[Senate Hearing 117-984]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-984
THE NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE
CHRISTINE E. WORMUTH TO BE
SECRETARY OF THE ARMY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 13, 2021
__________
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
63-009 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii TOM COTTON, Arkansas
TIM KAINE, Virginia MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine JONI ERNST, Iowa
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois RICK SCOTT, Florida
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
MARK KELLY, Arizona JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
John D. Wason, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
may 13, 2021
Page
The Nomination of the Honorable Christine E. Wormuth to be 1
Secretary of The Army.
Members Statements
Reed, Senator Jack............................................... 1
Inhofe, Senator James M.......................................... 3
Witness Statements
Hagel, Charles ``Chuck'', Former Secretary of Defense............ 3
Wormuth, The Honorable Christine, Nominee to be Secretary of The 5
Army.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 37
Questions for the Record....................................... 72
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 91
Biographical Sketch............................................ 92
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 95
Signature Page................................................. 103
(iii)
THE NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE
CHRISTINE E. WORMUTH TO BE
SECRETARY OF THE ARMY
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021
United States Senate,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room
SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Jack Reed
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Committee Members present: Senators Reed, Shaheen,
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters,
Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer,
Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED
Chairman Reed. Let me call the hearing to order.
Good morning. The Committee meets this morning to consider
the nomination of Ms. Christine Wormuth to be Secretary of the
Army.
On behalf of the Committee, I want to thank you for your
willingness to return to public service. Thank you very much.
I also want to welcome your husband, Mr. Drew Kuepper and
your mother, Mrs. Deanna Wormuth, who are with us this morning.
I would like to acknowledge your daughters, Rachel and
Madeleine, and other family members who I am sure would have
liked to have been here in person, but because of pandemic
restrictions, are proudly watching from home. We thank them for
their continued support of your service to our Nation.
Finally, I want to recognize and thank former Secretary of
Defense Chuck Hagel, who will be introducing Ms. Wormuth this
morning. Thank you, again, Mr. Secretary, for your service and
your presence.
As we consider Ms. Wormuth's nomination, I note that she
has a wealth of experience in defense and national security
policy spanning 25 years both, in and out of government. She
has served in multiple senior leadership positions at the
Department of Defense (DOD) as well as with the highly public
policy research organizations, including her recent tenure at
the RAND Corporation.
I also want to acknowledge the historic nature of this
hearing. If confirmed, Ms. Wormuth would be the first woman to
be the Secretary of the Army and I am pleased that we have
finally reached this moment.
Ms. Wormuth, as Secretary of the Army your primary
responsibility will be the manning, training, and equipping of
Army Forces to ensure that the service is capable, in
conjunction with other branches for provides for the defense of
the United States. In the process of providing forces to
combatant commanders, you will need to navigate the perpetual
tensions amongst mobilization, modernization, and readiness.
The Army is fundamentally about people. The Chief of Staff
of the Army, General McConville, has committed the Army being a
people-first organization, not just for soldiers, but their
families, Army civilians, and veterans. To be a people-first
organization, the Army must show commitment through its
policies and practices.
However, a trip I took to Fort Hood with Senator Inhofe
deepened my concern about the cohesion of the force. The
military continues to show the strain of 2 decades of
continuous deployments. The Fort Hood report showed that too
many commanders do not know their troops and too many troops do
not trust their commanders, and issues such as racism,
extremism, sexual harassment, and sexual assault have, in too
many instances, gone unchecked.
Ms. Wormuth, these are issues that will require your direct
and immediate attention and I would ask that you share with the
Committee this morning how you plan to address these issues.
Historically, the Army has struggled to effectively
modernize. The establishment of Army's Futures Command and the
associated reorganization of related commands inject a
tremendous energy into modernization efforts and Congress has
provided the service-wide latitude to make programmatic and
structural changes and has supported the Army's efforts.
However, creating such new authorities as created tensions
between civilian and military acquisition officials. As
Secretary of the Army, you will face difficult decisions on
these modernization efforts. You will need to be clear-eyed in
defining the Army's appropriate role within the Joint Force and
multidomain operations and you will need to ensure that the
spirit and intent of civilian control of the military is
appropriately executed.
Lastly, the Army must continue to improve its readiness in
the context of long-term strategic competition. I applaud the
Army's ongoing focus on large training exercises, including the
Defender series in Europe and in the Pacific and its leadership
in the Project Convergence series. These large-scale events not
only test system capabilities and exercise critical skill sets
to include mobilization and deployment of the force, they also
facilitate joint and coalition training, reflecting how we
would fight in future operations.
The Army has also introduced ReARMM, Regionally Aligned
Readiness and Modernization Model, to synchronize all Army
components across regions and provide predictability to the
formations under U.S. supervision, regular Army, National
Guard, and the Army Reserves. This effort has great promise.
Ms. Wormuth, it is confirmed you entered an Army in
transition and will face China as the pacing threat,
revanchist, near-peer land threats in Europe, and
counterterrorism requirements remaining in the Middle East and
Africa. These challenges will require a thoughtful resolute
leadership.
Thank you, again, for your willingness to serve our Nation.
I look forward to your testimony.
Now let me recognize the ranking member, Senator Inhofe.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JAMES INHOFE
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, it is great to have you here today. We look
forward to your confirmation, and it is nice to see Chuck Hagel
back, too. So, we look forward to your introduction.
As I have often said, the world is the most dangerous
place. We all understand that now. We face the threats we have
not faced before. Our competitors have gone to school in the
American way of war and they are rapidly modernizing their
militaries to exploit our vulnerabilities.
We are all aware that China and Russia, combined, has spent
more to modernize their militaries than we are. Now, you are
the first Service Secretary nominee to come before us and we
have a couple of Army guys up here, so we have a little bias in
this, and I would tell each one of you, if you are given
insufficient resources to meet the mission, we are here to
help.
But we do not have time for that sort of question and drama
when our adversaries, especially the Chinese, are outpacing us.
Each of the services should be focused on providing the forces
and combatant commanders in need to keep up the pace.
The Army has quite a lot to contribute in the 2018 NDS
[National Defense Strategy]. You and I talked about that. Your
commitment to this blueprint is very impressive and I do
appreciate that. I have been pleased with the Army to drive and
adapt a new operational challenges in the INDOPACOM from the
developing in new land-based strike options to standing up
multidomain task forces. We wrote the Pacific Deterrence
Initiative last year, in part, because we are not present
enough in the Western Pacific and the Army understands that.
So, we look forward to your testimony and look forward to
serving with you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
Now, it is my privilege and pleasure to introduce former
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel to introduce Ms. Wormuth.
Mr. Secretary?
STATEMENT OF CHARLES ``CHUCK'' HAGEL, FORMER SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE
Mr. Hagel. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
Inhofe, and Members of the Committee.
I appreciate the opportunity to introduce Christine Wormuth
in support of the President's nomination of her to be Secretary
of the Army. As Senator Inhofe just noted, a few of us have had
some experience with the Army and as an old Army sergeant, it
is truly a privilege to introduce the President's nominee for
Secretary of the Army to the Armed Services Committee.
You all have Ms. Wormuth's bio and impressive work record
over many years in varied national security positions, so I am
not going to repeat what you already have; instead, I am going
to tell you a little bit about how I know her, how I have
worked with her, my experience with her, and my knowledge of
Ms. Wormuth.
I have known and worked with Christine Wormuth since
February 2013 during my time at the Pentagon as Secretary of
Defense, but I have known who she was through my previous
positions as a United States senator, co-chairman of the
President's Intelligence Advisory Board, and chairman of the
Atlantic Council.
When I became Secretary of Defense in February 2013, Ms.
Wormuth became an important part of my team. She held the
position of Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Strategy
Plans and Forces. She worked closely with Under Secretary of
Defense Jim Miller and the Deputy Under Secretary, Kathleen
Hicks, who this Committee has just recently confirmed to be the
Deputy Secretary of Defense.
In early 2014, I recommended to President Obama that he
nominate Ms. Wormuth to replace Under Secretary Miller, since
he was leaving, as well as Deputy Under Secretary Hicks. The
President nominated her and she was confirmed by this Committee
in mid-2014.
Under Secretary Wormuth and I worked closely on many
issues. Her experience, leadership, and good judgment were
essential to fulfilling the serious responsibilities that DOD
had during that time and continues to have. Ms. Wormuth led the
2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, working closely with the
chairman and vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the
military services.
Her leadership was especially important during the Ebola
crisis in 2014 and 2015. Where she worked closely with the
Army, AFRICOM command. The White House, and all the
intergovernmental agencies involved with the Ebola effort. Ms.
Wormuth's leadership and long experience was critical to
helping the Army to further develop and strengthen its
capabilities, its vision, and also understand and lead its
role, what the Army's role was during these developing times,
during a period of great power competition. Particularly, its
warfighting concepts, strategies, capabilities, and needs for
the future.
While serving as the senior director for defense policy at
the National Security Council before joining DOD, she worked
closely with Secretaries Gates' and Panetta's teams on the 2012
defense strategic guidance. Which revised DOD's strategy and
signaled to rebalance to the Asia Pacific.
