive innovation.
Conducting a contract competition for management of a Federally
Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) is expensive and
disruptive if there is not a clear benefit to doing so. In this
particular case, the cost-plus fee the government paid for managing
that lab was significantly less than the fee paid at other DOE labs
which had been through re-competition more recently. In my opinion, it
was unlikely that the DOE would have saved money or improved lab
performance through re-competition of the management of this federal
facility at that time. That perspective was the basis for my
recommendation.
Question. If confirmed, will you advocate for competition of Air
Force contracts?
Answer. Yes, if it's in the best interests of the government.
audit readiness
Question. The Department of Defense and the Services remain unable
to achieve a clean financial statement audit. The Department also
remains on the Government Accountability Office's list of high risk
agencies and management systems for financial management and weapon
system acquisition. Although audit-readiness has been a goal of the
Department for decades, it has repeatedly failed to meet numerous
congressionally directed audit-readiness deadlines.
What is your understanding and assessment of the Air Force's
efforts to achieve a clean financial statement audit in 2017?
Answer. I support the Air Force having auditable financial
statements and systems. If confirmed, I will assess the progress
towards being audit ready by the end of fiscal year 2017.
Question. In your opinion, is the Department of the Air Force on
track to achieve these objectives, particularly with regard to data
quality, internal controls, and business process re-engineering?
Answer. I am not fully informed on the status of the Air Force
efforts to comply with the requirement to have auditable financial
statements. If confirmed, I will assess these matters.
Question. If not, what impediments may hinder the Air Force's
ability to achieve this goal and how would you address them?
Answer. If confirmed, I will become more familiar with the progress
and work remaining to be done in this area.
Question. What steps will you take, if confirmed, to ensure the Air
Force achieves these objectives without an unaffordable or
unsustainable level of one-time fixes and manual work-arounds?
Answer. The Air Force should have auditable financial statements
and Air Force financial systems should be configured in such a way that
the finances are able to be audited.
nuclear enterprise
Question. What are your views on the necessity of maintaining a
nuclear triad?
Answer. We must maintain a safe, secure and reliable nuclear
deterrent. The deterrent has been effective for over 70 years. The air
and ground legs of the triad are a core mission of the Air Force and
will continue to be a core mission.
Question. What are your views on the condition of the ground-based
leg of the nuclear triad, and the urgency of the need for its
recapitalization?
Answer. The Minuteman III is aging and it needs to be replaced. It
was built in the 1970s, further life extension is no longer feasible
and continuing to rely on it for the long term is not cost effective.
If confirmed, I will be informed in more detail about the operational
and cost of maintenance issues that will influence the timeline for
replacing the Minuteman III.
Question. What priority would you give to the following Air Force
nuclear modernization programs within the overall Air Force acquisition
budget over the next 5 to 10 years: the Ground Based Strategic
Deterrent, the Long Range Standoff Weapon, a nuclear-capable variant of
the F-35, and modernization of the nuclear command and control
infrastructure?
Answer. I believe that each of these modernization efforts is an
important element in the U.S. nuclear deterrent. The Ground Based
Strategic Deterrent and Long Range Standoff Weapon will replace systems
that are operating decades beyond their originally intended service
lives. The dual capable F-35 aircraft will continue to extend the
umbrella of our nuclear deterrent over our allies.
I am not fully informed on the planned upgrades to our nuclear
command, control, and communications systems and, if confirmed, will be
fully briefed on this effort.
Question. If confirmed, will you affirm that you will give priority
attention to continued implementation of the recommendations of the
2014 Nuclear Enterprise Review, especially those recommendations
concerning the training, readiness, and morale of service personnel
assigned to the nuclear mission?
Answer. Yes.
f-35 joint strike fighter
Question. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program, the largest and
most expensive acquisition program in Department of Defense history,
was formally initiated as a program of record in 2001, and subsequently
adjusted to a total planned buy of 2,443 aircraft for the U.S. The
program has not yet completed the System Development and Demonstration
(SDD) phase, now projected for an additional seven-month delay and an
additional $500 million in cost overruns. The full rate production
decision is not due at least until 2019, 18 years after its inception.
At currently projected annual procurement rates, the last delivery of
the Air Force's F-35A is now planned for the year 2040.
The Senate Armed Services Committee report accompanying S. 1376,
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, required
the Secretary of Defense to assess the current requirement for the F-35
Joint Strike Fighter total program of record quantity, and then
revalidate that quantity or identify a new requirement for the total
number of F-35 aircraft the Department would ultimately procure. The
Department provided an interim response that stated a reassessment of
the total procurement quantity would be provided at a later date.
If confirmed, will you direct a reassessment of the Air Force's F-
35A total program procurement quantity, currently established at 1,763
aircraft?
Answer. If confirmed, I will fully support the review of the F-35
program as directed by Secretary Mattis so that the Air Force has the
capability it needs to protect our vital national interests against
threats now and in the future.
Question. President-elect Trump recently stated, ``Based on the
tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have
asked Boeing to price out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!''
In your view, what are the alternatives for the Air Force to
purchasing 1,763 F-35A fighter aircraft? Should the Air Force consider
restarting the F-22 production line, purchasing advanced fourth
generation fighters still in production such as enhanced F-15s and F-
16s, or developing a next generation fighter aircraft beyond the F-
35A's capabilities?
Answer. I fully support the review of the F-35 fighter program
directed by Secretary Mattis.
As we evaluate needs and options, there are some things I will keep
in mind.
The last time an American soldier or marine was killed in combat by
enemy aircraft was August 15, 1953--during the Korean War. Public
reports indicate that, in the current fight against ISIS, the United
States and its coalition partners have used more than 40,000 munitions
against the enemy with deadly effect. Ninety percent of these strikes
were conducted by the United States Air Force.
While we have dominated the air for the last 26 years of continuous
combat operations, we must continue to maintain the advantage in air
and space power against emerging threats. Our potential adversaries are
not standing still and there is cause for concern.
While current aircraft like the F-16, and F-15 can be effective in
lower threat environments, against well defended targets and the newer
aircraft being developed and deployed by our adversaries, they are
likely not good enough.
As part of the review directed by Secretary Mattis, I would expect
the Air Force to evaluate the cost of re-starting the F-22 production
line and the effectiveness of the F-22 against emerging threats.
We need to have an Air Force with a range of capabilities that can
win every fight. That will require modern, stealthy aircraft that can
penetrate defended airspace, and see and kill the target before the
enemy even knows what is happening.
Going forward, in procurement of major systems, time is money. We
have to keep the time from conception to operational capability short.
If we don't, technology of subsystems changes and design discipline
erodes, which results in increased cost.
b-21 long range strike bomber
Question. On October 27, 2015, the Air Force announced the award of
the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) contract for the
new B-21 bomber. The fiscal year 2017 NDAA directed enhanced reporting
of B-21 program cost, schedule, and performance data to the Government
Accountability Office for more frequent assessments and focused
oversight.
If confirmed as Secretary of the Air Force, what will be your role
in the management of the B-21 bomber program to insure cost, schedule,
and performance remain on track?
Answer. The Chief of Staff and I will work together so that the
requirements remain stable, achievable and affordable and the B-21 is
delivered on time, and on budget.
Question. The Air Force publicly released the adjusted average
procurement unit cost (APUC) of $511 million in fiscal year 2010
constant dollars, and $3.5 billion FYDP funding reduction, both of
which were adjusted downward due to the independent cost estimate based
on the winning bid.
In your view, why would it be necessary for the Air Force to keep
the total value of the B-21 EMD program contract award classified,
despite the fact that the Air Force budget has included an unclassified
request for the EMD phase each year since fiscal year 2012 and each
fiscal year's actual expenditures are publicly available?
Answer. As a nominee, I have not received classified briefings on
the B-21. I am aware that there are ongoing conversations between the
Air Force and members of the committee and members of the committee
staff on this issue.
If confirmed, I will ensure that the committee is kept informed
about classified programs and their costs so that the committee can
perform its oversight role.
Question. What actions shall you take if confirmed to ensure that
the provisions of section 211 of the National Defense Authorization Act
of Fiscal Year 2013 are met?
Answer. The B-21 has been designed from the outset to be a nuclear
capable bomber. Nuclear capability is not a modification or ``add-on''
feature. My role will be to ensure that the B-21 is capable of carrying
strategic nuclear weapons when it achieves initial operating capability
and that it will be certified to use nuclear weapons not less than 2
years later.
I have been informed at the unclassified level that nuclear
certification requirements have been confirmed at the program's latest
design review.
presidential aircraft replacement (par)
Question. The Air Force's total cost estimate for PAR program
development is $4.3 billion in ``then-year'' dollars. After President-
elect Trump stated, ``costs are out of control, more than $4 billion,''
the Boeing CEO stated his company will, ``get it done for less than
that... We're going to make sure that he gets the best capability and
that it's done affordably.''
If confirmed, how will you ensure the Air Force will keep the
development costs ``less than that,'' especially as the Air Force plans
to sign a development contract with a cost-plus reimbursement
structure?
Answer. In January, Secretary Mattis directed the Deputy Secretary
of Defense to guide a review of the requirements for the aircraft in
coordination with the White House Military Office in order to reduce
program costs.
If confirmed, I will work to ensure the Air Force meets the
Administration's intent to provide the best taxpayer value while
meeting executive airlift needs for the Office of the President.
ec-130h compass call recapitalization program
Question. The Air Force has plans to buy 10 business jet aircraft
to replace the capabilities provided by the current EC-130H Compass
Call aircraft. These plans include using some form of rapid acquisition
procedures that would lead to selecting a particular airframe very
quickly. This approach causes some concern because selecting an
aircraft for this program could give the selected aircraft contractor a
particular edge winning later competitions for modernization programs
for other Air Force capabilities, such as programs to modernize the
Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS), signals
intelligence aircraft and airborne warning and control aircraft.
How would you suggest the Air Force ensure that subsequent
competitions are not unduly influenced by a near-term rapid
acquisition?
Answer. It is my understanding that one contractor filed a bid
protest regarding the Compass Call program in February and that it is
currently under review.
While I have not been briefed on the bids or the protest, it is my
understanding that the Compass Call aircraft replacement program is
quite different from the modernization of JSTARS.
In the case of Compass Call, the Air Force needs a contractor to
move the current equipment into a new airframe. It's a mechanical
design and wiring job.
Modernization of JSTARS will be much more complex, involving the
development of an improved JSTARS system. This is a very different
challenge requiring different capabilities from the contractor.
Based on this understanding, it is my view that the Air Force
should approach each competition independently to get the right
contractor for each job, with the appropriate capabilities, in order to
get the best value for the taxpayer.
If confirmed, I will ensure that the Air Force reviews the results
of the bid protest and acts accordingly.
Question. If the Air Force cannot provide such assurances now,
should the Air Force hold a broader competition now for aircraft that
would reach beyond the more narrowly defined Compass Call modernization
program?
Answer. I understand that one contractor has challenged the bid
process and I have not been briefed on the proposals or the challenge.
That said, based on my understanding of the difference in these
projects set out above, my view is that the Air Force shouldn't
increase the cost and delay the new airframe for Compass Call to
benefit higher capability contractors who are likely very competitive
for JSTARS.
The Air Force needs a robust industrial base and I see no advantage
to the Air Force mission or the taxpayer from blending these two very
different procurements.
If confirmed, I will ensure that the Air Force takes into account
the results of the bid challenge and proceeds accordingly.
replacement of the e-4b national airborne operations center (naoc)
Question. The E-4B will be reaching end of life in the late 2020's.
This is a unique asset for performing the full range of the Secretary
of Defense's Title 10 responsibilities, including nuclear command,
control and communications. There is concern that a possible split of
the missions of the NAOC amongst separate future aircraft could cause a
loss of functionality and interplay between the E-4B's current mission
sets.
What are your views on the E-4B replacement program, and will you
ensure that any replacement program ensures that the Air Force will
retain the ability to perform the full E-4B mission set?
Answer. I understand that the Air Force is conducting an analysis
of alternatives for the replacement of the National Airborne Operations
Center. The analysis is due in fiscal year 2018. If confirmed, I will
keep the committee informed on the results of this review.
munitions
Question. Air Force munitions inventories, particularly those of
precision guided munitions, have declined significantly due to high
operational usage, insufficient procurement, and a requirements system
that does not adequately account for the ongoing need to transfer
munitions to our allies and operations short of major combat, such as
in the current operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the Air Force has
sufficient inventories of munitions to meet combatant commanders'
needs?
Answer. Over the past 2\1/2\ years, the Air Force has reportedly
used over 40,000 munitions in operations against ISIS. Congress has
supported the Air Force by authorizing Overseas Contingency Operation
funds to replenish these munitions.
It is my understanding that the Air Force is using these funds to
buy munitions and industry has reached the limit for current industrial
capacity for some munitions.
If confirmed, I will ensure that the Air Force continues to explore
opportunities to increase munitions manufacturing capacity.
This may also be an area where the three military services need to
work more closely together and with industry to improve advanced
manufacturing capability so that industry can respond to the needs of
the service.
Question. How will the Air Force adapt to self-imposed Department
of Defense restrictions on area attack and denial munitions in
accordance with the Ottawa Agreements?
Answer. With respect to area denial munitions, the Ottawa
Convention on Anti-Personnel Landmines (APL) bans the development,
production, acquisition, stockpiling, and retention of all anti-
personnel landmines. The U.S. is not a signatory to the Ottawa
Convention. However, there is a Presidential Policy Directive that
restricts use of anti-personnel landmines. If confirmed, I will ensure
the Air Force continues to work closely with the Army on alternatives
to anti-personnel landmines.
With respect to area attack munitions, I am aware that Department
of Defense (DOD) policy restricts the use and sale of cluster munitions
after 2018 that have a greater than one percent chance of leaving
unexploded ordinance behind on the battlefield. It is my understanding
that the Air Force currently has approximately 2,000 area attack and
denial munitions that meet the DOD policy and will continue to be
available for warfighter use after the January 2019 deadline. In
addition to these munitions, it is my understanding that the Air Force
is developing alternative munitions that will meet both the warfighter
area attack requirements and the DOD cluster munitions policy.
space
Question. The Secretary of the Air Force was assigned new oversight
responsibilities for space programs in the Department of Defense when
the position was designated as the principal DOD space adviser (PDSA).
If confirmed, would you propose any changes to National Security
space policy and programs?
Answer. I look forward to my responsibilities as principal DOD
space advisor and chairing the Defense Space Council. The Air Force is
responsible for over 90 percent of the Defense Department's space
assets on orbit and the nation is heavily dependent on space
capabilities for navigation, communication, command and control,
intelligence, and precision targeting.
I will seek to lead Department efforts to deepen our understanding
of the growing threat to our space assets, refine our strategy for
space control, and organize and equip the Air Force to meet the threat.
In addressing these issues, I will work closely with the other services
and federal agencies to align efforts where needed.
Question. There is growing concern about the vulnerability of our
nation's space-based systems and its supporting architecture.
Do you agree, and, if so, what would be your priorities for
addressing these vulnerabilities?
Answer. Yes.
As mentioned above, I will seek to lead Department efforts to
deepen our understanding of the growing threat to our space assets,
refine our strategy for space control, and organize and equip the Air
Force to meet the threat. In addressing these issues, I will work
closely with the other services and federal agencies to align efforts
where needed.
Question. What do you perceive as the threats to our national
security space satellites?
Answer. Space is no longer a sanctuary. In any conflict, it will be
a contested environment. I was serving on the House Intelligence
Committee when China successfully tested an anti-satellite missile
nearly a decade ago. While I have not been briefed on classified
matters for several years, it is my understanding that the threat to
space assets has continued to advance.
Question. Do you support the development of offensive space control
capabilities to counter those threats?
Answer. Yes. We need to think of air, near-space and space as a
continuum that the United States must protect through all phases of
potential conflict.