Her extensive efforts working on suicide prevention, sexual
assault, and harassment, and support to military families and
veterans, and all ``quality of life'' issues for our military
and their families were particularly impressive. When I told
Ms. Wormuth that I intended to recommend her to President Obama
to be Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, I also told her
that I intended to recommend to the President that Bob Work be
Deputy Secretary of Defense and Mike McCord be Under Secretary
Controller. The point was, I wanted a team that would work
closely together. She never wavered from that commitment and
was an effective and respected leader as a strong member of a
very impressive team.
In February 2015, I awarded Christine Wormuth the
Distinguished Public Service Award, which as you all know, is
the highest award that can be given to political appointees. In
this citation, I said, and quote, Ms. Wormuth played a vital
role, leading the Department's efforts to degrade, destroy, the
Islamic State of Iraq and the Lavan, regularly providing
strategic advice to the Secretary of Defense, engaging with
members of the interagency to formulate policy and briefing
members of Congress of key developments amid a significant
budget uncertainty that we were dealing with at the time.
Ms. Wormuth was a critical voice in the Department
deliberations aimed at aligning the Department's strategy with
its resources. After Ms. Wormuth left the Pentagon at the end
of the Obama administration in 2017, she took on new senior
director roles at the Atlantic Council and RAND. Where I,
again, worked with her as a member of the Atlantic Council's
international board of directors and RAND's board of trustees.
As I noted in my introduction of Mike McCord on Tuesday
morning, the indispensable requisites of leadership are
character, integrity, courage, and judgment. If any of these
are missing, the journey will not end well. If the person does
not possess a sense of humanity and decency, they are not fit
for leadership.
Christine Wormuth possesses all of these essential
requirements and the successful experience to warrant her
confirmation. I am proud to introduce Christine Wormuth this
morning.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Inhofe, for
allowing me to present my introduction of Ms. Wormuth for your
consideration of President Biden's nomination of her to be
Secretary of the Army. Thank you.
Chairman Reed. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I
particularly want to thank you for your service as a sergeant,
probably the high point of your contribution to the United
States of America. I say that as someone who cannot claim that
distinction as being an NCO [non-commissioned officer] in
combat. Thank you very much.
Ms. Wormuth, your statement, please.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CHRISTINE WORMUTH, NOMINEE TO BE
SECRETARY OF THE ARMY
Ms. Wormuth. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
Inhofe, and distinguished Members of the Committee. I am deeply
honored to come before you today as President Biden's nominee
for Secretary of the Army.
I am grateful for your consideration of my nomination and I
am also very grateful to this Committee for its long and
bipartisan commitment to our national security.
Thank you, Secretary Hagel, for being here in person today
and giving me such a lovely introduction. It was a privilege to
work with you when you were Secretary and it is a particular
honor to be introduced today by the first and only old Army
sergeant who was also Secretary of Defense. If confirmed, I
hope to follow your example of leadership that never lost sight
of the brave military members and their families who serve our
Nation and who are at the heart of everything we do in the Army
and Department of Defense.
To my husband Drew, a retired Navy officer, don't hold it
against him, Thank you for your love, optimism, and support, no
matter what comes our way. My daughters, Rachel and Madeleine,
are off in college now, but they are always in my heart. I have
been blessed with a strong and wonderful family who has taught
me to strive, lifted me up, and modeled service to others.
Thank you, Mom, for being here today and every day and
thank you, Jennifer, for all that you do as a caring and
capable surgeon.
My mother's father, Arthur Dean Wilkens, was a World War II
Army veteran. My father-in-law, Bill Kuepper, served in the
Army during the Korean War. My sister serves today in the U.S.
Army Reserves and my step son-in-law serves in the National
Guard.
While I have not served in uniform, I chose to serve in a
different way: as a career civil servant in the Department of
Defense and, later, I had the honor of serving as Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy. It has been the privilege of
my career to work alongside and see firsthand the sacrifices
soldiers and their families make, as well as all they achieve
when answering the Nation's call time and, again. I could not
be more humbled and proud to have the opportunity to serve as
Secretary of the Army and to ensure that we continue to provide
the Army with what it needs to succeed.
Title 10 gives the Secretary of the Army many
responsibilities. But fundamentally, the job of the Secretary
is to lead the Army, to lead change in the Army, to be a strong
advocate for the value of land power both, inside and outside
the Department of Defense, and to build strong relationships
with you, Congress, who ultimately provides the argumentative
with the authorities and resources it needs to fulfill its
mission.
If confirmed, I will focus each and every day on these
solemn responsibilities, working closely with the Chief of
Staff of the Army and other Army leaders. I will strive to
always provide candid and considered advice to Secretary Austin
and Deputy Secretary Hicks in matters affecting the Army.
More than any time in my professional life, the United
States appears to be at a strategic inflection point. We have a
window to make needed changes to ensure that the Army continues
to be the best fighting force in the world, but that window
will not be opened indefinitely.
If confirmed, my goal will be to help the Army continue to
transform to be able to compete, deter, and if necessary, fight
and win. Together with this Committee and others, we need to
carefully examine our operational concepts, align them to meet
the challenges posed by the adversaries we face, use them to
drive what new advanced capabilities we acquire and then
organize, train, and equip our soldiers to employ these
capabilities successfully in competition and conflict, if
necessary.
The Army has embarked on its most ambitious modernization
program in 40 years to enable it to stay ahead of the
challenges posed by the realities of high-intensity,
technologically advanced warfighting. Seeing these
modernization programs through successfully, while maintaining
readiness to meet the demands of current operations, will be a
top priority for me, if confirmed.
Fundamental to the Army's readiness is its people: Army
soldiers, whether Active, Guard, or Reserve, their families,
Army civilians, and our Army veterans.
General McConville and former Secretary McCarthy place the
Army's people at the center of their efforts and if confirmed,
I intend to prioritize the full range of people issues. To
ensure our soldiers and civilians have the best quality of life
possible, I will strive to continue improving our Army housing,
healthcare, childcare, and spouse employment opportunities. I
will focus on ensuring the Army can recruit, develop, and
retain the diversity of talent it needs to remain the world's
premier land force, and I will do everything in my power to
ensure we have a healthy command climate at every Army
installation that foster's Army values and ensures the well-
being of our people.
There is no place in our Nation's Army for sexual
harassment and assault, domestic violence, extremism, ration
racism, or other harmful behaviors that inhibit readiness.
Members of the Committee, if confirmed, I will seek to lead
as a hands-on Secretary that works closely with the Army's
uniformed leadership at all levels, empowers our staff, models
ethical and transparent leadership, and who demonstrates
everyday care for the entire Army team. I will be the strongest
possible advocate for the Army inside the Pentagon and out.
Finally, I would consult closely with this Committee,
because without regular and constructive dialogue and
partnership, we will not succeed in transforming the Army to
meet future challenges.
I look forward to your questions and thank you again for
opportunity to be with you today.
[The statement of Ms. Wormuth follows:]
Prepared Statement by Christine Wormuth
Good morning Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and
distinguished Members of the Committee. I am deeply honored to come
before you today as President Biden's nominee for Secretary of the
Army. I am grateful for your consideration of my nomination. I am also
grateful to the Committee for its long and bipartisan commitment to our
national security. Your commitment to ensuring our Armed Forces have
what they need to protect and defend our Nation is essential.
Thank you Secretary Hagel for being here in person today to
introduce me so warmly to the Committee. It was a privilege to work
with you when you were Secretary, and it is a particular honor to be
introduced today by the first and only Secretary of Defense who also
served our country during the Vietnam War as an Army sergeant. If
confirmed I hope to follow your example of leadership that never lost
sight of the brave military members and their families who serve our
nation and are at the heart of everything we work for in the Army and
the Defense Department.
To my husband Drew, a retired Navy officer, thank you for your
love, optimism and support no matter what comes our way. My daughters
Rachel and Madeleine are off in college now but they are my greatest
joy and are always in my heart. I have been blessed with a strong and
wonderful family who have taught me to strive, lifted me up, and
modeled service to others. Thank you Mom for being here today and every
day and thank you Jennifer for all that you do as a caring and capable
surgeon.
My mother's father, Arthur Dean Wilkens, was a World War II Army
veteran. My father-in-law, Bill Kuepper served in the Army during the
Korean War. My sister serves today in the U.S. Army Reserves and my
stepson-in-law serves in the National Guard. While I have not served in
uniform, I chose to serve in a different way, as a career civil servant
in the Department of Defense and later had the honor of serving as
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. It has been the privilege of my
career to work alongside and see first-hand the sacrifices soldiers and
their families make, as well as everything they have achieved in
answering the Nation's call, time and again. I could not be more
humbled and proud to have the opportunity to serve as Secretary of the
Army and ensure that we continue to provide the Army what it needs to
succeed.
Title 10 gives the Secretary of the Army many responsibilities, but
fundamentally the job of the Secretary is to lead the Army----to lead
change in the Army--to be a strong advocate for the value of land
power, both inside and outside the Department of Defense, and to build
strong relationships with you, Congress, who ultimately provides the
Army with the resources and authorities it needs to fulfill its
mission. If confirmed, I will focus each and every day on these solemn
responsibilities, working closely with the Chief of Staff of the Army
and other Army leaders. I will strive to always provide candid and
considered advice to Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks on
matters affecting the Army.
More than at any previous point in my professional life, the United
States appears to be at a strategic inflection point. We have a window
to make needed changes to ensure that the Army continues to be the best
fighting force in the world. but that window will not be open
indefinitely. If confirmed, my goal will be to help the Army continue
to transform to be able to compete, deter, and if necessary fight and
win. Together with this Committee and others, we need to carefully
examine our operational concepts, align them to meet the challenges
posed by the adversaries we face, use them to drive what new, advanced
capabilities we acquire, and then organize, train and equip our
soldiers to employ those capabilities successfully in competition and
conflict, if necessary. The Army has embarked on its most ambitious
modernization program in 40 years to enable it to stay ahead of the
challenges posed by the realities of high-intensity, technologically
advanced warfighting. Seeing these modernization programs through
successfully, while also maintaining readiness to meet the demands of
current operations will be a top priority for me, if confirmed.
Fundamental to the Army's readiness is its people--Army soldiers,
whether Active, Guard or Reserve, their families, Army civilians and
our Army veterans. General McConville and former Secretary McCarthy
placed the Army's people at the center of their efforts and, if
confirmed, I intend to prioritize the full range of people issues. To
ensure our soldiers and civilians have the best quality of life
possible, I will strive to continue improving our Army housing,
healthcare, childcare, and spouse employment opportunities. I will
focus on ensuring the Army can recruit, develop, and retain the
diversity of talent the Army needs to remain the world's premiere land
force. I will do everything in my power to ensure we have a healthy
command climate at every Army installation that fosters Army values
ensures and the well-being of all our people. There is no place in our
Nation's Army for sexual harassment and assault, domestic violence,
racism, and extremism. or other harmful behaviors that inhibit
readiness.
Members of the Committee, if confirmed, I will seek to lead as a
hands-on Secretary that works closely with the Army's uniform
leadership at all levels, empowers our staffs, models ethical and
transparent leadership, and who demonstrates care day in and day out
for the entire Army team. I will be the strongest possible advocate for
the Army inside the Pentagon and out. Finally, I would consult closely
with this Committee, because without regular and constructive dialogue
and partnership, we will not succeed in transforming the Army to meet
future challenges.
I look forward to your questions and thank you again for
opportunity to be with you today.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Ms. Wormuth.
There are a series of standard questions that we must ask
of the nominees. Would you appropriately respond?
Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations
governing conflicts of interest?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes.
Chairman Reed. Have you assumed any duties or taken any
action that would appear to presume the outcome of the
confirmation process?
Ms. Wormuth. No.
Chairman Reed. Exercising our legislative and oversight
responsibilities makes it important that this Committee, the
subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress
receive testimony, briefings, reports, records, or other
information from the Executive Branch on a timely basis.
Do you agree, if confirmed, to appear and testify before
this Committee when requested?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes.
Chairman Reed. Do you agree to provide records, documents,
and electronic communications in a timely manner when requested
by this Committee, its subcommittees, or other appropriate
committees of Congress and to consult with the requestor
regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in
providing such records?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes.
Chairman Reed. Will you ensure that your staff complies
with deadlines established by this Committee for the production
of reports, records, and other information, including timely
responding to hearing questions for the record?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes.
Chairman Reed. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses
and briefers in response to congressional requests?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes.
Chairman Reed. Will those witnesses and briefers be
protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much and, again, welcome, Ms.
Wormuth.
You are on the verge of being responsible for the manning,
training, equipping, and modernization of the Army and to
support combatant commanders for their requirements.
How do you see your policy and strategy background
contributing to your ability to serve this role.
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator, I have had the opportunity over
the course of my career on a number of occasions to think about
what kind of a National Defense Strategy we need and then think
about what that means in terms of the kinds of capability and
forces that our Nation needs to have to fulfill that strategy
and meet the needs of the strategy that we need at the time.
So, I have had the opportunity to work through Quadrennial
Defense Reviews, probably more than I care to remember, and to
work closely with all of the services. But certainly closely
with the Army in particular to think about what kinds of
capabilities we need and how best to organize those forces and
how to train and equip them.
I have also had the opportunity to, again, work closely
with the services as it has had to strike the difficult balance
sometimes between meeting the demands of current operations
while also preparing for the future and ensuring readiness,
even in very difficult times during sequestration. So, I think
all of those experiences would serve me well if I were
confirmed as Secretary of the Army.
Chairman Reed. Thank you. As you indicated in your
statement, and as I indicated in my statement, sexual
harassment and sexual assault remain very significant issues
under the force. As I indicated, Senator Inhofe and I had the
opportunity to travel to Fort Hood and what we discovered was
the prevention program, the education program, the shock
program, as designated by the Army, was basically nonexistent,
but below the brigade level. It was a check the box. It was, I
think, a major, contributing factor.
One of the major issues that you have it deal with is
prevention. Adjudication is important, but I would rather
prevent the crime than bring the accused to justice. But what
are your thoughts on how to increase the focus on prevention?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, I very much share your view that we
need to do more in terms of preventing sexual harassment and
sexual assault. I think that the Army has begun to focus on
that more through creation of this is my squad framework, if
you will. It is really more of a mindset, as I understand it,
but it very much comes from a place of trying to do a much
better job of educating our soldiers that we are all on the
team and on the squad together. I think that initiative will be
helpful in terms of restoring a much healthier command climate.
I think using the cohesion assessment teams that the Army
has stood up to go out and survey other installations to try to
get ahead of the kinds of problems that we saw at Fort Hood
would be a good step.
But if confirmed, I would want to look at what more could
be done. In my own experience, think there are types of
training that could be helpful with prevention and I am not
talking here about more PowerPoint slides that people just sort
of go to mental screen saver on. I am talking about training
that is much more hands on and gets people involved in
scenarios and talks to people about bystander training. Because
I think that is something else that we want our soldiers to, if
they see something happening, be part of stopping it.
Chairman Reed. Well, thank you very much.
If one of your advanced policy questions response, you
referenced a potential risk if the authority and flexibility in
modernization programs is too far removed from the actual
production of the platform or item, there could be a situation
where we are not wisely investing in such a program.
So, given the ambitious timeline for fielding new
equipment, what steps would you take to manage the risks across
this program?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, this is something, if confirmed, I
very much want to be hands-on, as I said, in my statement. I
think that the standup of Army Futures Command was very, as you
said, put a lot of energy around the Army's modernization
programs. But I think to try to make sure that we keep our
programs on schedule and at the cost that we have been planning
for. I will want to look carefully at the work of the cross-
functional teams, and I would, in particular, like to see the
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Logistics and Technology,
that part of the staff work very, very closely with Army
Futures Command. I think there has been some friction there and
I would like to do everything possible to make sure the whole
team is working together, given the challenges in the program.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
Senator Inhofe, please?
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, I want to say to our witness for giving me the
time, I had a chance to visit last week, and as we discussed
during that time, I think we can all agree that the 2018 NDS
with its emphasis on great power competition, as we discussed
in my office, accurately assesses the current strategic
environment and the Army will continue to play a major role in
this environment.
Now, back in 2014, the defense review of that year, it
recommended cutting the size of the Army based on the lack of
threat from Russia. Now, the first mention of Russia in that
document says the United States is willing to undertake
security, cooperation with Russia.
Well, times have changed and the situation has changed, and
I would ask a two-part question. One, as logistics become more
contested, including cyber threats, do you think that those
assumptions should be changed today and has the evolved threat
from Russia changed your thinking on what kind of Army the
Nation needs?
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
I will take the second question first, if I may. You are
absolutely right, circumstances have changed with Russia. I
think of Russia as being a rogue nation that is something of a
risk taker with Vladimir Putin at the head and I think we need
to be very mindful of the challenges that Russia poses. It is
one of the few nations that poses an existential threat to the
United States and I think as we have seen recently in its
aggressive behavior right at Ukraine's border that this is
something we need to watch very carefully.
I think there is very much a role for the Army in
particular in Europe to provide a strong deterrent to make
Russia think twice about any kind of aggressive action against
NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization], for example. So, I
support the forward headquarters of Fifth Corps, for example,
in Poland. I would like to keep working through the European
Deterrence Initiative to further strengthen our posture, vis-a-
vis, Russia.
To your point on contested logistics, I think it is fair to
say there is a much greater appreciation today than there was
in 2014 for the possibility of the challenges associated with
projecting proper from what I would call a disrupted Homeland.
So, logistics, and that is one of the reasons there is a joint
concept underway for contested logistics. I think we would want
to carefully examine assumptions around logistics in the
ongoing strategy review.
Senator Inhofe. Great response. I appreciate that.