Question. According to a recent study by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO), fragmented leadership has undermined the
Department's ability to deliver space capabilities to the warfighter on
time and on budget. One repeated cause for concern has been fractured
decision-making and many layers of bureaucracy.
Do you believe the existing space acquisition structure is
sufficient? If not, what changes do you believe are appropriate?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the acquisition structure for
space to ensure the warfighter is getting the capabilities we need at a
reasonable price.
Question. Do you support more competition in the launch of
Department of Defense payloads?
Answer. I believe competition can result in cost savings for the
government. At the same time, commercial launch providers may not be
able to meet launch requirements for national security space payloads
as those requirements are currently crafted.
I also believe that it is very difficult for commercial launch
providers to supply government customers at competitive prices because
of the constraints imposed by federal acquisition rules. If those rules
are the best way to serve the Air Force and the taxpayer well over the
long term, their use is justifiable. But if our processes and
regulations are impeding the accomplishment of the mission, we should
review our processes and improve them.
Question. The Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act
prohibits the use of Russian rocket engines after December 31, 2022.
Are you committed to ending United States dependence on the use of
Russian rocket engines as soon as possible, perhaps even before
December 31, 2022?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Air Force's commitment to
ending United States dependence on the Russian RD-180 engine. The Air
Force is currently working with industry to develop launch capability
and transition from the RD-180. I understand that the Air Force
estimates it will take until 2022 to have new launch capability
available. I understand that the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense
Authorization Act authorized the Air Force to buy 18 more RD-180
engines through December 31, 2022 for launches through 2024. If the
transition can be done faster than 2022, I would support an earlier
transition.
cyber and electronic warfare
Question. Cyber is an issue that cuts across many departments and
agencies of the Federal Government, from the intelligence community to
the Department of Defense, the FBI, Homeland Security, the State
Department, the Justice Department, and so on. This fact, and the
complexities associated with the cyber domain, severely challenges the
ability of diverse agencies to integrate and collaborate effectively.
Do you believe the Air Force is organized and postured
appropriately to address the full spectrum of cyber threats to Air
Force air, space, and cyberspace operations?
Answer. While the Air Force is currently providing cyber forces to
Combatant and Joint Commanders, I don't think any element of government
or the private sector is prepared for the full spectrum of cyber
threats.
Question. Do you have recommendations for improving inter-service
and inter-agency orchestration of offensive and defense cyber
capabilities?
Answer. While the strongest national capability for both cyber
offense and cyber defense is in the National Security Agency, each of
the services also have cyber forces. There likely needs to be a focus
in all three services on developing common understanding of cyber
operational capabilities, training and deployment processes as well as
developing specific areas of focus and expertise.
Question. As the Department prepares to release its new electronic
warfare (EW) strategy, and considering the Air Force has relied upon
Navy and Marine Corps EW capabilities since retiring the EF-111 Raven
aircraft in 1998:
How do you envision the future of Air Force electronic warfare
capabilities?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Air Force provides the
Defense Department's electronic warfare capability against command and
control systems with EC-130H COMPASS CALL aircraft. The Navy and Marine
Corps provide the majority of the Defense Department's electronic
warfare capacity against radar with the EA-6B and EA-18G.
Specialization by agreement among the services in the kind of
electronic warfare capabilities provided to combatant commanders makes
sense to me for assets that are important, but small in numbers.
Question. Because of the difficulty in determining and defining the
point where cyber operations and electronic warfare operations merge,
how would you organize, train, and equip the Air Force to minimize gaps
and seams with regard to threat assessment, requirements determination,
material solutions, and concept of operations development for these two
critical mission areas?
Answer. The Air Force has collocated the divisions responsible for
cyber operations, cyber requirements, and electronic warfare in the
Pentagon to allow for collaboration on requirements and programs.
While both electronic warfare and cyber operations can have similar
effects--disabling an enemy's systems rather than physically destroying
them--the method, equipment and concept of operations is quite
different.
Ultimately, a combatant commander must have an integrated system of
command and control in order to accomplish military objectives by a
variety of means.
air force information technology programs
Question. The Air Force's Air Operations Center 10.2 system upgrade
program recently experienced a Critical Change (Major Automated
Information System equivalent to a Nunn-McCurdy critical program
breach) that resulted in development costs doubling and a 3-year delay.
What major improvements would you like to see made in the Air
Force's development and deployment of major information technology
systems?
Answer. If confirmed, I will become more familiar with this
particular program.
As a general principle, information technology is likely an area
where it makes sense to take advantage of commercially available
systems, or allow greater flexibility to buy new capabilities rapidly
when it can be done securely or with reasonably low risk.
Question. How will you encourage process and cultural change in
organizations so that they maximize the benefits that new enterprise
information technology systems can offer in terms of cost savings and
efficiency?
Answer. The potential cost savings from enterprise information
technology systems and how the Air Force has organized its IT systems
is an area where I will have to learn more, if confirmed.
From my experience in higher education and child welfare,
improvements in information technology enterprise systems usually take
longer and cost more than estimated--particularly when transitioning
data and tools from legacy systems.
Though new enterprise IT systems may enable performance
improvements, they don't always improve efficiency or save money.
Question. What is the relationship between Air Force efforts at
implementing enterprise information technology programs and supporting
computing services and infrastructure to support Air Force missions,
and efforts being undertaken by the Defense Information Systems Agency?
Answer. If confirmed, I will need to learn more about how the Air
Force is modernizing its information technology systems, and how it can
improve performance and reduce cost by aligning with or relying upon
the Defense Information Systems Agency.
Question. How will you ensure that appropriate business process
reengineering is undertaken and accomplished before initiating new
business systems, IT program development, and deployment?
Answer. While business process reengineering is required by statute
before initiating a new business system acquisition, it is also just
good management practice to continually review processes to streamline
and eliminate unneeded steps at all levels of the organization.
While the motivation to reduce unnecessary costs that drives the
private sector to continuously improve processes does not exist in
government, the frustration of inefficient processes contributes to
dissatisfaction among high performing airmen and wastes taxpayer money.
If confirmed, process reengineering will be required before any
business system acquisition. More importantly, if confirmed, I would
seek to reinforce that process improvement teams and other quality
management tools are the standard way the Air Force should operate in
general, and not just when buying information technology.
Question. What role will the Air Force's research and testing
enterprise play in the development and deployment of Air Force business
IT systems?
Answer. With a much larger commercial market, business IT systems
an area where the Air Force can benefit from private sector development
and will more than likely focus on purchasing commercial products
rather than research and development of unique systems.
If confirmed, I would anticipate that the Air Force will continue
to advance science and technology in intelligent and autonomous
systems, complex data visualization, human/machine interface, computer
science, and cybersecurity.
air force-related defense industrial base
Question. What is your assessment of the systems and processes for
identifying, evaluating, and managing risk in the Air Force's organic
and commercial defense industrial base, including the munitions
industrial base?
Answer. If confirmed, I will examine these systems and processes. I
understand that Air Force policy requires acquisition leaders to assess
the industrial base throughout each program's lifecycle, and there are
defense department efforts to evaluate and ensure access to a robust
defense industrial base. I am nonetheless generally concerned that the
difficulty of doing business with the government discourages medium and
small businesses and innovative technically oriented businesses from
viewing the defense department as a desirable customer. In a reversal
from the immediate post-World War II era, there is by far more research
and development done in the commercial sector than done by the defense
department. We must ensure that the Air Force can benefit from private
sector innovation.
Question. How should Air Force acquisition leaders consider impacts
on the industrial base when addressing requirements for
recapitalization or modernization of major defense weapons systems and
munitions?
Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to ensure that the Air Force
takes industrial base impact into consideration when planning major
procurement and long term support of weapons systems and munitions.
When possible, maintaining multiple sources of supply for components
and leveraging commercially capability and capacity benefits the Air
Force.
Question. If confirmed, what changes, if any, would you pursue in
systems and processes to improve identification, monitoring,
assessment, and timely actions to ensure that risk in the Air Force-
relevant sectors of the defense industrial base is adequately managed
to develop, produce, and sustain technically superior, reliable, and
affordable weapons systems and munitions?
Answer. At this time, I do not have any changes in mind. If
confirmed, I will keep the committee informed if I identify changes
that need to be made.
air force science and technology
Question. What is your understanding and assessment of the role
that Air Force science and technology programs have played and will
play in developing capabilities for current and future Air Force
systems?
Answer. The Air Force science and technology program advances
capabilities in all mission areas. More than at any time in our
history, rapid innovation moved quickly to the battlefield will
determine who will prevail in conflict. The Air Force must continue to
invest in path-breaking research and development and get new
capabilities from the lab bench to the flight line faster than our
adversaries.
Question. How will you ensure that promising Air Force science and
technology programs will successfully transition to operational
warfighting capabilities?
Answer. We need to tighten the connection between intelligence,
operations, research and acquisition. I strongly support rapid
prototyping and experimentation on tight time cycles for new
capabilities, and using rapid acquisition authorities to provide needed
capability to the warfighter.
Question. If confirmed, what metrics would you use to judge the
value and the investment level in Air Force science and technology
programs?
Answer. Metrics for research and development are inherently
difficult and often are not related to operational success. Common
metrics used in higher education and commercial industry like patents
awarded, license agreements signed, percent of sales from new products
and royalty revenue are not really relevant to Air Force research.
Moreover, the Federal Government has more latitude to support basic
research with long term potential than the private sector, which often
operates in a maximum 3 to 5 year time horizon.
I am unaware of what metrics the Air Force currently uses to
evaluate the value of science and technology programs, or how the Air
Force prioritizes research areas.
I would expect metrics like number of people involved in research,
percent of the budget spent on research, numbers of Ph.D. students or
research scientists engaged in Air Force sponsored projects, numbers of
active projects, numbers of Small Business Innovative Research grants,
numbers of active research partnerships and average project duration
are likely monitored and measured by the Air Force research enterprise.
Given that even the best metrics are of questionable value in
research enterprises, it is probably more important to seek to develop
and protect a sub-culture in Air Force research and development that
cultivates and rewards highly creative innovators, encourages
interdisciplinary partnerships, and rewards fast-paced productive
failure.
religious guidelines
Question. In your view, do Department of Defense policies
concerning religious accommodation in the military appropriately
accommodate the free exercise of religion and other beliefs, including
individual expressions of belief, without impinging on those who have
different beliefs, including no religious belief?
Answer. Air Force commanders have a responsibility to ensure that
the spiritual needs of all airmen are met. This responsibility, unique
to the military, is carried out through the Chaplain Corps. Commanders
must avoid the official endorsement of any particular religion, while
also being able to freely exercise their own religious beliefs. Air
Force policy must continue to ensure that all airmen are able to choose
to practice their particular religion or subscribe to no religious
belief at all.
Question. Do you agree that the primary role of the military
chaplaincy is to provide for the free exercise of religion by all
servicemembers and that military chaplains are sufficiently trained to
perform or provide for this constitutional right in today's pluralistic
military community? If not, why not?
Answer. The Air Force Chaplain Corps provides spiritual care and
ensures that the spiritual needs of all airmen and their families are
met. A chaplain advises Air Force leaders on matters related to
religious, spiritual, ethical, moral and morale concerns and advocates
for the religious and spiritual needs of airmen and their families.
The Chaplain is a valuable member of the military unit as airmen
deal with not only the joys and pains of life that all of us know, but
with the unique spiritual questions and pressures combatants face. In
my experience on Active Duty and as the wife of a guardsman, military
chaplains at the unit level carry out these responsibilities well.
Question. Do you believe it is the role of military chaplains to
provide for the religious and spiritual well-being of all members of
the armed forces, regardless of their faith beliefs?
Answer. Air Force Chaplains ``provide and provide for'' the
spiritual needs of airmen and their families. If the chaplain cannot
personally ``provide'' for the need of the airmen and their family due
to tenets of their faith, they seek to ``provide for'' the need of the
airmen and the family.
Chaplains provide religious worship and rites, pastoral care,
counseling and spiritual care for airmen. Chaplains will not perform
duties incompatible with their faith and noncombatant status.
Question. Do you believe that current policies provide sufficient
guidance to military chaplains who conduct non-religious command
training where attendance is required or encouraged to allow chaplains
to discuss their religious faith anecdotally and respectfully in a
pluralistic setting to support the training objectives?
Answer. I am not familiar with the specific details of current
guidance to military chaplains. It is my understanding that Air Force
guidance makes clear that chaplains adhere to the tenets of their faith
and they are not required to participate in religious activities,
including public prayer, which are inconsistent with their faith
tradition.
sexual assault prevention and response
Question. What is your assessment of the Air Force's sexual assault
prevention and response program?
Answer. I served on the House Armed Services Committee in 2003 when
the Air Force Academy sexual assault scandal led to intense
Congressional scrutiny. The Fowler Commission, which investigated the
Air Force Academy scandal, concluded that a systematic failure in Air
Force leadership helped foster a breakdown in values which led to the
pervasiveness of sexual assaults.
In the almost 15 years since that scandal, I think the Air Force
has made significant progress in three areas.
First, the systems in place to support and respond to victims are
better and are more widely known. The procedure that allows airmen to
initially get care without having to commit to participating in a
criminal investigation as a victim is widely understood and used. The
Air Force is consolidating violence response, recovery and care under
the Air Force Surgeon General to provide airmen and commanders
comprehensive clinical and non-clinical response support, especially
during a crisis.
Second, the education and training of airmen about sexual assault
prevention is standard practice and widely deployed.
Third, Commander accountability for command climate, as well as
responsibility for the thorough and impartial investigation of and
response to allegations of assault have been reinforced.
While it is difficult to assess, the increase in sexual assault
reporting in the Air Force over the past few years is, I think, a
positive sign of increased trust in the system that did not exist with
respect to the Academy and Air Force leadership in 2003.
Question. What additional steps would you take, if confirmed, to
address the problem of sexual assaults in the Air Force?
Answer. If confirmed, my objective will be to reduce the incidence
of sexual assault in the Air Force, to ensure victims are cared for, to
ensure allegations are investigated properly, to ensure perpetrators of
sexual assault are appropriately punished, and to ensure that
retaliation against victims who report is not tolerated.
I am aware that the Air Force is seeking to get beyond
``awareness'' to implement prevention strategies that have proven
results, like bystander intervention training. Programs like bystander
training and focusing on leadership excellence at the squadron level is
intended to address the culture and climate issues, rather than just
the manifestation of harassment, assault or retaliation.
As a university president responsible for implementing the
requirements of Title IX on my campus, I am familiar with bystander
education and think that this may help reduce the incidence of sexual
assault in the Air Force by influencing the peer culture in Air Force
units. As part of this effort, I am aware that the Air Force is in the
process of hiring a prevention specialist at the installation level who
will be responsible for implementing sexual assault and violence
prevention activities that have proven to be effective. If confirmed, I
would support this initiative.
Question. What is your view of the adequacy of the training and
resources the Air Force has in place to prevent sexual assaults and to
investigate and respond to allegations of sexual assault?
Answer. My understanding of awareness and prevention training is
addressed in the previous answer.
The Air Force has Special Victims Investigation and Prosecution
teams which are formed to respond to sexual assault cases. These units
receive comprehensive training to investigate and respond to
allegations of sexual assault.
Question. What is your understanding of the adequacy of Air Force
resources and programs to provide victims of sexual assault the
medical, psychological, and legal help they need?
Answer. The Air Force has a Special Victims' Counsel Program to
provide legal representation to victims of sexual assault.
The Air Force also has a Special Victim Investigation and
Prosecution capability to ensure that investigations comply with best
practices and victims get needed support. The Special Victim
Investigation and Prosecution capability is made up of specially
trained Air Force Office of Special Investigation agents, judge
advocates (including trial counsel), paralegals, and victim liaisons.
Air Force personnel in these positions are specially trained and
qualified individuals assigned on a case-by-case basis.