The other area, there have been a lot of changes. In 2018,
the Army leadership identified six essential modernization
priorities and since then, the Army has realigned over 35
billion to fund these modernization priorities. Now, there have
been a lot of changes, but I would ask the question, now based
on the 2018 NDS, do you agree that the Army's assessment that
long-range, precision fires is still the top modernization
priority?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, I am pretty comfortable with that
assessment. I think the long-range, precision fires portfolio
is a very important one in the Army's overall modernization
program and it is particularly important in the Indo-Pacific,
although, it is also relevant, vis-a-vis, Russia, as well.
Senator Inhofe. Very good. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe.
Senator Shaheen, please.
Senator Shaheen. Congratulations, Ms. Wormuth on your
historic nomination and thank you for your willingness to come
back into public service.
You mentioned the fact that your stepson, you said is a
member of National Guard and you also talked about the
importance of the people of our military and our Army; they are
the reason that we have been so successful. I am concerned that
over this past year, we have witnessed the National Guard
really deployed virtually nonstop to handle pandemic relief,
civil disturbances, to administer vaccines, protect the U.S.
Capitol, a whole myriad of activities.
In New Hampshire, we have had over 900 Guard members who
have deployed to support our COVID relief efforts. We could not
have gotten through this last year without them. They have been
consistently on deployment for more than 400 days and we also
just sent a battalion to, a unit from the 1st Battalion, 169th
Aviation Regiment to Kosovo and of that unit, 10 had previously
been deployed, and one was on a sixth deployment.
So, as we think about what we need and the important role
of our National Guard, are you concerned with those prolonged,
high-operational tempo of deployments and have you given any
thought to what we might do to address the impact on those
Guard members and their families?
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator for that question.
First of all, I want to take the opportunity to just thank
the National Guard for the tremendous work that it has done in
the past year, in particular; as you said, they have really
stepped up in a time period that has been difficult for all of
us. So, thank you to all of our National Guard for everything
they have done.
I am, of course, concerned about the possibility that there
are unreasonable or unhelpful demands on the National Guard, as
well as the Reserves. So if I were confirmed, I would want to
look closely at, with General Hokanson, Chief of the National
Guard Bureau, to look at exactly how that strain is manifesting
and whether his assessment is that there is undue stress on the
force.
I think we have to be, particularly with our citizen
soldiers, we have to be mindful of the fact that they are
balancing their service in our military with their civilian
careers and their responsibilities with their families, and,
frankly, from a recruiting and retention standpoint, if we are
overly taxing the Guard or the Reserves, that can be damaging
for recruiting and retention.
So, it is something that I would want to look into and I
think there are tools to help manage places where there is
undue strain, and that is something that also, the new ReARMM
readiness model, I think will be helpful in trying to make the
requirements more predictable for folks in the Guard and the
Reserve.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you.
One aspect of that is the complexity of retirement,
healthcare, and education benefits that the Guard receives, and
as you know, there is a difference between when they are
deployed on State orders under title 10, title 32, and the
complex healthcare transitions that are caused by going off and
on different orders. So, do you think we should re-examine
those benefits and would you commit to being part of an effort
to take a look at those and see how we can better ensure that
Guard members know not only what is expected of them, but what
they can receive as a result of what they are doing.
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, if I were confirmed, I would be happy
to look into the status of the benefits and how they are
provided and whether that makes sense. I know we have done a
tremendous amount in recent years to try to shrink the number
of different duty statuses just to sort of help us with that,
and I would be happy to look into the issues that you have
raised and come back and talk with you.
Senator Shaheen. Great. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Shaheen.
Senator Cotton, please.
Senator Cotton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, congratulations on your nomination. Thanks for
your, really lifetime of service in the Department in your many
different roles and to your family for their many different
family members who have served the country in uniform, as well.
As you prepare to take over the Army, I want to highlight
something that was troubling recently to me in the news. The
Army University Press has published guidance that they will no
longer use the term Union Army in their publications when
writing about the Civil War. I think this is political
correctness run amok.
U.S. Grant, of course, in his memoirs, frequently wrote
about the term Union Army and I think that we can all agree
that Unconditional Surrender Grant knows a little bit more
about Civil War history than do bureaucrats at the Army
University Press.
So, could I get your commitment today that you are going to
insist that the Army in all of its educational and academic
roles is going to reflect our common understanding of our
history and not write terms like Union Army out of academic
papers or books?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator Cotton, I certainly grew up learning
about the Union forces, myself. If I am confirmed, I would be
happy to look into this and make sure that we are not writing
the term Union forces out of our history.
Senator Cotton. Thank you. I think most normal Americans
who learn their Civil War history in ninth grade and are proud
of what men like U.S. Grant and William Sherman did would be
glad to hear that, as well.
Can I also get a commitment on professional military
education, that we will make sure that it is focused on what
our senior leaders need to know to perform their roles, to lead
their troops, and especially face off our main adversaries,
countries like China and Russia?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, absolutely. I am a firm believer that our
professional military education is essentially. Frankly,
particularly as we are moving into a period of great power
competition where so many of our officers have spent the last
20 years focused on learning about issues in the Middle East.
It is essential in my view that the PME [Professional Military
Education] curricula be reoriented to make sure that we are
teaching our officers what they need to know about the
challenges that they will face.
Senator Cotton. Thank you. Turning to programmatic matters,
unfortunately, I think you are going to be presiding over the
Army during a period of budgetary constraints. When you look at
the Army's key modernization priorities, which one of those do
you think are the most important to prioritize if you are
facing a constrained budget?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator Cotton, as I said, I generally
share the Army's current assessment that the long-range,
precision fires priority is the top priority, but there is also
a lot of interdependence among the six big categories. So, I
will want to, if, in fact, there is a requirement to make hard
choices, I will want to look very closely across the entire
modernization program.
Senator Cotton. Why do you think it is the long-range,
precision fires that is the most urgent or the highest
priority?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, I think, Senator, it is the highest
priority in my view because of the need to address the anti-
access area denial challenges that we face in both, uniform and
Indo-Pacific. Given the quite sophisticated integrated air
defenses that we will likely be facing, I think it behooves us
to develop capabilities that allow us to strike targets from
very long distances.
Senator Cotton. I agree, especially in the Western Pacific.
That is one reason why I think it was so important that we
finally leave the INF [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces]
Treaty because China has built up thousands and thousands of
missiles. Although many people of a potential conflict with
China as primarily being driven by the air and naval battle.
Obviously, you can carry a lot more rounds in the magazine, so
to speak, from ground-based precision fires. That would be the
Army's domain.
Another possible budgetary constraint you could see is if
the Department of Defense, not the Department of the Army,
overall top line is constrained and there are urgent priorities
that can no longer being postponed in the Air Force and the
Navy, then the Army may end up having money taken out of its
hide. Maybe the easiest place to come down there is the
reduction in in-strength number of troops.
What are your thoughts on the current in-strength and where
it needs to be in the future?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator, first of all, I would say, I
don't think anyone would be well served by looking at the Army
as something of just a bill payer.
Senator Cotton. I don't either, but I am afraid that that
might be the direction it is going if the budget comes in where
it has been reported.
Ms. Wormuth. Because that is my view and because I will be
a very strong advocate for the Army, if confirmed, I think I
would look very carefully and be quite skeptical of proposals
to make major cuts to force structure. I would not want to see
us return to the days of 15-month-long deployments and regular
use of stop-loss. So, I will certainly be a strong advocate for
the Army, in the event that we have to make hard choices.
Senator Cotton. Thank you. One final question, and I have
raised this with your predecessor. I raised it with General
Milley when he was the chief and with General McConville. Their
hearings will be your wingman.
The Army has all these great modernization priorities.
Soldiers don't want to ride around in a next-generation combat
vehicle. They want to ride in a Bradley or an Abrams. They
don't want to shoot an extended, long-range cannon. They want
to shoot a Paladin. They don't want to fly in Future Vertical
Lift. They want to fly in an Apache or a Blackhawk.
Can you commit to me, as your predecessors did, General
McConville and General Milley, that we are going to give these
things good names that motivate our soldiers, as opposed to
long bureaucratic names?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, absolutely.
Senator Cotton. There are a lot of great generals like
Pershing and Eisenhower and Grant and Sherman. A lot of great
young soldiers who have won the Medal of Honor over the years.
Soldiers need to be motivated by the glorious history of their
Army. They don't need to be riding around in vehicles with
acronyms----
Ms. Wormuth. Acronyms.
Senator Cotton.--that are unpronounceable.
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator.
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Cotton.
Let me recognize Senator Kaine, please.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Wormuth, great to visit with you. Congratulations on
your nomination. I would like to ask you to start off and just
talk about the Army's progress on dealing with the military
housing challenge. You and I talked and I feel like the Army
might have been suffering the most difficulty in this area, but
I have been pretty pleased with how the Army has moved out on
dealing with the challenge.
Please give me your assessment of where we are and what we
need to do to continue to make progress.
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator.
I think the Army did undertake a pretty large
reorganization to get its arms around the very significant
problems that it was having in housing by making the Army
Materiel Command and underneath that, the Installation
Management Command, responsible for keeping their eye on this
issue every single day. So, our three-star at IMC meets with
the heads of the privatized companies on a weekly basis to go
over exactly which houses are being worked on at particular
installations. We now have, I believe, quarterly town halls
with soldiers and their families at major installations to give
people the opportunity to talk about concerns they have in
their housing.
I think these have been good steps forward and, if
confirmed, I would want to continue to have that very regular
focus and a lot of very close cooperation with the companies
that are handling the privatized housing.
Senator Kaine. Thank you for that.
Last week, my colleague, Senator Sullivan and I had a
hearing in the Readiness Subcommittee and one of our witnesses,
Dr. Ray O'Toole is the acting director of operational tests and
evaluation. He told us something that shocked both of us.
Basically, all of the weapons programs that they evaluated in
fiscal year 2020, none of the weapons programs they evaluated
in fiscal year 2020 were survivable against relevant cyber
threats.
I have been on the Readiness Subcommittee for over 8 years
and we get routine reports on service readiness, measured in
terms of equipment, personnel, and training. However, we don't
measure how ready our forces or weapons systems are to counter
cyber threats.
If confirmed, will you work with the committee to make sure
that the Army is prepared to meet cybersecurity threats and
even examine the question of whether our readiness metric
should start to include assessments of how capable we are to
meet those threats?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, if confirmed, I would be pleased to
work with you and the Committee on this issue. I am greatly
concerned, frankly, by the threats that we face in the cyber
domain. All you have to do is look at the long gas lines that
are probably happening in your neighborhood right now as a
result of the Colonial Pipeline situation. I think those kinds
of threats are a serious issue both, to the integrity of the
modernization programs that we have underway, as well as to the
integrity of our secure communication networks. So, I would be
very happy to work with you, and Cybersecurity is something,
that if confirmed, I will take very seriously.
Senator Kaine. The last question--have is about Army's
arsenals. I am pretty involved in shipyard optimization in my
work with the Navy, given the heavy Navy presence in Virginia,
but my sort of more top line understanding of our Army arsenals
is that there is also significant need for investment and
modernization in those arsenals.
What can you tell me about how you would prioritize that
issue, should you be confirmed?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator, my understanding, based on a
variety of war games that I have had the opportunity to
participate in, for example, underscore to me that munitions
are going to be incredibly important and having sufficient
inventories of munitions. So, I would certainly be interested
in looking at our arsenals and the Army and making sure that
they are ready to do what we need them to do.
Senator Kaine. Thank you very much. I look forward to
supporting your nomination.
I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Kaine.
Let me recognize, via Webex, Senator Rounds.
Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, first of all, let me just say thank you for
taking the time to visit with me last evening. I really did
appreciate the discussion that we had.
I want to identify just two areas that I would like to get
your thoughts on and I will allow you to share your concepts of
how we move forward, and I think Senator Kaine start talking
about the cybersecurity. I would like to follow-up specifically
with regard to the direction from the NDAA [National Defense
Authorization Act] that was passed in fiscal year 2020. It said
that each Military Department secretary would appoint an
independent principal cyber advisor. This critical advisor may
not assume any other position or responsibility in the Military
Department, must be independent of the service chief's
information officer, and must also advise the service's senior
uniformed officer. This advisor must have a seat at the table
during senior leader meetings and forums to ensure
cybersecurity measures, actions, programs, and policies are
synchronized and coordinated and basically brought into the
framework and fabric throughout the Department.
I would like you to share with us your thoughts on that and
I would really like your commitment that, if confirmed, you
will get back to us within your first 60 days in office to
review the Army's implementation of this mandated requirement.
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator Rounds.
I would be very pleased, if confirmed, to come back with
you and talk in detail about Army's current cyber plans both,
on the capability side and also on the security side.
If confirmed, I would intend to work very closely with my
principal cyber advisor. I think creation of that position in
each of the services was very beneficial. Frankly, the cyber
domain, again, is an area in my experience where we really need
to have some more specialized expertise. So, I think having
someone advise me and be able to work closely with me would be
very, very useful.
I also think it would be beneficial for the principal cyber
advisors of all of the services to be able to work together and
collaborate and share lessons learned and best practices.
Senator Rounds. Thank you. My time is going to expire
shortly. With your background in defense policy at OSD [Office
of the Secretary of Defense] and your time at RAND and
Georgetown, I am curious to hear your perspective on how the
Army basically will look at the competition with an aggressive
China. Specifically, that part which is sometimes boring to
talk about, but it has to do with the logistics about fighting
in that AOR [area of responsibility].
Can you share a little bit about your thoughts about the
seriousness of what we face, the distances, the timing
involved, and so forth that the Army will have to face and come
up with, with regard to how you are going to handle logistics
in that AOR.
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator. Well, as you know, in the Indo-
Pacific, the distances are extremely long and will present some
very, you know, new challenges for us in terms of joint
logistics. One thing that I think would be helpful would be to
develop a more distributed forward presence in the region to
try to help us manage the challenges of those contested
logistics.
I also think, if confirmed as Secretary of the Army, I
would want to work closely with my counterparts in the Air
Force and the Navy. Because, frankly, as you know, many of you
know, the Army does not self-deploy, unlike the Air Force and
the Navy. So, getting ground forces to that theater will, to
some degree, require, obviously, working with the Air Force and
the Navy. I know, for example, there are some real issues, I
think, on sealift, for example.
So, thinking about the Army's logistical challenges in the
context of the broader joint force would be something that I
would want to focus on, if confirmed.
Senator Rounds. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Rounds.
Now, let me recognize, via Webex, Senator Gillibrand.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Congratulations on being our first woman nominated to be
Secretary of the Army. It is exciting and I am sure you are up
to the task.
As you know, fighting sexual assault in the military is one
of my most important issues and it requires a positive command
climate where survivors feel safe disclosing their assault.
Obviously, with the Fort Hood report, the Army has not been
acquitting itself well in that regard.
What is your current assessment of command climate and how
do you intend to improve it?
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator Gillibrand, and thank you
for your leadership on this issue over the years, as well as a
number of others on this committee. I know this has been
something that you have been passionate about, and as a woman,
I particularly appreciate that passion and focus.
I read the report of the independent Fort Hood review
commission back in February, cover to cover and when I was
done, I was extremely angry and frustrated. I think the
commission's report, you know, makes claim that the Army has
real issues when it comes to this topic and I think there is
quite a bit of work to be done.
I think it was very prudent of the previous secretary to
fully accept all 70 recommendations of the independent review
commission. If confirmed, I would be completely committed to
fully implementing those, not just at Fort Hood, but across the
entire Army, anywhere applicable.
I think, you know, the Army has started to take some steps
that will improve the command climate, such as sending those
cohesion assessment teams out to other installations, as I
talked about, but I think there is more work to be done. Again,
as I said in response to an earlier question, I think, you
know, we need to put quite a bit of focus on prevention
programs, but also really pushing a positive command climate
down to the lowest possible level, so those junior enlisted
soldiers, you know, between 17 and 24, feel safe, feel
protected, and are looking out for each other.
Senator Gillibrand. Well, thank you. I am glad you share my
concerns and I am glad that you are committed to implementing
all the recommendations of the commission, including taking
sexual assault out of the chain of command. I think that will
be something that President Biden's 90-day review will also
recommend taking those serious crimes out of the chain of
command, and I hope that you will commit to implementing those
recommendations as Secretary of the Army.
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator, and I look forward to getting
the results of the independent commission that Secretary Austin
directed. I will be very interested to see what recommendations
they make.
Senator Gillibrand. Me, too.
As Chairwoman of the Personnel Subcommittee, I held a
hearing two weeks ago on cyber personnel issues. Given the
serious threats our nation is facing from Russia and China
alone, having a strong cyber force is more important than ever.
In the hearing and in my conversations with cyber experts,
there have been a number of recommendations to strengthen our
cyber force, including as part of recruitment and retention
efforts.
I am asking for your commitment to work with me on these
important issues to help create a stronger, more adaptable
cyber force.
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, I would be happy to work with you on
that issue. I think it is essential that we be able to recruit
and retain qualified cyber experts into the Army and into the
broader military. That can be challenging, as you can imagine,
in terms of trying to compete with the private sector, so I
think we need to think creatively about how we can bring that
talent and keep it in the Army.
Senator Gillibrand. I agree and we are working on some
ideas, so I look forward to getting your input on that, as
well. I also want to mention in my last-minute the Army Combat
Fitness Test. On the subject of retention, I remain very
concerned about the retention issues posed by the Army Combat
Fitness Test. Mainly, its effects on retaining women and those
with specialty roles like our JAGs, medical personnel, cyber
warriors, which is why I pushed for a provision in the last NDA
to pause and have the test independently evaluated.
May I have your commitment that you will keep me and my
staff apprised on the results of this independent study and can
I also have your commitment that the Department of Army will be
fully transparent in sharing any necessary data and information
with me and my office regarding the ACFT?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator. If confirmed, I would be happy
to share that information with you. I know RAND is actually, I
believe, undertaking that independent assessment and, again, I
would want to look carefully at that myself.