Once an investigation is initiated, a Victim Witness Assistance
Program liaison is assigned to help the victim to navigate the military
justice system, provide the victim case information, help the victim
use military and civilian community resources, and facilitate access to
legal assistance.
Medical and psychological help for victims is consolidated under
the office of the Surgeon General.
Question. What is your assessment of the Department of the Air
Force special victim's counsel program?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Air Force began the Special
Victims' Counsel program in 2013 and that this program has helped to
build trust in the military justice process. It gives victims more
meaningful input on the disposition and resolution of their cases.
Since 2013, over 2,800 clients, of which 83 have been children,
have been represented by special victim's counsel. According to
anonymous survey results provided to clients at the end of the case, 99
percent of respondents would recommend a special victim's counsel to
others who have reported a sexual assault and 99 percent were satisfied
with their representation.
Question. What is your assessment of the potential impact, if any,
of proposals to remove the disposition authority from military
commanders over violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice,
including sexual assaults?
Answer. The foundation of military discipline is the commander's
authority to set standards, to require airmen to meet those standards,
and to hold airmen appropriately accountable when they fail to meet
standards. The military justice system is the commander's ultimate tool
to ensure a disciplined force. Removing commanders' disposition
authority undermines the effectiveness of the military justice system.
Commanders do not and cannot make their decisions in a legal
vacuum. Instead, every commander is informed and advised by his or her
staff judge advocate throughout the life of a case, from report and
investigation through disposition and adjudication. The military
justice system depends on both a judge advocate who advises a commander
and the commander who then decides what happens with a case. This
system best ensures fairness, justice, and discipline and keeps the
commander responsible and accountable for the climate, training,
prevention and response to infractions in the unit.
Our primary objective should be to reduce the incidence of sexual
assault. Command responsibility is vital to the success of that effort.
Question. What is your assessment of the Air Force's protections
against retaliation or reprisal for reporting sexual assault?
Answer. All reports of sexual assault as well as all reports of
retaliation or reprisal for reporting sexual assault or any crime must
be investigated. Substantiated allegations must be referred for
appropriate command action.
Recognizing the issues and the importance of the issues surrounding
retaliation, the Air Force has already taken significant steps to
prevent and respond to retaliation, especially related to reports of
sexual assault.
Sexual Assault Response Coordinators, Victim Advocates and Special
Victims' Counsel are able to identify victims' concerns about
retaliation and address them early and effectively through the
installation Case Management Group--the support system led by
commanders.
Complaints about retaliation can also be made to and handled by
command, AF Office of Special Investigations, the staff judge advocate,
the inspector general, or the Equal Opportunity office.
child abuse in military families
Question. Recent press reports indicate that the number of
incidents of child abuse in military families has increased.
What is your understanding of the extent of this issue in the Air
Force, and if confirmed, what actions will you take to address it?
Answer. I have been informed that the rate of child maltreatment in
the Air Force has remained stable at a low rate for over a decade.
The Air Force Family Advocacy Program provides clinical services,
safety planning, risk management, prevention services and advocacy to
military families. Early identification and reporting to the Family
Advocacy Program is the key to keeping children and families safe.
As a former foster and adoptive parent and the former Cabinet
Secretary for the child welfare system in New Mexico, the issues
surrounding child abuse and neglect and responses to it are familiar to
me. If confirmed, I will continue to assess the effectiveness of these
programs.
military health care
Question. Section 702 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017 transferred oversight and management of military
hospitals and clinics from the military services to the Defense Health
Agency (DHA).
How would you ensure a rapid and efficient transfer of the
operations of Air Force medical facilities to the DHA?
Answer. I understand that planning for the transition is underway
and that the Air Force is committed to supporting a timely transfer of
operations as required by the law. If confirmed, I will ensure an
efficient transfer of oversight and management of hospital and clinic
operations.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
reduces its medical headquarters staffs and infrastructure to reflect
the changing scope and size of its mission?
Answer. If confirmed, I will become more familiar with this
transition. It is my understanding that the Air Force and the other
services are planning the transition to Defense Health Agency
management of hospitals and clinics. If confirmed, I will rely on the
Surgeon General to ensure there is a fully developed plan that
identifies the specific functions and assets to be transferred to the
Defense Health Agency or eliminated as redundant. The Air Force Surgeon
General will be assigned appropriate staff at the headquarters level to
perform remaining responsibilities.
Question. What is your assessment of the quality of health care and
access to health care provided to Air Force military personnel and
their families?
Answer. It is my understanding that satisfaction with quality of
health care delivered at Air Force military treatment facilities has
consistently scored over 95 percent with the military health system
goal being 90 percent. Satisfaction with inpatient care has
consistently been between the 75th and 90th percentile.
I also understand that the Air Force is in its second year of a
``Trusted Care'' initiative that applies the same principles used in
aviation safety to the goal of eliminating instances of harm to
patients. It is my understanding that there is a significant reduction
of ``harm events'' with strong performance against national healthcare
benchmarks.
Finally, to improve healthcare access, the Air Force has
implemented policies to increase the number of same day appointments
while streamlining or eliminating specialty care referrals.
Question. If confirmed, how would you work with the Air Force
Surgeon General to improve the healthcare experience for Air Force
military personnel and their families?
Answer. If confirmed, I will rely on the Air Force Surgeon General
to continue to operate an exceptional healthcare system using best
practices for safety, quality, and access.
More than one million patients entrust the Air Force with their
healthcare. Through continuous process improvements and development of
performance management metrics, the Air Force Medical Service continues
to meet or exceed most of the Military Health System benchmarks for
patient satisfaction and outcomes.
I will continue to support this system.
suicide prevention
Question. What is your assessment of the Air Force's suicide
prevention program?
Answer. Suicide is a terrible tragedy for the individual and for so
many others whose lives are forever changed--family, friends, and
colleagues. It is also a loss for the Air Force. Too often, it leaves
people wondering what they could have done, or how they failed to see
the pain of someone close.
While the Air Force is committed to suicide prevention, and has a
number of initiatives underway to address it, I am unfamiliar with the
effectiveness or deployment of these efforts. If confirmed, I will be
fully briefed on these programs to evaluate what else should be done.
Sadly, as a university president, the challenges of depression and
other mental health issues and suicide prevention are not unfamiliar to
me. Suicide among the under 25 age group is a major issue in society at
large.
Question. If confirmed, what role would you play in shaping suicide
prevention programs and policies for the Department of the Air Force to
prevent suicides and increase the resiliency of airmen and their
families?
Answer. If confirmed, I would support the continued development and
support of effective suicide prevention strategies by the command
leadership and the Surgeon General.
senior military and civilian accountability
Question. While representative of a small number of individuals in
DOD, reports of abuses of rank and authority by senior military and
civilian leaders and failures to perform up to accepted standards are
frequently received. Whistleblowers and victims of such abuses often
report that they felt that no one would pay attention to or believe
their complaints. Accusations of unduly lenient treatment of senior
officers and senior officials against whom accusations have been
substantiated are also frequently heard.
What are your views regarding the appropriate standard of
accountability for senior civilian and military leaders of the
Department?
Answer. I expect senior leaders to lead by example and uphold the
high standards of behavior we expect of every airmen. Allegations of
inappropriate behavior by senior leaders will be taken seriously,
investigated fairly and dealt with appropriately.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
senior leaders of the Air Force are held accountable for their actions
and performance?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to ensure that allegations
are investigated and that substantiated allegations are referred for
appropriate command action.
base closure and realignments
Question. The Department of Defense has repeatedly requested a Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round.
Do you believe another BRAC round is necessary? If so, why?
Answer. I understand the Air Force believes it has significant
excess infrastructure. I have not yet reached the same conclusion based
on the information I have seen. If confirmed, I will review the
supporting analysis carefully.
Question. If you are confirmed, and if Congress were to authorize
another BRAC round, how would you set priorities for infrastructure
reduction and consolidation within the Department of the Air Force?
Answer. If confirmed, and Congress were to authorize a DOD BRAC
round, I would direct the Department to evaluate the operational needs
of the Air Force to accomplish the missions that the nation expects of
us. I believe threat drives strategy, strategy drives force structure
and force structure drives infrastructure needs. I would also direct an
assessment of projected needs taking into account new and emerging
technologies including increasing numbers of remotely piloted vehicles,
high performance fighters, joint operations training, and new weapons
systems on the distant horizon that may require different training and
basing options than we have today.
Question. What is your understanding of the responsibilities of the
Air Force in working with local communities with respect to property
disposal if Congress were to authorize another BRAC round?
Answer. In the wake of previous closures, the Air Force worked with
local communities so that base closure could result in redevelopments
into trade ports, industrial, recreational, and residential areas. This
effort to redevelop was successful in some communities and less
successful in others. The Air Force must also address any environmental
cleanup responsibilities associated with base closure.
Question. It has been noted repeatedly that the 2005 BRAC round
resulted in major and unanticipated implementation costs and saved far
less money than originally estimated.
What is your understanding of why such cost growth and lower
realized savings occurred?
Answer. I was skeptical of cost saving estimates while serving in
the House of Representatives before the 2005 BRAC round. At that time,
the Defense Department could not provide a clear explanation of the
basis for their cost estimates or a clear accounting of what savings
had been realized from the previous round of BRAC.
Question. How do you believe such issues could be addressed in a
future BRAC round?
Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to improve the quality of
analysis done on this issue so that the Defense Department and the
Congress can make good decisions informed by rigorous analysis and
validated data. In that way, we can make better decisions to support
the mission at the lowest cost for the taxpayer.
operational energy
Question. In his responses to the advance policy questions from
this committee, Secretary Mattis talked about his time in Iraq, and how
he called upon the Department to ``unleash us from the tether of
fuel.'' He stated that ``units would be faced with unacceptable
limitations because of their dependence on fuel'' and resupply efforts
``made us vulnerable in ways that were exploited by the enemy.''
Do you believe this issue remains a challenge for the Department of
Defense?
Answer. Yes. Supporting forward deployed troops and bases with fuel
and water is a very expensive Air Force mission.
Question. If you are confirmed, what specific steps will you take
to unleash the Air Force from the tether of fuel?
Answer. I will support the continued research, development and
deployment of technologies that reduce fuel use and turn waste into
fuel and water at forward locations. I must recuse myself from
particular matters involving the research being done at the South
Dakota School of Mines.
Question. If you are confirmed, what priorities would you establish
for defense investments in and deployment of operational energy
technologies to increase the combat capabilities of warfighters, reduce
logistical burdens, and enhance mission assurance on our installations?
Answer. If confirmed I would continue to support a range of energy
initiatives, particularly related to reducing the logistical burdens of
energy supply at forward locations through advanced research and
development.
On our installations, I would expect the Air Force to continue to
enhance energy assurance by reducing reliance on single external
sources of supply and improving energy efficiency in ways that save
money. Efforts that provide the Air Force with the ability to continue
operations, recover from energy interruptions, and sustain the mission
are priorities.
Question. If you are confirmed, how will you consider operational
forces' energy needs and vulnerabilities during training exercises,
operational plans, and wargames?
Answer. I understand that war games and studies have concluded that
while U.S. Forces are considerably more lethal than in the mid-1990s,
they consume more fuel. Adversary attacks on fuel storage and resupply
systems should be factored into training exercises, operational plans,
and wargames.
energy and acquisition
Question. How can our acquisition systems better incorporate the
use of energy in military platforms, and how, if at all, are
assessments of future requirements taking into account energy needs as
a key performance parameter?
Answer. When we buy systems, energy use should be a consideration.
energy resiliency in the fight against isil
Question. Back in July after a coup attempt, the Turkish Government
cut off power to Incirlik Air Base, which is the primary platform for
launching coalition airstrikes in the fight against ISIL. For roughly a
week, deployed units had to operate relying backup generators, which is
expensive and is certainly not the preferred method of operation given
the demanding tempo of sorties against ISIL. Just last month, the Air
Force described an incident in the past (via open source) in which a
RPA mission based in the U.S. was flying a targeting mission overseas.
Because of a power outage stateside, the RPA feed temporarily lost
visual and the target was able to get ``away and is able to continue
plotting against the U.S. and our allies.''
If you are confirmed, how will you specifically address and make
energy resiliency and mission assurance a priority for the Air Force,
to including acquiring and deploying sustainable and renewable energy
assets to improve combat capability for deployed units on our military
installations and forward operating bases?
Answer. Ensuring the Air Force has the energy it requires where and
when it needs it is critical to the mission. I am aware that recently
the Air Force issued its overarching policy for energy projects. One of
the priorities is to make sure critical missions and capabilities
continue to have the energy to function. If confirmed, I will continue
to support this effort.
Question. Do you support the J-4's enforcement of the energy
supportability key performance parameter in the requirements process?
Answer. The energy key performance parameter is mandated by statute
and Defense Department directive for all new acquisition programs that
have an operational energy impact. The Air Force will comply with the
requirement.
Question. Section 2805 of the Fiscal Year 2017 NDAA gave the
Department new authority to plan and fund military construction
projects directly related to energy resiliency and mission assurance,
to help address and mitigate against incidents like Incirlik, not to
mention secure micro-grids to help prevent cyber-attacks.
If you are confirmed, will you commit to use section 2805 to
support mission critical functions, and address known energy
vulnerabilities with projects that are resilient and renewable?
Answer. Yes.
environment
Question. If confirmed, will you comply with environmental
regulations, laws and guidance from the Environmental Protection
Agency?
Answer. Yes.
Question. If confirmed, will you make the same level of investment
for DOD's Environmental Research Programs?
Answer. I understand that the 5 year defense program plans level
funding for environmental research. While I am not familiar with the
focus and results of the environmental research program, in general, it
is my perception that the Air Force should increase its research and
development efforts.
Question. If confirmed, will you work with the Department of
Interior and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to find cooperative ways
to ensure military readiness and protect the environment on and around
U.S. military installations?
Answer. Yes.
management and development of the senior executive service (ses)
Question. What is your vision for the management and development of
the Air Force senior executive workforce, especially in the critically
important areas of acquisition, financial management, and the
scientific and technical fields?
Answer. If confirmed, I will assess the current Senior Executive
Talent Management and Development processes and ensure our executives
are equipped to lead and manage the Air Force. In particular, I will
focus on the acquisition, financial management, and the scientific and
technical fields.
Question. Do you believe that the Air Force has the number of
senior executives it needs, with the proper skills to manage the
Department into the future?
Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate if the Air Force has the
right number of Senior Executives and if they have the skills required
to successfully lead the Air Force.
congressional oversight
Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
appropriate committees of the Congress are able to receive testimony,
briefings, and other communications of information.
Do you agree, if confirmed for this high position, to appear before
this Committee and other appropriate committees of the Congress?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, if confirmed, to appear before this
Committee, or designated members of this Committee, and provide
information, subject to appropriate and necessary security protection,
with respect to your responsibilities as the Secretary of the Air
Force?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree to ensure that testimony, briefings and
other communications of information are provided to this Committee and
its staff and other appropriate Committees?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree to provide documents, including copies of
electronic forms of communication, in a timely manner when requested by
a duly constituted Committee, or to consult with the Committee
regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in providing
such documents?
Answer. Yes.
Supplemental Question
abusive on-line conduct
Question. Recently, the Committee considered testimony on reports
that certain members of an unofficial Marine Corps Facebook group were
found to be posting degrading comments and sharing nude photos of
female servicemembers. Members of the group included a number of Active
Duty servicemembers, former military members, and military retirees.
What is the current Air Force policy for use of social media by
airmen?
Answer. Specific to social media, I understand that the Air Force
has testified that its social media policy does not tolerate bullying,
hazing, or any instance where an airman inflicts any form of physical
or psychological abuse that degrades, insults, dehumanizes, or injures
another airman regardless of the method of communication. The Air Force
expects airmen to sustain a culture of trust, dignity and respect.