I also have concerns, obviously, about the implications of
the test for our ability to continue to retain women, which we
obviously want to do. I do think it is important for the Army
to have a physical fitness test that tests the kinds of combat
skills soldiers will need to have. To have a test that prevents
injuries, which I think the new test is designed to do much
better than the old one. But we want to make sure that we are
not indirectly penalizing anyone. I think the Army's decision
to, for example, allow women to do a plank, rather than the leg
tuck is a good example of adapting it in a way that I think is
helpful.
Senator Gillibrand. I agree. Thank you so much. Good luck.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Gillibrand.
Let me now recognize Senator Ernst, please.
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Wormuth, thank you, so very much for your willingness
to step forward once again and serve our Nation in this
capacity. You are certainly making history by charting course
as our first female nominee for Secretary of the Army.
Thirty years ago, I was commissioned into United States
Army Reserve, and at that time, the opportunities for women
were very limited. Women could not participate in combat arms.
They were cut out of various leadership positions because they
weren't able to be in combat arms. We had very few civilian
female leaders within the scope of the Army.
Now, knowing my daughter and her peers will be commissioned
next year in 2022 and she will go into the United States Army
and I am so thankful that she will have a strong, intelligent,
and well-qualified woman leading our United States Army. So,
God bless you for breaking those barriers and being the right
person at the right time, and I wish you well.
So, once confirmed, and I can assume your confirmation, you
can't, but I can, you will have a very challenging road ahead.
We do have a number of issue areas out there that do need
attention and we all will need to ensure that our soldiers are
prepared while we are able to modernize our Army and to defeat
those threats globally, as have been discussed.
I do look forward to working with you in the years to come
to ensure our Army and our wonderful soldiers have the critical
resources necessary to win the modern win on the modern
battlefield.
An area of interest that Senator Shaheen had brought up
earlier was our National Guard Forces. I retired out of the
National Guard just a few years ago and, certainly, they,
through the last 20 years or so, have really been put to the
test and you acknowledged that, and thank you for recognizing
that, through COVID, through the natural disasters that we have
throughout our states. We had a trade show in Iowa that our
Guard soldiers responded to. They were here in our nation's
capital, and we have soldiers in Kosovo as well, as Senator
Shaheen has said, and we always have them in the Middle East
from the great state of Iowa.
So, we know that there are training challenges with those
members as they are rapidly deployed both, domestically and
OCONUS [Outside Contiguous United States] and they also lack
the same type of resources as their Active Duty counterparts.
What would you do to ensure that we are maintaining their
readiness levels and making sure that their equipment is on par
with their counterparts on Active Duty?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, first, Senator, thank you very much for
your very kind words. I really appreciate it, and if confirmed,
I would certainly hope to live up to that example for your
daughter.
In terms of the National Guard and their equipment and
readiness, I am very much a believer in the Total Army and am
committed to making sure that our soldiers in the National
Guard have the training that they need to be ready to do what
we ask of them and have the equipment that they need to be able
to execute the missions that we ask them to do. So, that is
something that I will work diligently on.
As you know, you know, there are times when there can be
disagreements about where equipment needs to go and sometimes
hard choices that are made, but I will be very attentive to the
fact that the Guard has training and equipment needs.
Senator Ernst. Yeah, thank you so much for your commitment.
Another area of interest for me is our Army Special
Operations Forces (SOF) and they have a program within Special
Operations that is called Preservation of the Force and
Families, and they are committed through this program for
medical care of their forces, they focus on brain and cognitive
health. Those efforts are critical to SOF, but I would also
like to see some of those measures extended out to our
conventional forces, as well.
Would you be willing to collaborate with me on those
efforts to make sure that we are paying attention to traumatic
brain injury, to cognitive health with those conventional
forces, as well?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, I would be happy to collaborate with
you in that area, yes.
Senator Ernst. I think it is extremely important to do
that.
Just because my time is expiring, we did, during our phone
conversation, talk about the challenge that we are facing in
Iowa. It is related to the large warhead manufacturing facility
at the Iowa Army ammunition plant. It is critical that we get
this issue resolved. There is a piece of equipment that we need
to make sure remains in place, and, once again, I do appreciate
your willingness to work with me on that issue, as well.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. Thank you very much.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Ernst.
Let me now recognize Senator Kelly.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, as chair of the Emerging Threats Subcommittee,
I spend a lot of time considering the disrupt I have
technologies and countermeasures being pursued by our most
sophisticated adversaries and working to ensure that we can
address and outmatch these efforts.
As I traveled around Arizona, visiting our installations,
it is clear that our ranges play a key role in this work. These
testing environments provide significant value to our military
as we focus on increasingly sophisticated near-peer challenges
and strengthen our ability to leverage and integrate
capabilities in AI [artificial intelligence], electronic
warfare, and more.
If confirmed, how will you ensure that ranges like the Yuma
Proving Ground and Fort Huachuca's proving ground are a
priority for the Army, and do I have your commitment to work
with me to ensure that robust resourcing that can support
state-of-the-art infrastructure in a robust workforce to meet
the growing demand?
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator Kelly.
First of all, I completely agree with you that the Army
needs to be very attentive to challenges like counter UAS, for
example. Clearly, we are going to see artificial intelligence
on the future battlefield, so those are absolutely areas that
we need to be working on in terms of developing our
capabilities and obviously being able to test our capabilities.
So, I would be pleased to work with you on making sure that we
are using our testing ranges to the fullest degree possible and
are making sure that we are resourcing them so that we are able
to use them in the ways that we need.
Senator Kelly. Well, thank you.
Fort Huachuca is also the home for a significant portion of
the training for UABs . One of the benefits of training, as a
former pilot myself in the United States Navy, training in
Arizona is unmatched anywhere else. In Southern Arizona, we
have 350-something days of sunshine every single year and it
benefits the Army to do this training in Arizona. So, I would
love, at some point, if you had the opportunity, to come out to
Arizona and visit Fort Huachuca, Yuma Proving Ground, and just
see the facilities that we have there and the capability that
we have.
You know, often, there are challenges that we face with,
you know, moving systems and training around, so I wanted to
invite you out to the state of Arizona to visit some of our
incredible Army installations, and I hope you take me up on
that.
Ms. Wormuth. I would be happy to take you up on that. I
would love to go visit Fort Huachuca, see Yuma Proving Ground,
and see our terrific military intelligence schools there.
Senator Kelly. Thank you. I yield back.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Kelly.
Now, let me recognize Senator Cramer, please.
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Ms. Wormuth, for your incredible service and for
your willingness to step in this gap and congratulations. I
hope that your staff has prepared you for my question, because
the details are quite complicated.
But I was heartened by your statement, and I am just going
to quote a couple of things you said, ``Fundamental to the
Army's readiness is its people, Army soldiers, whether Active,
Guard, or Reserve, their families, I appreciate all of that,
and civilians and Army veterans.'' Then you state that General
McConville and former Secretary McCarthy placed the Army's
people at the center of their efforts.
Later on you said you want to be a hands-on secretary, work
closely with uniformed leadership and empower staff. I love
empowering staff, unless they do a really lousy job, okay. So,
I like the hands-on part, too.
So, there is really nothing that you are going to do in
your job or that we do here that, is more important than taking
care of our soldiers. The problem is, when a problem has to be
solved by a congressional inquiry that has to go all the way to
the senators themselves, threatening to hold a nominee's
confirmation up, that is bad from top to bottom. So, I am
trying to help a major whose pay has been incorrect for over 10
months now.
I will spare the details. It is a soldier in a family of
four who has been underpaid over $50,000. It came to my
attention 2 months ago when it was only an 8-month problem 2
months ago. Now, it is a 10-month problem and this issue still
isn't completely fixed, certainly not to my satisfaction.
In fact, I am worried that my inquiry may have slowed the
process down, if you can consider slowing an 8-month delay
down. I say that because in one of the emails we received a
couple of days ago, maybe even yesterday, just the last couple
of days, it is the unit that is trying to fix the issue wrote
this. They said they are prohibited from any additional action,
now that a congressional inquiry is in place. Another email
said that AFRICOM couldn't fix the soldier's problem until he
closed out his inquiry.
Now, I shouldn't have to tell you how that sounds. It
certainly doesn't sound like the soldiers are the most
important thing or the people are the most important thing. It
also troubles me that the Army might fix the problem and
provide the backpay, again, it exceeds well over $50,000. But
because it took over 10 months, obviously there are other
problems, like the benefits lost to the TSP [Thrift Savings
Plan] contributions or lost opportunities based on the time
value of money and of course the complications of tax fixes
that are upcoming.
So, I hope you took the time to prepare for the question,
because I want to make sure that your comments in our opening
statement become action and that you really do care about our
soldiers. I have no reason to believe you don't, unless on June
1, the soldier still doesn't have his backpay, then I am going
to be concerned, and that the organization is going to ensure
for the care of our soldiers.