Question. In your view, is this policy adequate to address abuses
such as what occurred in the Marines United incident?
Answer. I am not in a position to make that determination at this
time. I understand that the Air Force is currently reviewing its
policy, practice, and legal authorities in this area. If confirmed, I
will consider the analysis and recommendations that result from the Air
Force review.
Question. If confirmed, what action would you take to ensure that
members of the Air Force are not subjected to abusive on-line conduct?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Air Force has policy, legal
authority and training to prevent and to respond to abuses. I will
expect leaders at all levels to reinforce the expectation that everyone
is to be treated with dignity and respect.
Question. What legislative authorities, if any, do you believe are
necessary to address this problem?
Answer. At this time, I do not have any recommendation for
additional legislative authority. I am aware the Department of Defense
and the Air Force are reviewing current law and may recommend
additional authority. If confirmed, I will participate in this review.
------
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Roger F. Wicker
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
1. Senator Wicker. Dr. Wilson, earlier this week, General Curtis M.
Scaparrotti, USA, Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, testified before
our House counterparts that--relative to Russia--United States European
Command (EUCOM) has prioritized ``ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance] collection platforms'' to improve timely threat
information. He went on to say he needed ISR platforms in ``greater
numbers than he has now''.
In the past few years, this committee has heard very similar and
specific refrains from other combatant commanders (COCOMs),
specifically from United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), United
States Africa Command (AFRICOM), and United States Pacific Command
(PACOM). Some of those requests infer need for capacity, some
capability. Either way, the consistent theme is a greater need for ISR,
and in many cases, the theatre of operations at issue can make meeting
those needs quite costly.
The Air Force is a significant provider to the COCOMS of ISR
platforms, primarily through unmanned aerial systems. What is your
approach to the Air Force ISR platform inventory?
Dr. Wilson. As more and higher quality intelligence, surveillance
and reconnaissance capabilities have become available, the demand for
them has increased geometrically. Information that, in the Gulf War 26
years ago, might have been available to a two-star air commander in a
headquarters, is now available to captains in tactical fights.
If confirmed, I will focus my efforts in two areas. First, cost-
effective expansion of ISR capabilities. Second, effective systems for
tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination so that the
military gets maximum value out of ISR platforms and the information we
gather from them.
As with other aircraft, the shortage of remotely piloted aircraft
pilots is also an issue we will have to address. I do support the
recruitment and training of enlisted remotely piloted vehicle pilots.
2. Senator Wicker. Dr. Wilson, what assurances can you provide that
you will thoroughly investigate all options in development for
affordable, ultra-long endurance ISR platforms to better serve the
strong demands of our combatant commanders for additional ISR?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will continue to evaluate cost-
effective options to meet requirements for future intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance platforms.
ISR is an area where we need to think about ``endurance'' applied
to the architecture and not just individual systems or nodes. What
matters is timely information from the ISR system to the warfighter,
not what ``bird'' the information comes from.
This is an area where experimentation, close cooperation with
industry, and system integration could get a lot more help to the
warfighter at a more modest cost. If confirmed, I look forward to
learning more about how the Air Force is analyzing these possibilities
and supporting efforts to consider ``outside the box'' solutions.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
future joint pacific alaska range complex investments
3. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, you testified about the importance
of readiness in order to best counter near-peer threats. One of the
best way to do this is with realistic training, like in Alaska's Joint
Pacific Alaska Range Complex (JPARC). There is at lease $100-150
million in threat upgrades that would improve the JPARC's threat
density to better replicate Integrated Air Defense System (IADS) of
today and tomorrow. What are your thoughts on increasing the threat
density in the JPARC, when do you think that might occur, and can I get
your commitment to look at making this critical investment in the
JPARC?
Dr. Wilson. Investment in operational training infrastructure is
vital to readiness. The JPARC is one essential component of that
infrastructure.
It is my understanding that there are plans to add ``Joint Threat
Emitters'' followed by variants of our newest and most capable high
fidelity threat emitters, the Advanced Radar Threat System to the
JPARC.
I also understand the Air Force is systematically upgrading many of
the legacy threat systems currently in place at JPARC to more capable
and reliable digital systems.
oconus kc-46
4. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, General Stephen M. Goldfein, USAF,
Chief of Staff of the Air Force, has committed to take a hard look at
Alaska for Outside the Continental United States (OCONUS) basing of the
KC-46. The Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
outlines criteria that the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) should
consider when basing the OCONUS KC-46. What is your opinion on the need
to modernize the Northern Air Bridge, and can I get your commitment to
take a hard look at Alaska for the OCONUS basing of the KC-46 and to
strongly consider those factors in the Fiscal Year 2017 NDAA?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, I believe Alaska should be considered when the Air
Force executes its strategic basing process for the next beddown of
OCONUS K-46 aircraft as the Northern Air Bridge is extremely important
to global operations. Alaska will get a hard look.
As I mentioned in answers to questions during my hearing, when it
comes to basing decisions, I support the strategic basing process that
evaluates locations based on an objective assessment of what the
warfighter needs. I will support a process that is fair and impartial
and I know that, for every state that is happy with a basing decision,
there will likely be 49 states that are not happy.
168th air refueling wing active association
5. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, the Fiscal Year 2015 NDAA directed
the Air Force to conduct a business case analysis on converting the
168th Air Refueling Wing (ARW) to an Active association. What is your
opinion on this conversion and can I get your commitment to work with
the Alaska National Guard on potentially forming this association?
Dr. Wilson. Although I have not had an opportunity to review the
analysis, my understanding is that the intent was to find a way to meet
all Alaskan area air refueling requirements. If confirmed, I look
forward to making sure Air Mobility Command works with the Alaska
National Guard and others to understand the requirements and ensure we
are meeting them in the most effective and efficient manner possible.
Certainly, consideration should be given to an association if it makes
the most sense.
f-35a to eielson air force base
6. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed, will you continue to
support strategic basing decisions and the record of decisions of your
predecessors, including the beddown of the F-35s at Eielson Air Force
Base, and will you also work to--assuming funding is made available--to
keep the current beddown timeline for Eielson Air Force Base?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
national guard associations
7. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, the Air Force is currently looking
at unit associations with the Alaska National Guard for three separate
units--the 168th ARW, the Alaska Guard combat rescue triad (210th,
211th, and the 212th), and the future F-35A beddown. If confirmed, will
you commit to taking a close and detailed look at each of these
associations, which I believe will significantly benefit both Active
and Guard forces?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I look forward to exploring opportunities
like this that can increase effectiveness and efficiency. I appreciate
the strategic importance of basing in Alaska for both local rescue
capabilities and western looking contingencies.
small business contracting
8. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, in March 2015, the Department of
Defense (DOD) issued a report to Congress, the ``Assessment of
Justification and Approval Requirements Implemented Under Section 811
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010
(``section 811'').'' The report found that in fiscal year 2014 no 8(a)
sole-source contracts were awarded that required an 8(a) justification
and approval (J&A). DOD stated it could not determine the cause for
this decline. There have been numerous reports from 8(a) firms that the
decline in awards is due to tougher J&A standards for and scrutiny on
the firms themselves, not the sole-source contracts that could be
awarded to these firms. If confirmed, how would you encourage DOD to
work more effectively with Native community-owned contractors,
particularly regarding 8(a) sole-source contracts?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I look forward to learning more about the
status of the 8(a) program and removing barriers to small and medium
sized businesses generally. If confirmed, I would expect the Air Force
Small Business and Acquisition Program Offices to work together to
identify and fix inappropriate policy barriers and seek contract
opportunities that fit the 8(a) program requirements.
9. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, section 811 does not prohibit
direct awards greater than $22 million (adjusted from $20 million due
to inflation), it has encouraged greater--if not excessive--levels of
approval for comparatively small contracts. This unnecessarily high
level of approval then led to zero contract awards above $22 million to
8(a) corporations, according to a 2014 Government Accountability Office
(GAO) report. How would you encourage such awards above $22 million,
when appropriate, to Native community-owned contractors given the
additional scrutiny experienced by these firms?
Dr. Wilson. I would expect that Air Force Small Business and
Acquisition Program Offices to work together to explore policy and
opportunities that fit the 8(a) program requirements.
10. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, do you agree that section 811,
similar to the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA), allows for the
approval of a justification for an 8(a) sole-source to be approved by
someone other than the Head of Agency and can the Head of Agency have
the legal ability to delegate the approval authority for an 8(a)
justification?
Dr. Wilson. It is my understanding that section 811 established
statutory limits and any existing delegations to approval authority
still exist.
11. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, shouldn't the level of agency
approval by the appropriate agency official be tied to the dollar value
of the contracts, as is done under CICA?
Dr. Wilson. It is my understanding that current approval levels as
established remain and are still followed within the Agency. If
confirmed, I don't come to this position with a predetermined view of
what the approval levels should be for this program.
12. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Wilson, while section 811 does not
require a ``Head of Agency'' approval for sole source contracts over
$22 million, DOD--to include the Air Force--has interpreted it to
require that level of approval. In addition, current law establishes
higher levels of approval commensurate with higher contract values. If
confirmed and given the authority of the Secretary, do you commit to
streamline the approval of contracts above the $22 million threshold to
below the ``Head of Agency'' level and to the approval levels that are
already matched to the contract risk incurred by the Air Force? If so,
will you also issue a memo to contracting officers within the Air Force
informing them of your decision to establish that authority at levels
that are appropriate to the size and risk of the contracts in question,
consistent with what is already in law?
Dr. Wilson. It is my understanding that current approval levels, as
established, remain and are still followed within the Air Force. If
confirmed, I would expect that Air Force Small Business and Acquisition
Program Offices would work together to continuously evaluate policies
and procedures to improve results consistent with the law.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator David Perdue
joint surveillance and target attack radar system recap
13. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, under the current Air Force plan,
the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) fleet is
facing at least a year-long capability gap, and there will be nearly a
decade with a fleet below 10 aircraft, which means tiered readiness and
degradation of primary flight training. What do you plan to do to avoid
a capability gap?
Dr. Wilson. Based on my understanding, you are correct that there
will likely be a capability gap as the E-8C JSTARS are retired. The
demand for this capability will likely not decline. If confirmed, I
will consider whether there are options to minimize this potential gap.
14. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, given the operational demand for
these platforms and the cost of keeping the legacy airframes flying,
assuming Congress provides the resources, can you assure me the Air
Force will make a decision and move this program forward by making a
contract award in fiscal year 2017?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed I will look into the plan for contract
award.
15. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, is the JSTARS Recap one of the
crucial Air Force programs that could be delayed by failure to pass a
full-year Defense Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2017?
Dr. Wilson. My understanding is that failure to pass a full-year
Defense Appropriations bill will affect the JSTARS Recapitalization
Radar Risk Reduction effort and put Initial Operational Capability in
fiscal year 2024 at risk.
16. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, could the Air Force accelerate the
program once a decision has been made on the winning bid?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will look into options for potential
acceleration.
17. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, is there an annual cost related to
delay in executing the Air Force acquisition strategy?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will look into the program details and
can identify any cost related to delay at that time.
18. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, are there cost savings associated
with acceleration?
Dr. Wilson. It is my understanding that the outcome of source
selection will provide insight into potential cost saving
opportunities.
19. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, do you agree that the JSTARS Recap
must remain a top modernization priority to meet combatant commander
requirements and that further delay has a negative impact on meeting
those requirements?
Dr. Wilson. JSTARS Recapitalization is an Air Force modernization
priority. With support from Congress, the Air Force will continue to
execute the JSTARS program in order to meet combatant commander
requirements.
depot maintenance
20. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, the Air Force has maintained a
three-depot strategy for some time now. Will you continue to support a
requirement for three depots?
Dr. Wilson. It is my understanding that the three depots are
integrated and give the country capacity irrespective of what is
available in the private sector. While these requirements can change
over time, if confirmed, I come with no predisposition to change the
three-depot structure.
a-10 replacement
21. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, due to budget pressure and
sequestration, the Air Force decided to prematurely retire the A-10, a
platform that performs close air support to the warfighter. The Air
Force is still in need of a suitable replacement for the light attack
fleet. Can you talk about your plan for replacing the A-10 fleet and
ensuring we have the right platform to perform the vital close air
support mission?
Dr. Wilson. The Air Force has made the commitment to keep the A-10
through 2021 and I support that decision. I am aware that the Air Force
is also interested in an experiment to evaluate light attack aircraft
for uncontested environments. If confirmed, I will review the Air Force
plan on the future of the A-10.
national airborne operations center replacement
22. Senator Perdue. Dr. Wilson, I was fortunate to recently tour
the National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC), the E4-B. In case of
national emergency or destruction of ground command and control
centers, this aircraft provides a highly survivable command, control,
and communications center to direct U.S. Forces, execute emergency war
orders, and coordinate actions by civil authorities. This is a unique
and very vital asset, and there is concern that a possible split of
missions of the NAOC amongst separate future aircraft could cause a
loss of functionality and interplay between the E-4B's current mission
sets. What are your views on the E4-B replacement program, and will you
ensure that any replacement program ensures that the Air Force will
retain the ability to perform the full E-4B mission set?
Dr. Wilson. I understand that the Air Force is conducting an
analysis of alternatives for the replacement of the National Airborne
Operations Center. The analysis is due in fiscal year 2018. If
confirmed, I will keep the committee informed on the results of this
review.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Ted Cruz
status of forces/fiscal year 2017 appropriations request
23. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, last week, Major General Martin
briefed my staff on the Air Force's portion of the $30 billion fiscal
year 2017 request for additional appropriations. When compared with
where things stood in 1991 during Operation Desert Storm, he said that
the Air Force today has 59 percent fewer fighter squadrons, 30 percent
fewer people, and 37 percent fewer aircraft. He also noted that current
aircrew readiness is at near all-time lows. These numbers are striking
and paint a stark picture of our current ability to project power. Can
you describe for us how the fiscal year 2017 budget amendment will fill
current readiness challenges?
Dr. Wilson. The Air Force is the smallest, oldest, and least
prepared in its history. Since the enactment of the Budget Control Act
in 2011, the size of the Air Force has decreased further and the demand
for air and space power has increased.
The fiscal year 2017 budget amendment will increase Air Force
topline by $7.4 billion ($6.8 billion base/$.6 billion Overseas
Contingency Operations). Combined with the fiscal year 2017
Appropriations Bill, it will help readiness recovery, fill critical
gaps and improve future lethality.
The funding will allow the Air Force to sustain end strength growth
to address manpower shortfalls in maintenance, pilots, ISR, cyber and
Battlefield Airmen. The Air Force will add needed funding for weapon
system sustainment, and upgrades to multiple platforms to keep our
current fleet viable. Space and cyber operational shortfalls will be
addressed and we will invest in infrastructure that directly impacts
readiness and training. Funds will also be used to address threats to
base resiliency and cyber communications, as well as improvements to
the nuclear enterprise.
My major concern is that, if we have a continuing resolution for
fiscal year 2017 rather than an appropriations bill with only five
months remaining in the fiscal year, the Air Force would likely have to
suspend non-combat flying hours, freeze civilian hiring, slow filling
critical career fields, slow or stop depot level maintenance, and
suspend starting new programs. The pilot shortage that is already a
problem would become worse, as would readiness levels.
We won't get out of this in a year. If confirmed, I will work with
the Secretary of Defense and the Congress to get beyond the Budget
Control Act and restore the force.
24. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, why is it so vital to fund this
amendment and increase the Air Force budget, regardless of spending
increases in other areas of the Government?
Dr. Wilson. A primary responsibility of the Federal Government is
to provide for the common defense. Without security, it is not possible
to enjoy our liberties.
Today's Air Force is the smallest, oldest and least ready in our
history.
This comes at a time when we are a leader in the global response
against ISIS and facing a resurgent Russia, rising China, destabilizing
Iran and unpredictable North Korea. The Joint Force requires airpower
to be successful and demand exceeds our ability to support the fight.
Our Air Force is too small for what the nation expects of us.
As competitors continue to close the capability gap, we must
recover readiness and invest in future capabilities that allow our
Airmen to win decisively. Passing the Fiscal Year 2017 Appropriations
Bill and supporting the budget amendment is a first step to provide the
Air Force that our Joint Force requires and that our nation expects.
25. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, the Senate Armed Services Committee
has received several briefings that highlighted the efforts our near-
peer adversaries are taking to close the military capabilities gap we
have long held; their efforts are deeply concerning. What are the Air
Force's plans to strike a balance between current readiness and future
modernization in order to reestablish a capabilities gap?
Dr. Wilson. I share Secretary Mattis' priorities: improving
warfighter readiness, and building a larger and more lethal force. If
confirmed, I will work with him to ensure we appropriately balance the
needs of today and the demands of tomorrow.
26. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, how will you envision making that
happen while also ensuring that existing commitments to airmen and
their families are upheld?
Dr. Wilson. As a leader, I am values driven, mission focused and
people oriented. People are the strength of the Air Force. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress to ensure we balance
our priorities while always keeping Airmen and their families in mind.
anti-access/area denial
27. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, the Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD)
challenge is not confined to the South China Sea, as evidenced by
Russia's attempts to expand its influence in its near abroad with
interventions in Georgia and Ukraine, and contentious behavior in and
around the Baltic Sea.
Operating in an A2/AD environment will require superior technology,
well-trained personnel, and the combined military efforts of the
Services. What is the Air Force's role if it were necessary to conduct
combat operations in a well-defined A2/AD theatre?
Dr. Wilson. You are correct in your assessment of air space
challenges beyond just the China Sea. In any combat operation, the Air
Force must gain and maintain air superiority. The establishment of air
superiority then allows ground and other forces to achieve tactical,
operational, and strategic objectives.
As I mentioned in my confirmation hearing, we sometimes take air
superiority for granted. The last time an American ground troop was
killed by enemy aircraft was April 15, 1953--in the Korean War. With
adversaries modernizing and our readiness to fight a near-peer
competitor at a low, we cannot take this for granted.
28. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, can you describe the capability and
discriminators that 5th generation aircraft, such as the F-35, have
over the current legacy fleets and what impact they will have on future
air superiority?
Dr. Wilson. Fifth generation fighter aircraft are more survivable
and more lethal than fourth generation aircraft. Discriminating
attributes include stealth, maneuverability, advanced integrated
avionics, and networked interoperability between aircraft and other
systems.
29. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, do you believe that current fourth
generation aircraft will be as survivable in the robust A2/AD
environments that are being established?
Dr. Wilson. No. Adversaries are modernizing their defenses in ways
that will make current fighter aircraft more vulnerable.
30. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, do you believe that the United States
has sufficient capacity to fight in more than one theatre if a crisis
were to erupt today and, if not, what force levels are necessary to
operate in more than one theatre?
Dr. Wilson. The Air Force's ability to fight in more than one
theater depends on the size and scope of the operations and the
theaters in question.
31. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, how does the A2/AD threat in Europe
compare to that of the South China Sea?
Dr. Wilson. There are similarities and differences. Both involve
adversaries that employ modern weapons technology designed to defeat US
airpower and deny or degrade forward air bases. In each theater,
potential adversaries also possess highly capable, long range and
layered integrated air defense networks to deny entry into their
airspace.
The biggest difference is geography. Europe has numerous partner
airbases which lie a relatively short distance from the likely area of
any conflict. By contrast, in the South China Sea, there are few
airbases and they are hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away from
each other. Air superiority is more fragile because we don't have lots
of basing options and air bases are increasingly vulnerable to long-
range attack systems currently being modernized by our adversaries.
nuclear deterrence-space
32. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, a strong nuclear deterrent is
arguably a foundational requirement of our national security. Our near-
peer adversaries continue to modernize their nuclear capabilities,
highlighting that a robust deterrence posture will be necessary for
decades to come. General Paul J. Selva, USAF, Vice Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified in front of the House Armed Services
Committee that ``the nuclear deterrent is the joint force modernization
priority, and . . . is bigger than just the bombers, ICBMs
[intercontinental ballistic missiles] and submarines, it is command and
control, it's space, it's tankers and it's a much bigger enterprise
than just the three legs of the Triad.'' Given Russian and Chinese
development of capabilities that place our space assets at risk,
Congress must view nuclear modernization holistically. What specific
steps should we take to both modernize and protect our space-based
assets from kinetic and passive attacks?
Dr. Wilson. Space is no longer a sanctuary. In any conflict, it
will be a contested environment.
If confirmed, I look forward to my responsibilities as principal
DOD space advisor and chairing the Defense Space Council. The Air Force
is responsible for over 90 percent of the Defense Department's space
assets in orbit and the nation is heavily dependent on space
capabilities for navigation, communication, command and control,
intelligence, and precision targeting.
I will seek to lead Department efforts to deepen our understanding
of the growing threat to our space assets, refine our strategy for
space control, and organize and equip the Air Force to meet the threat.
In addressing these issues, I will work closely with the other services
and Federal agencies to align efforts where needed.
33. Senator Cruz. Dr. Wilson, in the Fiscal Year 2016 National
Defense Authorization Act, I requested a feasibility study from the
Missile Defense Agency on space-based interceptors to complement our
terrestrial-based missile defense assets. How would the presence of
space-based interceptors or increased sensors impact our ability to
identify, track, and intercept ballistic missiles earlier in flight?
Dr. Wilson. I'm not yet briefed on this matter. If confirmed, I
will become more deeply involved in matters related to space and space
control.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
sandia contract purchase agreement
34. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, in June 2013, the Department of
Energy Inspector General (IG) issued a report on the contracting
irregularities associated with consulting agreements awarded to Heather
Wilson and Company, LLC (HWC). The report noted that HWC entered into a
consulting agreement in January 2009 with Sandia National Laboratories.
This agreement was subsequently converted into a Contract Purchase
Agreement (CPA) that would be executed via monthly task orders at a
cost of $10,000 per month.
In response to a lack of requirements for deliverable work
products, the CPA was further modified in April 2010 to include the
following language: ``Task Orders shall contain a requirement for a
deliverable such as a Progress Report or statement of completion of
work for the task order, and indication of which tasks are ongoing, and
what progress has been made on the ongoing tasks.''
Did you sign the modified April 2010 Contract Purchase Agreement?
Dr. Wilson. Task Orders were drafted by Sandia monthly. I do not
recall that they ever contained any requirement for a written progress
report. There were written work products created when they could be
produced at the unclassified level, such as memoranda, briefing slides,
and other written work products. In general, Sandia was more interested
in my engagement with their people in reviews, meetings and working
groups than in using my time to write progress reports about those
meetings, which would not have been useful for them.
I cannot confirm whether this CPA document was concluded in this
form.
35. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, were you aware that the modified
April 2010 Contract Purchase Agreement required a deliverable product
detailing the work you performed?
Dr. Wilson. Yes, with the ``deliverable product'' defined by the
monthly Task Orders which were written by Sandia monthly. The work was
done and the task orders were complied with.
36. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, the 2013 Inspector General report
noted that the task orders from Sandia issued under the modified April
2010 Contract Purchase Agreement did not incorporate the language
requiring deliverable products. During your confirmation hearing I
asked you if you were aware of the requirements to provide evidence
supporting the work you performed under the contract. You stated ``I
did the work. I complied with the contract.'' I further asked if you
reviewed the final contract before you signed the agreement and you
replied that you did.
While the Task Orders did not include the requirement for
deliverable products, the modified Contract Purchase Agreement did
include the requirement. If you reviewed the contracts before you
signed them, per your testimony before the Committee, why did you not
fulfill the requirement to provide Sandia with deliverable work
products in support of your monthly consulting payments?
Dr. Wilson. I did fulfill the requirement, as defined by Sandia in
its Task Orders. The agreement you quote above says task orders shall
include product ``such as'' progress reports. Sandia established the
task orders monthly and requested written materials or reports when the
entities asking for my help wanted written materials or reports. It was
more common for them to request my presence working and engaging with
their teams on a problem, plan or process, most often in classified
settings.
I believed then and now the labs wanted my timely input and
participation at the appropriate level about ongoing, frequently
classified matters. Paying me to write after-the-fact reports regarding
the same would have given the labs and the government no added value
for money spent.
sandia contract strategy team
37. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, according to the November 2014
Special Inquiry report by the Department of Energy, Sandia National
Laboratories formed an in-house Contract Strategy Team that was focused
on securing ``a noncompetitive extension of the Sandia Corporation
contract with the Department.'' The IG investigation further found that
``the plan developed by the SNL [Sandia National Laboratory] Contract
Strategy Team represented an apparent violation of 31 U.S.C. Sec.
1352, Limitation on use of appropriated funds to influence certain
Federal contracting and financial transactions. In this case,
appropriated funds were used to pay the recipients of a Federal
contract, both SNL employees and consultants, salaries and fees for
developing a plan intended to result in influencing or attempting to
influence an officer or employee of the Department or a member of
Congress in connection with the extension of the SNL contract.''
Were you a member of the SNL Contract Strategy Team?
Dr. Wilson. No.
38. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, did you consult with the Contract
Strategy Team regarding Federal contracts?
Dr. Wilson. No.
los alamos consulting agreement
39. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, in June 2013, the Department of
Energy IG issued a report on the contracting irregularities associated
with consulting agreements awarded to Heather Wilson and Company, LLC
(HWC). In August 2009, HWC entered into a consulting agreement in
August 2009 with Los Alamos National Laboratory to perform 50 hours of
work per month at a cost of $10,000 per month.
Per the IG report, the draft statement of work for the contract
included requirements to deliver work products to support the monthly
consulting payments to HWC. The report further found that the language
was ``deleted from the final task order even though a Los Alamos
contracting official informed the NNSA [National Nuclear Security
Administration] Contracting Officer that deliverables would be
established in individual task assignments.'' However, when the IG
asked for documentation of these task assignments ``Los Alamos was not
able to provide any documentation showing what tasks and activities HWC
was directed or scheduled to perform on a monthly basis.''
During your confirmation hearing I asked you if ``there was a
negotiation about what would be in the contract and what would not be
in the contract.'' You responded that there was a negotiation ``mostly
with respect to the statement of work.'' Did you negotiate to exclude
the requirement for deliverable work products in the final statement of
work for the Los Alamos agreement?
Dr. Wilson. In general, lab leaders wanted my active engagement
with them and their teams, often in classified settings, rather than
written reports. There were some occasions where written products
including memos, briefings, and analytical products were requested and
provided. I believe that the editing and negotiation referred to above
appears to relate to a draft exchanged between Los Alamos Lab and the
local National Nuclear Security Agency office. I do not recall seeing
any statement of work that included a requirement for monthly written
reports, nor would I have likely objected to preparing monthly work
products if that is what Los Alamos Lab wanted. Paying me to write
after-the-fact reports regarding meetings in which we were actively
engaged as a team would have been unlikely to give the labs and the
government added value for money spent.
40. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, regardless of whether or not the
contract included a requirement to provide deliverable works products,
did it occur to you that the Federal Government deserved a more
detailed accounting of the services you performed given the unusual
nature and your consulting agreement with Los Alamos and the large sums
of money you received on a monthly basis?
Dr. Wilson. As a consultant, I was responsive to the desires and
instructions of the client. I did the work asked of me to a high
standard in the way that was useful for my clients and complied with
the contracts.
41. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, the Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR) (FAR 31.205-33, Section F) explicitly states ``evidence necessary
to determine that work performed is proper and does not violate law or
regulation shall include--
(2) Invoices or billings submitted by consultants,
including sufficient detail as to the time expended and nature of the
actual services provided; and
(3) Consultants' work products and related documents,
such as trip reports indicating persons visited and subjects discussed,
minutes of meetings, and collateral memoranda and reports.
Were you aware of this specific provision in the FAR that requires
consultants to submit invoices with detailed information to
substantiate the work performed for payment?
Dr. Wilson. In the case of the Nevada Test Site, the work performed
was verified by the President of the Nevada Test Site and the Assistant
to the President sitting in the room at the time of each of the day-
long quarterly advisory board meetings for which I was compensated. The
meetings were generally conducted at the Top Secret-Q or Special
Compartmented Information level for nuclear weapons or intelligence
discussions. No trip reports were requested of any member of the
President's Advisory Board.
In the case of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, all members of the
Intelligence Advisory Board were paid the same amount for attendance at
the advisory board meetings. The meetings took place in the secure
facility at Oak Ridge and were conducted at the Top Secret--Special
Compartmented Information level. Oak Ridge did not want trip reports
from Intelligence Advisory Board members. Oak Ridge maintained that the
contracts were appropriate and the DOE site office in Oak Ridge
concurred with the lab. Oak Ridge did not reimburse the government.
With respect to Sandia and Los Alamos, the time expended was as
agreed in the contracts and was certified to every month with the
submission of invoices. The nature of the services provided were
consulting services. The invoices for Sandia and Los Alamos were
approved by the contract managers at each laboratory. They were
satisfied with the work I was doing and they did not indicate that they
needed or desired further detail on invoices.
42. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, the 2103 Inspector General report
also noted the irregularities of the invoices that were submitted by
HWC for payment. During the period of the Los Alamos contract, 19
invoices were issued by HWC for payment. Every invoice lacked
sufficient detail on the services that were provided. According to the
IG report, the Los Alamos agreement stated that:
``the Subcontractor may submit monthly billings for the
services performed. A breakdown of the specific activities
performed for [Los Alamos] must be included on or with each
invoice. [Los Alamos] shall pay the Subcontractor, upon
submission of acceptable invoices or vouchers, the prices
stipulated in this subcontract for work delivered or rendered,
less any deductions provided in this subcontract.''
However, the invoices submitted by HWC did not include a breakdown
of services.
Your company failed to comply with the requirement to submit
invoices that included specific activities performed during the month
services were provided, and yet, you accepted payment for those
invoices. Can you justify your actions?
Dr. Wilson. I provided consulting services to Los Alamos. No other
services besides consulting services (e.g. equipment, materials, lab
testing, custodial services, construction) were provided to Los Alamos.
Travel reimbursement was itemized and receipts for travel were
provided. Los Alamos accepted the invoices and did not request changes
or greater description of the matters on which I consulted to be listed
on the invoices.
The work was done and the contract was complied with. The invoices
specified that consulting services were provided and the labs accepted
and approved the invoices.
43. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, while the IG found that Los Alamos
failed to enforce the requirement for detailed invoices to substantiate
payments, do you also bear any responsibility for disregarding the
requirement for detailed invoices? If not, why not?
Dr. Wilson. The contract did not require ``detailed'' invoices. It
required specific activities performed. The activity that I performed
was consulting services.
I did the work, complied with the contract, and completed invoices
that were accepted for payment by Los Alamos. Los Alamos never
requested further detail than that which was provided.
repayments and settlement costs
44. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, from January 2009 through part of
2011, Heather Wilson and Company, LLC (HWC) received $464,000 in
payments from four NNSA laboratories for consulting services. These
laboratories included Sandia National Laboratories, Los Alamos National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the Nevada National
Security Site. Due to the lack of evidence to substantiate the work
that was provided, the Department of Energy Inspector General
investigated the contracts. As a result, the contractors who operated
the laboratories on behalf of the Government paid back at least
$442,877 to the Department of Energy with respect to payments made to
HWC. Furthermore, Lockheed Martin, which operated Sandia National
Laboratories, agreed to an overall settlement of $4.7 million for their
management failures.
While you were not found guilty of any actual wrongdoing, do you
agree that this arrangement gives the perception of wrongdoing?