Did the Army give you any excuse about why a soldier's pay
issue wasn't fixed for 10 months and needed a United States
senator's personal attention before it got fixed?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator, first of all, as my mother
taught me, my mom didn't really like it when I screwed up and
gave excuses. So, this situation, frankly, is totally
unacceptable. We can't have situations where we are not paying
our soldiers the money that they earned for 10 months. The good
news is my understanding is the Army is going to have this
problem solved by June 1, but from my understanding, which is
not in great depth, there isn't a good reason why this
happened. There is not a particularly good explanation for why
this happened, other than the fact that we have a very large
complex bureaucracy.
But I can assure you, if confirmed, that I will examine the
particulars to make sure that we do learn lessons from this
particular case so that this kind of thing doesn't happen
again.
Senator Cramer. Well, I appreciate that. That is the answer
that I am looking for. I trust you with it, but I don't yet
trust the Army. I might have 8 months ago.
So, we are going to see how it plays out. See if I can
learn some more about why this happened. In reading the email
there is some reference to the fact that we don't have people
in the office anymore taking care of these things. I am
paraphrasing slightly, but that is a really unacceptable
answer.
Ms. Wormuth. I agree with you.
Senator Cramer. In North Dakota, everyone goes to work, by
the way. We all go to work. We have a pandemic, but we still go
to work. We do our jobs. If we have to do our jobs from home,
we still do them. We don't say we can't do them. We don't get
paid if we don't do them. We do our work and so, we expect no
less, certainly, from the leadership of the United States Army.
So, thank you, again, for your service. I share Senator
Ernst's confidence in your confirmation, but I would sure like
to see some work put into action by our leadership.
I yield. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Cramer.
Let me recognize via Webex, Senator Rosen.
Senator Rosen. Well, thank you, Chairman Reed, I appreciate
it, Ranking Member Inhofe, for holding this nomination hearing.
I would also like to thank Ms. Wormuth for testify today, for
your willingness to serve. That is a very important position.
So to it, I would just like to talk about Army
cybersecurity personnel and a few other things that we talked
about when we were able to meet earlier this week. We have to
really address those challenges of establishing our deterrence
in cyberspace. DOD's 2018 Cyber Strategy outlined the defend
forward approach, meaning, identifying our adversaries cyber
campaigns early on, engaging in defensive operations to disrupt
the attacker's infrastructure and aggressively preventing
attacks before they happen.
Nonetheless, in December, it was reported that Russian
intelligence successfully breached networks of multiple
government agencies and private companies by exploiting the
vulnerability in the solar winds system. So this recent attack,
of course, on the United States, it demonstrates that we need
to continue to increase our investments in cybersecurity,
including cultivating the personnel to do these jobs, personnel
who can rise to these challenges that are presented by Russia
or China or whomever else in mind. So, with this in mind, the
DOD Cyber Strategy calls for enhancing our current cyber
workforce, finding talented new people to recruit.
So, I would like to just build upon what Senator Gillibrand
already asked you about, if confirmed, what policies would you
enact to cultivate a qualified or develop a qualified cyber-
capable workforce to support the Army's mission, including that
of Army Cyber Command, and then in order to meet surge
capacity, what do you think about creating a cyber Reserve
program?
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
I think there are a few things we could do in terms of
trying to recruit cyber expertise into the Army. First, I think
just in our general recruiting for Army soldiers, we could
probably do more to explain to young people about the
opportunities for folks who are technologically inclined to be
able to perform missions that draw on those types of skills.
I think that, you know, many young people may not be aware
of how much more emphasis that we are placing on cyber
capabilities in the U.S. Army. It is not all about driving
tanks and flying helicopters.
I also think, again, as I said to Senator Gillibrand, I
think we need to do more to think creatively about how to bring
people in potentially laterally with those kinds of skills. You
know, there are some special authorities, I believe that, have
been given to the Department to try to bring in specialized
expertise, but I would like to explore, if confirmed, whether
we could do more on that.
Then to your point----
Senator Rosen. Oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't sure you were
through. Go ahead.
Ms. Wormuth. Then to your point about the cyber Reserve, I
would be very interested, if confirmed, it explore that with
you. Certainly, you know, we leverage cyber expertise through
the National Guard, for example. I know there are some
specialized units that are comprised of people who work in
Silicon Valley and so on, but there may be a possibility to
have, you know, a more strategic reserve, if you will, of
people who have cyber skills that could be called into service
if we needed a surge.
Senator Rosen. Well, thank you. I was going to say I have
the bill for junior ROTC [Reserve Officer Training Corps] to
allow them to have a STEM [science, technology, engineering and
mathematics] track now, and so we are going to try to recruit
those young folks, just like you mentioned, into the junior
ROTC, allowing for that.
I guess, finally, what I would really like to talk about,
we do have a quite robust military right now, but we may need
to retrain them or upskill them with folks that are there. How
do you envision retraining or reskilling some of the enlisted
servicemen and women in the Army so that they can branch
themselves out to other things and be there, even maybe for an
additional surge capacity when we need it?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator, on that issue, I think I would
probably try to take two approaches if I were confirmed. First,
obviously, the professional military education system provides
an opportunity to educate our officers and such about new
skills and new areas, so that is something. Then in terms of
our enlisted folks, I think I would want to look into in more
detail, if confirmed, what kinds of opportunities are there
right now and see whether they need to be expanded in light of
the new challenges and particularly the emphasis on technology
that we are going to need in the future.
Senator Rosen. Well, thank you. I see my time is up, but I
would say for everyone in the military, having a basic STEM
education, you talk about flying helicopters and driving tanks,
there are computers on all of them, so we need those skills.
So, I appreciate that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Rosen, and to my
colleagues, I will have to step out briefly to participate in a
Webex for the Appropriations Committee. In my absence, Senator
Kelly will be presiding.
With that, let me recognize via Webex, Senator Blackburn.
Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, thank you so much for your time this week for
the conversation that we had, and I am going to come right
along with what Senator Rosen was talking about with having
people there in the Army with these skill sets that are
specific to technology STEM, and cyber. She and I are working
on different components of legislation with ROTC on STEM,
looking at a cyber civilian Reserve corps.
The National Guard as a ready response unit that can work
remotely when we have cyber attacks. So, you can feel assured
we are going to come to you with some of those conversations.
I want to go back to something that we discussed and that
is Afghanistan and our conversation around Afghanistan. We had
talked about a quote that you had given in March when you were
reflecting on your time with the Obama administration and I am
quoting you now and I want your response to this. ``We
persuaded the President to keep troop levels steady in
Afghanistan, something that we felt was required from a
national security perspective. Successfully persuading him to
change his mind was a really big deal.''
So, I understand from our conversation that you are
comfortable with the current President's decision to withdraw
troops this September, because we have achieved what we set out
to do. Your comment.
So, elaborate on that view that you have and then as the
voice of the Army within the Biden administration, would you
speak truth to power when it comes to really assessing this
situation as it has evolved on the ground and making certain
that we do not lose the ability to support the Afghani Army and
the Afghan people in protecting themselves against these
terrorist groups.
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator Blackburn, and thank you
for the conversation that we had earlier.
I am comfortable with the Administration's decision to
withdraw our troops, our military troops from Afghanistan this
coming September. I believe we achieved our objective of
halting Afghanistan from being used as a launch pad to attack
the United States. I think the members of our military and
certainly our Army soldiers, in particular, can be very proud
of what they have done in Afghanistan. But I think at this
time, we owe it to those soldiers and their families to
conclude that it is time now to move to other future
challenges.
In terms of looking to speaking truth to power, if
confirmed, I absolutely would provide my candid advice to
Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks. As Secretary of
the Army, I don't think I will be weighing in on the policy
discussions, but I certainly know from previous experience that
U.S. Central Command will be looking very carefully at how we
can best monitor the situation in Afghanistan in terms of
future terrorist threats, and, certainly, we will be continuing
to provide assistance to the Afghan security forces from a
financial perspective, so that they can continue to work to
defend themselves.
Senator Blackburn. When it comes to our departure from
Afghanistan, we are going to leave a void and China is going to
try to step into that void. So, how do you assess China's
impact on Afghanistan, via, and looking at it through the lens
of our departure?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator Blackburn, my own sense is that
to a certain degree, well, first, I should say, China, I think,
at various points, has tried to be helpful over the years in
terms of working on the challenges in Afghanistan. But they
also have been, you know, something of a free rider in the
sense that they have been happy to have the United States of
America and our military providing stability there. I think
with the decision to withdraw our troops, to the extent that
there is, perhaps less stability going forward, that will be
something that China will actually have to grapple with, along
with countries like Pakistan and Iran and others in the region,
in a way that they haven't had to do so in the past 20 years.
Senator Blackburn. Okay. My time is expiring. I have a
couple of other things I am going to submit to you for the
record but thank you so much.
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you.
Senator Kelly. [Presiding.] I now recognize Senator Warren
via Webex for 5 minutes.
Senator Warren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So, thank you, Ms. Wormuth, for being here and
congratulations, again, on your nomination. I just want to
spend some time talking about military housing this morning,
but before I get to that, I want to ask about two other issues.
First, Fort Hood independent review made clear that the Army
has not made any progress on addressing sexual assaults.
Will you commit to making significant improvements in this
area a top priority?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator, I will absolutely make it a top
priority. As I indicated, I would like to see us put more
emphasis, in particular, on trying to prevent incidents of
sexual harassment and sexual assault.