Dr. Wilson. No. The quality of my work resulted in Sandia
recruiting me and offering me a full time senior leadership position
responsible for the division of the laboratory with which I worked most
frequently--Vice President for non-nuclear defense and intelligence
programs. I declined their offer in order to run for the U.S. Senate.
While three of the four labs negotiated and settled this matter,
all of them appear to have disagreed with the auditors and none of them
admitted wrongdoing.
45. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, did Heather Wilson and Company, LLC
reimburse the Government for any of these expenditures? If not, why
not?
Dr. Wilson. No. I did the work, complied with the contracts, was
not found at fault, and I was never even interviewed by the auditors.
negotiating for future employment
46. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, the 2008 edition of the House Ethics
Manual states that Members must disclose ``any job negotiations made
with a private employer while the individual is still employed by the
House, as well as any recusal from official matters that is
necessitated by those negotiations.'' The ethics manual further states
that ``Members and employees should be particularly careful in
negotiating for future employment, especially when negotiating with any
individual or entity that could be substantially affected by the
performance of official duties.''
Per the House Ethics Manual, and House Rule 27, Members must notify
the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct within three (3)
business days ``after the commencement of any negotiation or agreement
for future employment or compensation with a private entity.''
Your tenure in the House of Representatives ended on January 3,
2009. An invoice submitted to Sandia National Laboratories for
consulting work indicated you began consulting work for the lab on
January 4, 2009--the day following your departure from Congress.
Based on these dates, did you start negotiations with Sandia during
your tenure in the House of Representatives?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
HW Note: There have been subsequent changes to the House Ethics
Manual and the 2008 edition is not available to me. Some of the rules
have changed since then, particularly timelines for types of reporting
about post-government employment planning. I sought advice from the
committee staff and complied with their guidance and the rules in place
at the time.
47. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, if you did start negotiations with
Sandia during your House tenure, did you notify the Ethics committee of
these negotiations? If not, why not?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
48. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, furthermore, the House Rule states
that any Member subject to the notification requirement must recuse
themselves, in writing, from ``any matter in which there is a conflict
of interest or an appearance of a conflict for that Member.''
During your tenure, you were a member of the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce during the 110th Congress (2007-2008). The
Committee had jurisdiction over the Department of Energy, including
Sandia National Laboratories. Did you recuse yourself from any matters
that would have impacted Sandia as you negotiated this contract? If
not, why not?
Dr. Wilson. Yes. There were no matters that would have impacted
Sandia during the time I made post-federal employment plans. I was
aware of the requirement to recuse in the event that any matters came
up and would have done so, based on guidance from the House ethics
office.
contacts with u.s. attorney for u.s. attorney for new mexico
49. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, according to a September 2008 joint
report by the Department of Justice Inspector General and the
Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility, you called
David Iglesias, the U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, on October 16, 2006,
to express concern that he was delaying prosecution of certain public
corruption cases. At the time you made the call, your opponent in the
2006 election was the New Mexico Attorney General who did not prosecute
``the courthouse'' cases. As such, Mr. Iglesias' actions were directly
related to positions your opponent took. The Department of Justice
concluded in their report on the dismissal of Mr. Iglesias that ``[t]he
evidence we have developed so far shows that Wilson and Domenici in
fact called Iglesias shortly before the election, and that the
substance of the call led Iglesias to believe he was being pressured to
indict the courthouse case before the upcoming election.'' As a result
of his actions, Senator Pete Domenici was admonished by the Senate
Ethics Committee.
The House Ethics Manual in effect at the time provided that a
request for background information or a status report ``may in effect
be an indirect or subtle effort to influence the substantive outcome of
the proceedings,'' and it further states that the best way to
communicate is in writing and make it part of the proceedings.
In your testimony before the Committee, you stated that you called
Mr. Iglesias because ``an individual or constituent with knowledge of
ongoing investigations told me that the U.S. attorney was intentionally
delaying corruption prosecutions and I felt as though I had to address
that allegation in some appropriate way.''
Who suggested that you call you call Mr. Iglesias?
Dr. Wilson. No one.
HW Note: There was no connection between my opponent and ``the
courthouse'' cases. Our campaign advertisements in July, August and
September 2006 concerned a case involving my opponent's failure to
prosecute State Treasurer Vigil and large campaign contributions my
opponent received from entities and individuals with business pending
in her office. The federal Vigil trial ended on September 30, 2006.
From on or about October 4, 2006 through the election, the subjects of
our advertising related to my opponent were on national security
matters, her handling of a child abuse case, and her competence. We had
no information connecting my opponent to ``the courthouse cases'' and I
am aware of no information that has ever connected her to those cases.
50. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, did you discuss your call with Mr.
Iglesias with anyone before or after you made the call?
Dr. Wilson. No, not until after Mr. Iglesias made his public
allegations in February or March 2007.
51. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, during our meeting prior to your
confirmation hearing, you explicitly stated that you did not talk
directly to any Member of the New Mexico delegation, including Senator
Domenici, about this matter. Did you have any contact with Senator
Domenici's staff about this matter?
Dr. Wilson. I did not have any contact with Senator Domenici or his
staff about the allegation communicated to me or my telephone call to
Mr. Iglesias until after Mr. Iglesias made his public allegations in
late February or early March 2007. I was also not aware that Senator
Domenici had contacted Mr. Iglesias in October 2006 until after Mr.
Iglesias made his public allegations in February or early March 2007.
52. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, during your confirmation hearing
before the Committee you agreed to cooperate with this Committee in
response to congressional requests. If you refuse to answer these
questions, what legal provision gives you the privileged right to
refuse to answer a question from the Committee regarding your
suitability for confirmation?
Dr. Wilson. This is an ethical question, not a question of
privilege. As I said in my confirmation hearing, a constituent trusted
me with information of concern to them. I did not betray them then, and
I will not betray them now.
53. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, do you truly believe it is
``appropriate'' to contact a U.S. attorney in this manner which is
clearly contrary to the ethics rules that govern the conduct of Members
of the House of Representatives?
Dr. Wilson. It was not contrary to the ethics rules. In fact, the
Ethics Committee, under the Chairmanship of Congresswoman Stephanie
Tubbs Jones (D-OH) did a preliminary review including interviewing Mr.
Iglesias and decided not to initiate an investigation of this matter.
54. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, why didn't you communicate in writing
in accordance with the House Ethics Rules?
Dr. Wilson. My actions were in accordance with the House rules. My
inquiry was not a status report or request for information about any
particular case or person. This matter was reviewed by the House Ethics
Committee under the Chairmanship of Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones
(D-OH) after Mr. Iglesias made public accusations. The committee
interviewed Mr. Iglesias and decided not to initiate an investigation
of this matter.
55. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, claiming a sitting U.S. attorney is
``intentionally delaying corruption prosecutions'' is a serious
allegation. If you believed the allegation had merit, why didn't you
raise your concerns through proper channels to ensure the allegation
would be investigated officially?
Dr. Wilson. There are a variety of ways to appropriately address an
allegation of impropriety. In this circumstance, I had been informed of
the perception of one person, but nothing more. The allegation was
deeply troubling to me, but not substantiated by any further
information or corroboration, and people can have different perceptions
of the same set of facts.
One appropriate way to address an allegation of this kind is to
confront the individual involved and ask them about it. That is the
course I chose. Mr. Iglesias denied delaying prosecutions. I told him
that I would take him at his word, and I did.
56. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, do you think you demonstrated the
best judgement in this situation, and if so, please explain?
Dr. Wilson. Acting ethically is important. While I felt strongly
that I could not ignore the allegation, and potentially tolerate the
behavior if the allegation was true, I also was aware that it was a
perception of a single individual.
The matter had to be resolved. I did so in a way that was entirely
appropriate.
responsiveness to congress
57. Senator Reed. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed as Secretary of the Air
Force, do you agree to respond in a timely manner to letters and
inquiries from individual Senators and Representatives?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
three-dimensional expeditionary long-range radar
58. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Wilson, in October 2009, the Air Force
initiated a competition to design a replacement for its antiquated
surveillance radar, which has been in service since 1968. The new
Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR) will become
the principal Air Force long-range, ground-based sensor for detecting,
identifying, tracking and reporting aircraft and missiles in real-time
under a wide variety of conditions. The program's initial Request for
Proposal (RFP) for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD)
phase and Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) was issued in November
2013, and its first major contract was awarded in October 2014. The
award set off a 2-year long series of protests and legal challenges by
competing applicants. As you may be aware, the Government is
considering auctioning off radio frequency spectrum in the 1300-1350
MHz sub-band. Of concern, one of the competitors for the contract award
is offering a solution in the radio frequency that potentially will be
sold and no longer available to the Government.
As Secretary of the Air Force you will be responsible for making
important acquisition decisions and a steward of taxpayer dollars. If
confirmed, will you commit to review the Government's potential sale of
radio frequency spectrum that will directly impact the 3DELLR program
and render one of the offered solutions inoperable--costing the
taxpayer to reengineer the radar?
Dr. Wilson. Sale of radio frequencies is outside the direct
authority of the Air Force. During my time serving on the House
Subcommittee on Telecommunications I was aware of the pressure on the
military to give up spectrum for commercial purposes. I am not aware of
whether a final decision has been made on auctioning this spectrum.
If confirmed, I would be willing to work with you on this specific
issue to see if a resolution can be found.
energy efficiency
59. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Wilson, earlier this year, the Air Force
introduced a new Energy Flight Plan identifying a long-term vision to
enhance mission assurance through energy assurance. The Air Force is
also pursuing projects to provide cost-effective, cleaner energy
solutions to ensure continuous operations in spite of potential energy
supply interruptions. What challenges do you see in continuing to
advance these energy efficiency initiatives across the Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. I primarily see opportunity. Congress has provided a
tool box including enhanced use leases, power purchase agreements,
performance contracts and more that allows the Air Force to leverage
third-party financing for power production, energy efficiency and
resiliency. In some cases, appropriations will be required for things
like microgrids.
60. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed, will you commit to
pursuing cost savings through energy efficiency and alternative
resources?
Dr. Wilson. Mission assurance and reduced operating cost are
driving the Air Force's energy efforts. In many cases, efficiency and
alternative energy sources can both contribute to mission assurance and
provide cost savings. If confirmed, I will be interested in research
and development that reduces energy and water demand at forward
locations to reduce the cost of supply and free up airlift resources
for other missions.
small business innovation research/small business technology transfer
61. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Wilson, the Small Business Innovation
Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) programs invest
a small percentage of research and development funding at DOD and other
agencies into small businesses that are working on innovative solutions
to our national security challenges. There is strong bipartisan support
for these public-private partnerships because they work and provide a
good return on the investment. One of the most well-known SBIR success
stories is the development of Lasik Eye Surgery. Originally developed
for Air Force pilots, today millions have taken advantage of this
technology.
The SBIR and STTR programs also help diversify our industrial base,
attracting new suppliers--a third of participants in SBIR each year are
new companies. Last year, Congress reauthorized the SBIR and STTR for 5
years as part of the Defense Authorization bill.
What role do the SBIR and STTR programs play in meeting the DOD
mission?
Dr. Wilson. The SBIR and STTR programs provide innovative
technology solutions for the Air Force and meet the needs of the
warfighter. I am familiar with the programs and I will support them, if
confirmed.
62. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Wilson, what recommendations do you have
to improve the acquisition process to support small businesses working
on innovative technologies?
Dr. Wilson. Too many companies will not supply the Defense
Department or other federal agencies because it is too hard to do
business with the government. With private sector research and
development exceeding that done in the military, we have to be able to
buy capabilities developed in the commercial sector. If confirmed, I
will work with the Air Force Acquisition Office to identify more and
better ways to buy commercial products and services that are a good
value for the Air Force.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
cyber
63. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, I view the National Guard as
uniquely positioned to train cyber warriors capable of responding to
needs at the state and federal levels. In New York and many other
States, skilled private sector technology employees could bolster our
capabilities to prevent and react to cyber threats. What role do you
see for the National Guard in countering cyber aggression and
responding in the event of a mass cyber-attack?
Dr. Wilson. As I mentioned in my testimony before the committee, I
think it makes sense to explore whether the Air Force should rely more
heavily on National Guard units for cyber capability so that the Air
Force could leverage talent from the private sector and the private
sector could benefit from Air Force training. The National Guard's
ability to operate in either state or federal status could also be
beneficial, depending on the nature of a crisis.
The Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act allows and
encourages the services to experiment with direct commissioning
programs. Cyber may be an area where we should try something new.
64. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, I believe the success of U.S.
Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) and DOD's cyber initiatives will be determined
by our ability to attract and retain the highest caliber individuals to
join the ranks of our cyber warriors. How will you lead the Air Force
in recruiting, training, and retaining the best cyber warriors?
Dr. Wilson. Computer scientists and computer information
technologists are in very high demand; we will not be able to compete
on salary alone.
In this area, we may need to be very creative in our approaches to
recruitment, retention and organization of the force. While the call to
service and the opportunity to engage in activities that are prohibited
outside of the military have appeal, we may need to do more. If
confirmed, I would be interested in reviewing the recruitment model the
Navy uses for nuclear engineers, which I have watched be very
successful on my university campus at a relatively low cost compared to
ROTC. As mentioned above, we may need to review the mix of Active,
Reserve and Guard Forces, and I'm interested in tasking the Air Force
to look at the possibility of direct commissioning.
combat integration
65. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, I am closely following the
efforts of all the Services to integrate women into combat rules. The
Air Force was in a unique position, as most positions were already open
to women when Secretary Carter ordered the Services to open all
positions to women. Yet, I understand that the Air Force has identified
outreach about career opportunities as a challenge in the process. What
can the Air Force do to improve outreach and education about the
positions that are now open to women?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will ensure our outreach, recruiting
and marketing efforts are reviewed and kept up to date.
Women have been flying in the Air Force since 1976 and virtually
all pilot positions were opened to women in 1991 when the Congress
repealed the 1948 law that prohibited women from flying in combat. With
the exception of very few positions, the Air Force has been fully
integrated for over 25 years.
Unlike the Army and the Marine Corps, which opened a very large
number of direct combat positions, the final few career fields in the
Air Force that opened to women in 2016 have very small numbers of
people assigned to them and are very exclusive. The right recruiting
approach may be more personalized and targeted.
66. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, what other challenges do you
think might be impacting the rates of women entering and completing
pipeline training in these careers fields and how might you address
these challenges?
Dr. Wilson. With respect to positions newly open to women in the
Air Force, the most significant difference is likely physical strength,
particularly upper body strength. Combat rescue and pararescue career
fields are physically demanding and the standards are high--as they
should be.
The career field is small to begin with; a smaller percentage of
women than men are likely to be qualified for consideration; and women
are a smaller percentage of the force. As a result, and as expected
when the Defense Department made the decision to open these fields to
women, there will be a disparity in participation.
It has been a long time since I participated in Air Force physical
training and intercollegiate sports, but I have been made aware of
significant advancements in sports medicine and data driven injury
prevention through my participation as a university president in the
NCAA and college sports. The science of strength and conditioning has
advanced significantly and there are some differences between men and
women in injury prevention and physical training of which the Air Force
may already be aware.
The important point to me is that these positions are open to
qualified women and that the Air Force may use the talents and
abilities of every airman to defend the nation.
military justice
67. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, I am sure you are as appalled
as I am by the recent reports of cyber stalking, harassment, and
exploitation of female servicemembers by fellow male servicemembers. I
understand that the Air Force has formed a task force to address the
issue. What do you plan to do to ensure this scourge is eradicated from
the Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will ensure the Air Force has policy,
legal authority and training to prevent and to respond to abuses. I
will expect leaders at all levels to reinforce the expectation that
everyone is to be treated with dignity and respect.
68. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, the 2016 Sexual Assault Gender
Survey found that almost half of female Air Force cadets experienced
sexual harassment. Military research has consistently identified a
strong positive correlation between the occurrence of sexual harassment
in a military unit and the occurrence of sexual assault within the
unit. What can we do to ensure all Air Force cadets are free from
sexual harassment?
Dr. Wilson. While I experienced what I believed to be
discrimination based on gender when I was a cadet, I did not personally
know anyone who was sexually harassed or assaulted in the 4 years I
spent at the Air Force Academy. In some ways, perhaps, because having
women at the Academy was so new and the scrutiny so intense, we may
have been protected from some of the corrosive cultural phenomenon that
may have arisen in later years.
Focusing on leadership excellence at the squadron level is intended
to positively influence the culture and climate in the Air Force,
including the Air Force Academy.
69. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, have you spoken with the
prospective commandant of cadets about this issue? If so, what is the
plan to combat this issue at the academy?
Dr. Wilson. No.
national guard
70. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, as you know, the Arctic is
becoming more and more important to our national security policy. New
York is home to the only ski-equipped C-130s in the world. These LC-130
``skibirds'' perform vital missions on behalf of the National Science
Foundation in Antarctica, as well as training in Greenland. They have
also been part of joint training missions with Canada. However, these
planes are aging, and are in need of modernization in order to continue
their amazing work. What role do you see the Air Force playing in
Arctic operations?
Dr. Wilson. The Air Force plays and will continue to play a
significant role in Arctic operations. The Northern Air Bridge,
exceptional Artic training areas, strategically important natural
resources and the build-up of Russian forces in the Artic are all
factors that draw our attention. I am currently unfamiliar with the LC-
130 and its missions, and, hence, uncertain about how renewed focus on
the Artic might impact the unit.
71. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, do I have your commitment to
include funding for modernization of these vital aircraft in the
upcoming budget?
Dr. Wilson. I can't commit to modernization of these specific
aircraft at this time as decisions about the budget have not been made
and I have not been privy to individual items and the trade-offs within
it.
It is my understanding that the Air Force has a modernization plan
for the C-130H aircraft, that would, I believe, include the LC-130s.
72. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, I was so pleased that the 914th
at Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station was chosen to convert to a KC-135
mission. I was there last year and was pleased with the progress. The
one thing we need now is a KC-135 flight simulator, to serve both the
914th and other units. We currently have an empty building on the base,
built to hold a C-130 simulator, making the basing of one that much
easier for the Air Force. If confirmed, do I have your commitment to
work with me on basing a simulator at Niagara Falls?
Dr. Wilson. I appreciate your concern for training for our airman.
I understand that Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station is in consideration
for a KC-135 simulator. Air Mobility Command will work with Guard units
and Guard headquarters as it relocates our KC-135 simulators to meet
demand. While it would be great to have a simulator at every base with
KC-135 aircraft, that may not make sense if the simulator isn't used
sufficiently to justify the cost. If confirmed, it is my view that a
regional approach is likely the right way to go to meet the training
needs of the tanker force, and I believe that is the plan being pursued
by Air Mobility Command.
73. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, as you know, the Air Force
remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) operators contribute critical
capabilities to our national defense. In New York, we have two Air
Guard units actively engaged in the intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR) mission--the 107th in Niagara Falls, and the 174th
in Syracuse, which is also one of the only training units for MQ-9s. I
am concerned about the Air Force's challenge in recruiting, training,
and retaining our talented uniformed RPA workforce. What can lawmakers
do to assist the Air Force in keeping up with the considerable
operational demand generated by the need for RPA capabilities?
Dr. Wilson. I understand that the Air Force is finalizing two new
Active-Associate squadrons for MQ-9 operations, one of which will be
located in Syracuse with the 174th. I also understand that
Congressional support for getting to a normal pace of operations for
remotely piloted aircraft would help increase pilot retention. If we
have a year-long continuing resolution rather than a budget for fiscal
year 2017, I would expect the pilot retention problem will worsen.
74. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, last year's National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) included a provision to shift a significant
portion of the MQ-9 pilots to enlisted airmen. I worked with the
Committee to clarify that this might not work for the National Guard,
which cannot simply move pilots to different jobs, and I hope that the
Air Force is interpreting the legislation with that understanding. Do I
have your commitment to look at whether the National Guard may be
treated differently in this transition?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
75. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, as you know, the 106th Air
Rescue Wing in Gabreski flies the Combat Rescue Helicopter. I am deeply
concerned by the Air Force's decision to modernize the Active
component's helicopters first, and not start on the Air Guard's
aircraft until the last 3 years of the project. Our airmen regularly go
out on rescue missions, and they should not be forced to use the oldest
helicopters for years to come--this goes against the Air Force's usual
focus on concurrent and proportional fielding, and I will continue to
push back against it. What are your thoughts on modernization of the
combat rescue helicopter fleet? Will we have your support?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will receive more information on Air
Force plans for delivering the Combat Rescue Helicopter.
76. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, as you know, there have been
concerns raised by the National Guard over the role and staffing of
title 32 military technician positions. These positions have different
benefits afforded to them compared to their Active Guard Reserve (AGR)
counterparts, which is part of the reason the airlines are so
successful at hiring away our pilots. Do I have your commitment to work
with me on addressing the concerns of our TAGs [The Adjutant General]
and military technicians?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
lgbt rights
77. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Wilson, during the hearing, I asked you
a question about your views on LGBT [Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay, and
Transgendered] individuals and you responded that it is not your
intention to change any of the policies in place with regard to sexual
orientation. Will you also support retention of existing inclusive
policies for transgender troops?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I have no intent to alter any policies
established by my predecessors concerning transgender troops. I am
aware that the Office of the Secretary of Defense is monitoring the
implementation of this DOD policy.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Richard Blumenthal
diversity of force
78. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, will you respect and uphold
recent DOD efforts already in place that strengthen and diversify our
force--including combat integration, the repeal of Don't Ask Don't
Tell, and permitting transgender servicemembers to serve openly?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I have no intention of changing the
policies in place and will treat all servicemembers with dignity and
respect.
79. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, will you commit to equally
protecting and upholding the rights of all members of the Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
f-35
80. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, I would ask that you look for
ways to invest in F-35 capacity, capability, and production ramp to
reach full rate production (80 aircraft per year) by 2021. If
confirmed, will you commit to this committee that the Air Force will
not back down from their planned procurement of this 5th generation
aircraft?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will fully support the review of the F-
35 program as directed by Secretary Mattis so that the Air Force has
the capability it needs to protect our vital national interests against
threats now and in the future.
81. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, from an acquisition standpoint,
the F-35 international partners and foreign military sales countries
have played a critical role in both the development and production of
the F-35 program. It is my understanding that the international
investment in the program has allowed the United States to reduce its
cost per jet by more than $10 million per aircraft in addition to the
benefits of interoperability and nation building that this program has
and will continue to play for decades to come. How will you continue to
build these relationships with our international partners and foreign
military sales countries to enhance the role they play in this program?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will guide the Air Force to continue to
engage partners and foreign military sales customers to ensure
interoperability is maintained with our allies and keep costs down.
82. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, do you support an expansion of
this program?
Dr. Wilson. I support working closely with our allies where it
enhances collective self-defense and keeps costs down. If there are
ways to expand that effort, I am open to them.
83. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, how does this align with the
current administration's focus on turning inward rather than building
relationships with our allies and partner nations?
Dr. Wilson. America is stronger when we align ourselves with allies
who share our interests and values. If confirmed, I will support
Defense Department policy in this area.
huey replacement
84. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, do you agree that to protect
our national security, the UH-1N helicopters need to be replaced as
soon as possible?
Dr. Wilson. I understand that the Air Force is proceeding with a
full and open competition to replace the UH-1N helicopters. If
confirmed, I will work with the Chief of Staff to ensure that the
requirements are validated and stable so that the UH-1N replacement is
delivered on time and within budget.
85. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, will you commit to prioritizing
this acquisition program is moved forward as soon as possible, if
confirmed?
Dr. Wilson. I will seek to guide this program forward as authorized
by the Congress, getting the capability needed within schedule and
budget. If the fiscal year 2017 budget becomes a year-long continuing
resolution 7 months into the year, this and other programs may be
affected.
86. Senator Blumenthal. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed, will you fully
review all procurement options to meet the mission set, including
production ready, mature aircraft, as the Air Force requested last
year?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will ensure the Air Force remains
committed to delivering a UH-1N replacement with needed capabilities on
schedule and within budget.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Joe Donnelly
department of defense weather mission
87. Senator Donnelly. Dr. Wilson, as you know, military and
intelligence operations depend upon accurate and timely weather data
for their success. In addition to the projected near-term gap in polar
weather data as the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program comes to
an end, the Department of Defense also lacks a long-term solution to
the need for persistent weather coverage over the Indian Ocean and the
U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of operations. I understand the Air
Force may include funding in the fiscal year 2018 budget request to
address this imminent gap by moving an aging Geostationary Operational
Environment Satellite (GOES), such as GOES 14, to the Indian Ocean.
GOES 14 was launched in 2009 and is approaching the end of its expected
service life. The Air Force must allocate resources toward a U.S.-
owned, long-term solution to our need for weather imagery to support
CENTCOM operations. It is my understanding that this need can be met
without a large, expensive satellite, but rather through more flexible
approaches like launching an appropriate instrument as a hosted
payload. I do believe it is critical that this sensor capability is
provided by a U.S.-controlled asset. Will you commit to ensuring
adequate funding in the fiscal year 2018 budget request for defense
weather capabilities, if confirmed--including funds to begin building a
weather imager?
Dr. Wilson. Weather is a critical capability. I understand that the
Air Force has examined a host of innovative short term options as well
as multiple options to meet the longer term need. If confirmed, I will
ensure that the Air Force examines all options available to meet the
need in the short term and the long term.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
focus on the pacific
88. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, a strong presence in the Asia-
Pacific plays a significant role in promoting the security and
stability of the region. As an area of strategic importance to the
United States, how is the Air Force positioned to meet its requirements
in the region?
Dr. Wilson. The Air Force has continuous presence with assigned
forces in South Korea, Japan, Guam, Alaska, Hawaii, and other
locations. The Air Force also sends units forward and makes its
presence known routinely throughout the theater.
89. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, what if any additional resources
would you recommend for the Air Force in the region?
Dr. Wilson. None at this time. The ability to deploy Air Forces on
short notice demonstrates resolve in support of our regional allies and
partners.
civilian workforce
90. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, how do you view the role of the
civilian workforce in terms of achieving improved Air Force readiness
and force structure growth?
Dr. Wilson. Air Force civilians are serving in many critical areas
that directly contribute to readiness. From maintainers and depot
workers who keep the aging fleets mission ready, to highly-valued
child-care workers providing peace of mind for Airmen so they can focus
on the mission at hand. As such, the Air Force relies heavily on its
civilian employees when it comes to improving readiness.
91. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, do you believe that the civilian
workforce is a critical force multiplier when it comes to the Air
Force's capability, capacity, and lethality and accomplishing its
mission objectives?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
92. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, do you agree with the President
that the Federal civilian workforce, to include the Department of Air
Force, needs to be reduced across the board?
Dr. Wilson. We need to use every dollar taxpayers give us to get
the most lethal force possible. The Air Force should always be
reviewing mission requirements to ensure that we have the right people
with the right skills to accomplish the mission.
93. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, do you believe attrition based
workforce shaping, replacing every three departing employees with one
new one, is an effective means to manage a workforce?
Dr. Wilson. I believe the Air Force should retain the flexibility
to propose in our budget request the numbers of people and the talent
needed to ensure mission success.
94. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed, what will you do to
control contracted services costs and make sure that we do not
needlessly or carelessly spend taxpayer dollars on contracted labor
because of hiring freezes or reductions to civilian employees?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, the Air Force will continue to comply
with the President's guidance that contractors will not be used to
circumvent the hiring freeze.
attracting future skilled airmen
95. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, this committee has received
testimony from all of the Services on the need to modernize and adjust
the overall military posture to combat emerging threats like China and
Russia with advancing technologies in addition to rogue nations and
terrorist threats. If confirmed, what modifications, if any, would you
recommend in the recruiting and retention of uniformed and civilian
personnel to attract new technical skillsets?
Dr. Wilson. I understand that the Air Force is meeting its
recruiting targets and that the biggest challenge is retention. I am
interested in how the Air Force might use new authorities given to us
by the Congress for direct commissioning programs for highly technical
fields like cyber. I'm also interested over the long term in how we
might meet needs and retain talent with technically oriented positions
and units in the Guard and Reserve.
diversity
96. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, recently, 33 retired general and
flag officers released a statement saying: ``More than half a century
of history and research has made clear that an inclusive military that
prioritizes talent and ability over social judgment and personal
prejudice is an essential ingredient of an effective fighting force.
This is especially true in a diverse Nation like ours, which molds
millions of individuals from countless different backgrounds into a
unified whole capable of defending our nation and its interests.'' Do
you agree that our military should be inclusive and that servicemembers
should be judged on the basis of individual merit?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
97. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, former Secretary of the Air Force
Deborah Lee James said, ``I feel anyone who's qualified should be able
to serve'' in the Air Force. Do you agree?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
98. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, do you support the existing DOD
policies, directives, and implementation guidelines regarding open
service by LGBT troops? If so, will you fully embrace them as the
senior leader of the Air Force setting the example for those you lead?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I do not intend to change the policies
currently in place in the military. I will treat all servicemembers
with dignity and respect.
99. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, do you agree with Secretary Mattis'
affirmation before this Committee that women and LGBT troops are part
of our lethal fighting force?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
energy resilience
100. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, military commanders and
strategists have long discussed the role energy consumption plays in
national defense. How would you recommend the military utilize
operational energy improvements in conjunction with other force shaping
tools?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I would continue to support a range of
energy initiatives, particularly related to reducing the logistical
burdens of energy supply at forward locations through advanced research
and development.
101. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, over the last several years, the
Air Force has taken important steps to address its energy security. In
February 2016, the Air Force established the Office of Energy Assurance
which is tasked with taking an enterprise-wide approach to energy
projects that provide resilient, cost-effective, and cleaner energy to
Air Force installations around the country. The Air Force is now
operating a 19-megawatt solar array in Nevada and a 16.5-megawatt solar
array in New Jersey. In January 2017, the Air Force issued a new Energy
Flight Plan which is the Air Force's long-term vision for enhancing
mission assurance through improved energy resilience. If confirmed,
will you commit to the committee to maintain the effort already
underway by the Air Force to enhance its energy resilience posture?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will continue to support Air Force
efforts to develop resilient energy systems that allow it to continue
to perform its missions in the face of increased cyber, physical and
natural threats to bases, installations, and the nation's electric
infrastructure that powers these bases and installations.
102. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, the use of energy savings
performance contracts (ESPC) by the Air Force present an opportunity to
partner with energy service companies to reduce the Air Forces' energy
bills with improvements guaranteed by the companies. This can lead to
saving taxpayer money. If confirmed, will you ensure that the Air Force
continues to pursue, where appropriate, ESPCs that prevent the
Government cost savings while improving energy efficiency for Air Force
installations?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
103. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, emergency power generation systems
used by military installations can often be unreliable and have high
operation and maintenance costs. The NDAA directed the Secretary of
Defense to develop a comprehensive plan to improve emergency power
generation readiness while expanding fuel flexibility and reducing
maintenance costs. If confirmed, will you commit to working with the
Committee to ensure emergency power generation systems maintained at
Air Force installations are reliable and operated in a cost effective
way?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will continue the Air Force's focus on
mission assurance through energy assurance to develop resilient, cost-
effective back-up systems of all types.
space and technology
104. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, the Maui Space Surveillance Site
is an invaluable asset for this Nation where Air Force space
professionals have for decades provided vital information for our space
and national security establishments. With the rise in the importance
of space, it will undoubtedly become more valuable. If confirmed, will
you do what you can to visit the site to see the outstanding
capabilities and to recognize the great uniform and civilian team
charged with the operations?
Dr. Wilson. As much as I would love to visit the site, it will be
difficult to get to for reasons you well understand--primarily time and
distance. If possible, I will come to Maui, but it is more likely that
I will have an opportunity at some point to visit operations on Oahu.
105. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, we are seeing a rapid growth in
the space in both the commercial and government sector. What is your
perspective on how the Air Force can leverage the growth of the
commercial sector in space?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I look forward to my responsibilities as
principal DOD space advisor and chairing the Defense Space Council. The
Air Force is responsible for over 90 percent of the Defense
Department's space assets in orbit and the nation is heavily dependent
on space capabilities for navigation, communication, command and
control, intelligence, and precision targeting.
With respect to launch services, I believe competition can result
in cost savings for the government. At the same time, commercial launch
providers may not be able to meet launch requirements for national
security space payloads as those requirements are currently crafted.
I also believe that it is very difficult for commercial launch
providers to supply government customers at competitive prices because
of the constraints imposed by federal acquisition rules. If these rules
are the best way to serve the Air Force and the taxpayer well over the
long term, their use is justifiable. But if our processes and
regulations are impeding the accomplishment of the mission, we should
review our processes and improve them.
If confirmed, I will be interested to learn more about how the Air
Force is currently considering commercial space capabilities, beyond
just launch, as it develops America's space strategy.
106. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, how can space be leveraged to
support of the Air Force's needs for improved resiliency and
responsiveness?
Dr. Wilson. The Air Force provides space-based capabilities to
civilians and warfighters including navigation, communication, command
and control, intelligence, weather, and precision targeting.
In any future conflict, space will be a contested domain and we
need to think of air, near-space and space as a continuum that the
United States must protect through all phases of potential conflict.
Thinking in this way is likely to make our systems more resilient and
robust.
post government employment
107. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, after leaving the House of
Representatives, you signed contracts to consult for Los Alamos
National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, and the Nevada National Security Site. What was in the
statement of work for these contracts and how was progress measured to
authorize payments?
Dr. Wilson. I no longer have copies of the statements of work.
At Oak Ridge National Laboratory I served on the Intelligence
Advisory Board of about 20 people. This board would meet about 4 times
a year to receive briefings, ask questions and provide advice at the
Top Secret/Special Compartmented Information level on intelligence
related programs. The meetings were generally a day long and each
Advisory board member was paid a flat fee for attending. The Vice
President responsible for Global Security was always present and
authorized payment.
At the Nevada Test Site I served on the Presidential Advisory Board
of about 10 people. The Board met 4 times a year for a day, or a day
and a half. The agenda was set by the President of the Test Site and
included discussions of major challenges or problems, review of
programs, presentations and discussions of programs underway at the
test site. Discussions were usually at the Top Secret level. On one
occasion, I was also asked to come to the test site a day early to
review several special access programs. The President and his assistant
were in the room and authorized payment.
At Los Alamos, I primarily reviewed and advised programs under the
Vice President for Global Security and the Field Intelligence Element,
in addition to the President and some other program offices related to
nuclear materials. I met quarterly with the President of the Laboratory
to discuss matters including stockpile certification, nuclear weapons
policy and any other matters of interest to the President.
At Sandia, I served on the Intelligence Advisory Board and the Non-
Proliferation Advisory Board. I also did extensive work with the
division responsible for intelligence and non-nuclear defense programs,
including cyber security, space assets and special access programs. I
assisted with strategic planning, program reviews and assisted the
laboratory with the reestablishment of their distinguished speakers'
series. I was available to provide insight on matters related to
pending legislation, advice on national security policy matters or
congressional operations. I was available to all Vice Presidents as
well as the President of the laboratory and program managers who sought
my advice or assistance. I was in frequent contact with the Sandia
contract manager about the work that I was doing, often multiple times
a week. The contract manager monitored progress and satisfaction with
the work being done.
108. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, reflecting back on the issues
which came out of your post-House of Representatives consulting
contracts with Los Alamos, Sandia, Oak Ridge and the Nevada National
Security Site, given what you know now, presented with the same
opportunities again, would you do anything differently in terms of your
work with the four entities before, during and after the period of
performance of the contracts? If yes, please describe what you would
change.
Dr. Wilson. The work I did was viewed positively by the labs and I
am glad I made contributions to national security that mattered.
potential conflicts of interest
109. Senator Hirono. Dr. Wilson, President Trump recently issued an
executive order barring his appointees from working on matters related
to former employers or clients for 2 years. What, if any, impact will
this executive order have on your work as Secretary of the Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. In accordance with the ethics letter I submitted, I
will recuse myself from matters related to the South Dakota School of
Mines and Raven Industries as well as a number of non-profit entities
for the time periods specified in the letter. I don't expect this
executive order will impact my work as Secretary of the Air Force.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
research, development and testing
110. Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wilson, the recent emphasis by the
military on readiness has come at the expense of research and
development (R&D), which is critical to our continued and future
readiness.
For example, the Department has significantly reduced R&D dedicated
to space systems, dropping from $5 billion to less than $1 billion over
the past 6 years (fiscal years 2009 to 2016). How will you prioritize
R&D in the Air Force, and will you grant Air Force Research Labs with
the authorities to hire, take risks, and modernize its facilities?
Dr. Wilson. As I mentioned in my testimony before the committee,
the Secretary and the relevant committees of the Congress, have a
particular responsibility to take the long view. If confirmed, I will
review and further develop Air Force research and development
priorities to ensure we are investing in basic and applied research
that will keep the Air Force ahead of adversaries for the long term.
speed of contracts
111. Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wilson, one of the frustrations I hear
from both businesses and Air Force units is the amount of time it takes
to get through the contracting process to an award. Yet, it is more
important than ever that the Air Force respond quickly to ever-changing
threat environments. As Secretary, how can we further accelerate
contracting authority, particularly as it applies to space systems?
Dr. Wilson. I share your concern. Too many companies will not
supply the Defense Department or other Federal agencies because it is
too hard to do business with the government, and we have to get
capabilities from the drawing board to the flight line faster.
If confirmed, I will work with the Air Force Acquisition Office to
identify more and better ways to buy products and services that are a
good value for the Air Force in a way that is simple for Air Force
units and the businesses that want to cost-effectively support the
military.
112. Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wilson, will you encourage the
utilization of contracting authorities that make it easier to leverage
commercial-off-the-shelf technologies (COTS) and industry talent?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
space acquisition
113. Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wilson, Air Force Space Command's
General Hyten set forth the Space Enterprise Vision last year, which
called for a more responsive and resilient approach to space. Industry
has made great strides in technologies that may address these
challenges, including small satellites and inexpensive launch vehicles.
How will the Air Force make the most of existing industry investments
in the small satellite market?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will chair the Defense Space Council
and deepen Air Force partnerships with industry to find innovative ways
to leverage commercial capability in ways that make sense for the
military.
114. Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wilson, what role do you envision
Operationally Responsive Space continuing to play in executing this
vision?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I would expect the members of the Defense
Space Council and Space Command to consider how the Operationally
Responsive Space Office can best address the urgent needs of combatant
commanders and what role it plays in the larger shift in thinking about
space as a contested environment in any future conflict.
kirtland air force base fuel spill
115. Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wilson, in 2015, I was able to join the
Secretary of the Air Force to celebrate the installation of the first
pump-and-treat well to address the fuel plume at Kirtland Air Force
Base. As of this week, extraction wells have now pumped more than 159
million gallons of groundwater for treatment by the new system, which
removes all fuel-related contaminants from the water. Under your
leadership, will the Air Force continue its financial commitment to
completely protect and clean-up Albuquerque's water?
Dr. Wilson. Yes. If confirmed, I will stand by the Air Force's
commitment to ensure contaminated water does not reach drinking water
wells, reduce and eliminate the contamination plume, and meet
regulatory standards.
I am also interested in whether we can learn things from Air Force
remediation efforts at this and other sites that lead to new techniques
and technologies to reduce the cost of water purification or improve
clean-up of ground water contamination.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
civilian personnel
116. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, how do you view the role of the
civilian workforce in terms of achieving improved Air Force readiness
and force structure growth?
Dr. Wilson. Air Force civilians are serving in many critical areas
that directly contribute to readiness. As such, the Air Force relies
heavily on its civilian employees, as it does every member of the team,
when it comes to improving readiness.
As I mentioned in my hearing, almost half of the Air Force are
civilians. They are very important members of the team.
117. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, do you agree with the President
that the Federal civilian workforce, to include the Department of Air
Force, needs to be reduced across the board?
Dr. Wilson. We need to use every dollar taxpayers give us to get
the most lethal force possible. The Air Force should always be
reviewing mission requirements to ensure that we have the right people
with the right skills in the right places to accomplish the mission.
118. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, do you believe attrition based
workforce shaping, replacing every three departing employees with one
new one, is an effective means to manage your workforce?
Dr. Wilson. I believe the Air Force should retain the flexibility
to propose in our budget request the numbers of people and the talent
needed to ensure mission success.
119. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed, what will you do to
control contracted services costs and make sure that we do not
needlessly or carelessly spend taxpayer dollars on contracted labor
because of freezes or reductions to civilian employees?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, the Air Force will continue to comply
with the President's guidance that contractors will not be used to
circumvent the hiring freeze.
diversity of the force
120. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, do you agree with Secretary Mattis
that women and LGBT troops are equally valuable parts of our lethal
fighting force?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
121. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, do you support the existing DOD
policies, directives, and implementation guidelines regarding open
service by LGBT troops?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
122. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, if you decide to modify in any way
the policies, directives, and guidelines regarding open service by LGBT
troops, will you first provide members of the Committee with a written
explanation as to how such a modification would enhance readiness,
cohesion, and morale?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will to the extent that there are
policies specific to the Air Force (rather than DOD).
123. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, do you support the existing DOD
policies, directives, and implementation guidelines regarding women in
combat?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
124. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, if you decide to modify in any way
the policies, directives, and guidelines regarding women in combat,
will you first provide members of the Committee with a written
explanation as to how such a modification would enhance readiness,
cohesion, and morale?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
sexual harassment
125. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed as Secretary of the
Air Force, will you be committed to a zero-tolerance approach to
harassment or similar behavior?
Dr. Wilson. I support Air Force policy that proscribes sexual
harassment in either of its recognized forms, encourages and supports
reporting of sexual harassment, investigates allegations of sexual
harassment fairly, takes appropriate action up to and including
termination, and prohibits retaliation for reporting sexual harassment.
I believe any violation of the policy merits a consequence.
126. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed, what actions will
you take to prevent something like Marines United from happening in the
Air Force?
Dr. Wilson. Specific to social media, I understand that the Air
Force has testified that its social media policy does not tolerate
bullying, hazing, or any instance where an Airman inflicts any form of
physical or psychological abuse that degrades, insults, dehumanizes, or
injures another airman regardless of the method of communication. The
Air Force expects airmen to sustain a culture of trust, dignity and
respect.
I understand that the Air Force is currently reviewing its policy,
practice, and legal authorities in this area. If confirmed, I will
consider the analysis and recommendations that result from the Air
Force review.
If confirmed, I will ensure the Air Force has policy, legal
authority and training to prevent and to respond to abuses. I will
expect leaders at all levels to reinforce the expectation that everyone
is to be treated with dignity and respect.
defense innovation unit experimental
127. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, commercial technology is moving
faster than ever before, and the defense acquisition system has
struggled to keep up. The Defense Innovation Unit Experimental, or
DIUx, has partnered with the Air Force on several rapid prototyping
demonstrations. Do you believe that missions such as DIUx enable us to
capture commercial innovation quicker and more efficiently?
Dr. Wilson. I believe DIUx and other efforts like it can provide a
means to quickly capture commercial technology and innovation. As I
mentioned in my hearing, we also have to make sure that innovations can
be integrated, operated, and sustained by capable young people in high
stress combat situations far away from the innovators who developed the
systems.
I am also interested in how the lessons learned at DIUx can be
incorporated more broadly in Air Force acquisition so that capabilities
get from the drawing board to the flight line faster.
128. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, if confirmed as Secretary of the
Air Force, will you support DIUx?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
nuclear command, control, and communication
129. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, General John E. Hyten, USAF,
Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, recently said that Nuclear Command,
Control, and Communication (NC3) was his highest priority for nuclear
recapitalization. He said that ``any delay, deferment, or cancellation
of NC3 modernization will create a capability gap potentially degrading
the President's ability to respond appropriately to a strategic
threat.'' Do you agree?
Dr. Wilson. While I have not been briefed recently on classified
nuclear command, control and communications modernization efforts, I
have no reason to question General Hyten's assessment.
The greatest risk we face with this and other systems is budget
uncertainty and the potential for a year-long continuing resolution 7
months into the fiscal year. We have to get beyond the Budget Control
Act and re-establish greater normalcy in budgeting and appropriations
to avoid delay and deferment of important modernization programs.
130. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, our track record at executing
modernization programs without delay, deferment, or cancellation has
not been great in recent years. How do you think the Air Force should
mitigate risk to the NC3 system from delays or deferments to the
program of record?
Dr. Wilson. Clear and achievable requirements, reasonable
timelines, empowered and accountable program managers, and predictable
funding are keys to successful modernization programs.
prior record
131. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, after leaving Congress in 2009,
you received contracts from four Department of Energy (DOE)-owned and
contractor-operated research centers. Did you negotiate any of these
contracts while you were still a Member of Congress?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
132. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, did you consult with the Ethics
Committee about your ongoing negotiations and subsequent contracts?
Dr. Wilson. Yes
133. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, according to internal documents
obtained from the DOE investigation into your contracts with these four
laboratories, a Los Alamos National Laboratory official stated that you
refused his request to provide an accounting of your time and work. Is
this accurate, and if so, can you explain your decision not to do so?
Dr. Wilson. No. I do not believe it is accurate.
134. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, the DOE IG also found that the
original agreement you signed ``specifically prohibited activity
related to `business development.''' Did you know that the agreement
you signed prohibited activity related to business development?
Dr. Wilson. Yes.
135. Senator Warren. Dr. Wilson, do you consider your efforts to
obtain a no-bid contract extension for Sandia to be business
development?
Dr. Wilson. My advice to the Lockheed-Martin contract manager was
what I thought Lockheed-Martin should do, not Sandia.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Gary C. Peters
cyber and remotely piloted aircraft training
136. Senator Peters. Dr. Wilson, the 110th Attack Wing in Battle
Creek has two critical missions that will be important to the Air Force
for years to come: flying remotely piloted aircraft and a cyber
operations squadron. It's important that these missions are resourced
properly given the demand from combatant commanders and the competition
from the private sector for airmen with these skills. If confirmed,
will you commit to ensuring there are adequate training slots for
Guardsmen to prepare for the RPA and cyber operations missions?
Dr. Wilson. Based on what I know, I don't see a reason why this
should be a problem. Both the remotely piloted aircraft and cyber
missions are vital and appropriate missions for the Guard. Training is
the key to readiness and mission success, and we are short of operators
in both of these fields. They need to be trained.
rpa resources
137. Senator Peters. Dr. Wilson, the 110th Attack Wing has only one
RPA console despite having space for two more. Given the demand for
RPAs to provide intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance as well
as strike capability, it's important that this mission is fully
resourced. Will you commit to reviewing resourcing of the RPA mission
at places like the Battle Creek Air National Guard Base?
Dr. Wilson. If confirmed, I will review this high-demand program to
ensure we are using the resources we have to accomplish the missions
expected of us cost effectively.
______
[The nomination reference of the Honorable Heather A.
Wilson follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of the Honorable Heather A.
Wilson, which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
nomination was referred, follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
form that details the biographical, financial, and other
information of the nominee. The form executed by the Honorable
Heather A. Wilson in connection with her nomination follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of the Honorable Heather A. Wilson was
reported to the Senate by Chairman McCain on April 5, 2017,
with the recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The
nomination was confirmed by the Senate on May 8, 2017.]
[all]