Senator Warren. Good, and then, second, there is no way to
address the climate crisis without confronting the Department
of Defense's role as the largest consumer of fossil fuel on the
planet.
Will you commit to using all of the tools and authorities
at your disposal to make the Army more climate resilient and to
reduce its carbon footprint whenever possible?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, yes. I would certainly like to look
into how the Army can do more to make itself more resilient in
the face of climate change, for example, more fuel efficient.
We are undertaking some efforts already, but given the scale,
for example, of our vehicle fleet, I think looking at the
extent to which we can pursue electrification of our vehicle
fleet would be a place where we could make a contribution and
it would also help us on the battlefield by reducing our
dependence on things like fuel convoys.
Senator Warren. Good. So, I look forward to following up
with you on both of these issues.
Now, as Secretary of the Army, you will oversee the largest
military service and be responsible for the well-being of
hundreds of thousands of servicemembers across the globe and
their families. In the last few years, we have heard countless
stories from military families about the deplorable conditions
of on-base privatized housing. Reports about substandard,
rotting houses filled with lead paint and black mold and
rodents, and these stories are widespread.
Children and families are getting sick as a result. Despite
multiple hearings and changes in the law that we passed, my
office is still hearing from military spouses that the problem
isn't getting any better and that landlords are not following
the rules that are supposed to protect tenants.
Ms. Wormuth, do you agree that substandard military housing
presents a serious challenge to military readiness?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, I do, Senator. I think it poses
challenges for readiness, but also for retention.
Senator Warren. Yes, and if confirmed, will you commit to
using all the tools available to hold these landlords and
private companies accountable to make sure that they build and
they maintain quality housing for servicemembers and ensure
that these outfits can no longer profit from substandard
housing?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator, you have my commitment.
Senator Warren. Good. I appreciate it.
You know, unfortunately, these conditions and their
consequences are the result of bad behavior from companies that
DOD hired to manage these properties. For years, they have
failed to properly maintain military families' homes and they
have escaped accountability by doctoring their numbers and
sweeping complaints under the rug and raked in millions of
dollars, taxpayer dollars in the process.
So, there it is: sexual assault, climate change, military
housing. All of these affect military readiness, but for too
long, the military services have only paid lip service to this
reality. It is time for that to change and I look forward to
working with you to make that happen.
So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back my time.
Chairman Reed. [Presiding.] Thank you very much, Senator
Warren.
Let me now recognize Senator Tuberville, please.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, welcome. Congratulations on your historic
nomination. I am looking forward to working with you. We had a
great conversation the other day.
Just listening to the questions, I can't imagine the
enormity of dealing with all the problems you are getting ready
to face, but it will be fun. It will be challenging, and just
talking to you, you are well prepared, looking forward to it, I
am sure, and it will be a huge challenge.
But working through all this, at the end of the day, we
have got to have somebody who can protect this country. I know
you are up to the challenge. You are going to be dealing with
egos. I hope you will keep as much politics out of it as
possible.
In just a small realm, of coaching, I dealt with egos and,
of course, thousands of fans and all of that and you try to
please everybody, but you can't do it. At the end of the day,
you have got to get your job done and understand your final
goal.
The National Defense Strategy recommends a 3 to 5 percent
Department of Defense budget increase per year, but this year,
it looks like we are going to receive less than half of that.
How do we absorb this hit in the Army? How do you foresee that
for the future?
You just heard barracks, housing going down, all the
things, the problems that we are having, climate change. How do
you work those battles yourself?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, thank you, Senator, for the question. I
think, first of all, we have to make sure that we have a
strategy that aligns to its resources. If I am confirmed, I am
going to look very carefully at the resources that are given to
the Army to do its job and I am going to be the strongest
possible advocate I can be to making sure that it has the
resources it needs, precisely, as you said, to deal with all of
these different challenges.
I think, if there are in the future, places where difficult
choices need to be made, I would be guided by a couple of
things. First of all, trying to strike a balance between
current operational needs and preparing for the future, which I
think is very, very important, given the kinds of challenges
that we face from China and Russia.
Then also trying to strike a balance between the size of
the Army and its force structure, the readiness of those forces
and then the modernization program that I think is very, very
important. My own view is that having a larger Army that is
equipped with old equipment is not going to serve us well in
the future, so those are some of the things that I would be
looking at.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you, and you strike me as
somebody that would get in your car and go to the White House
and say, we need more money, because we want to help you. You
know, the defense of our country is the most important thing
for the people who live here. You can strike everything else
out. If we don't have a secure country, then we have got huge
problems and you are going to be a big factor of that.
Thirty-five million young men and women have the
capabilities of being selected into the armed services every
year, 35 million that we have to choose from. Only 450,000 of
those are really eligible and can pass all the qualifications
to be selected in any form. You know, 450,000 out of 35
million, that is not a lot.
How do you foresee recruiting for the Army in the near
future out of such a small pool with a lot of these kids that
would normally get in the military, but, hey, they are going to
go to big tech, make the big bucks, and bypass a possible
future in defending our country?
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, it is absolutely true that we face a
lot of competition when it comes to recruiting for the Army.
You know, a smaller and smaller number of young Americans show
the propensity to serve in the first place, but as I understand
it, at this point in time, the Army believes that it is going
to meet its recruiting targets for this year.
I think the Army has, particularly during the pandemic,
been very creative in pivoting pretty quickly to virtual
recruiting. We have expanded from really focusing on 22 cities
to more than 40 cities around the country. We have a program
called Urban Access where we are actually really focusing on
Los Angeles and Houston to try to reach out to communities that
may not have previously thought about joining the military and
joining the Army.
But I think that is something that we are going to have to
continue to work hard on. Particularly as the economy rebounds,
we will face competition with the private sector.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you. With all the Army personnel
we have in the state of Alabama, I want to invite you to
Redstone Arsenal in Fort Rucker that does all the vertical lift
for our country in terms of helicopters and training. So, you
are welcome and I look forward to working with you. Thank you
very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Tuberville.
Now let me recognize Senator Peters, please.
Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, congratulations on your nomination and we
certainly appreciate your willingness to serve our country.
Ma'am, the 46 Military Police Command of the Michigan
National Guard serves as one of two command and control
elements in the national chemical response enterprise. It has
experienced a cumulative 25 percent decrease in funding from
the Army over the past 3 years and I believe it is unwise to
shortchange some of those critical elements of emergency
preparedness. We talked earlier about these kinds of efforts
and my focus on these efforts as the Chairman of the Homeland
Security Committee here in the Senate.
So, if you could respond to kind of your thoughts on these
units and how important they are and would you be in a position
and willing to look at addressing the shortfall that we are
seeing with these critical units.
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator. I would be happy to look
into that specific issue with you.
As you and I talked about a little bit when we met, you
know, I am very much of the view that we need to have a
capability here in the United States to deal with chemical,
biological, radiological types of incidents. That is, you know,
an important part of our homeland defense capability which
remains relevant, and so I would be happy to look into that and
gain a better understanding of what the resourcing issues are
there.
Senator Peters. As the Army embraces multidomain operations
by standing up five multidomain task forces, I certainly
believe that the National Guard should be home to one of these.
In my mind, it is critical that Reserve components, which
obviously compose a big part of the Army's overall force
structure, has the capabilities and the experience to operate
in this space.
So, my question to you, if confirmed as Secretary of the
Army, how will you approach allocating the remaining
multidomain task forces?
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator. Well, first of all, as you
likely know, the Army is experimenting right now with its
multidomain task force in Fort Lewis and we are still working
through developing exactly what kinds of capabilities that
particular formation will have and how it will operate.
I think, I will want to look carefully, if confirmed, at
where we are going to position those units, both in terms of
whether it is here in the United States or perhaps overseas and
also whether those task forces should be in the Active
component or potentially in the Reserve component. I would want
to look at what makes most sense, but I think it is useful to
reflect on the fact that another one of the Army's sort of more
specialized formations, the Security Force Assistance Brigades,
the Army did make a decision to put one of those in the
National Guard.
So, I think there is a track record there of making smart
decisions about allocating those forces.
Senator Peters. Madam, given the President's executive
order from January 27 of 2021 and the rapid advancements, as
well as significant investment in battery technology
development from our commercial auto makers, what steps would
you take, if confirmed, as the Secretary of the Army, to focus
efforts on the electrification of the Army's both, tactical and
combat vehicle fleets?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator, from the perspective of
resilience and making the Army more fuel efficient, I think it
is very much something to look into, as the degree to which we
could potentially pursue electrification in our vehicle fleet.
So, that is something that, if I were confirmed, I would
certainly want to look into, to understand how deeply we can
pursue that.
I think the infrastructure associated with charging
vehicles and making sure that we could have batteries that have
sufficient staying power would be things we will look at, but
it is certainly an area that I would like to pursue.
Senator Peters. One component of the Next-Generation Combat
Vehicle Program, which I am proud to say is being run out of
the Detroit arsenal in Warren, Michigan, is the Armored Multi-
Purpose Vehicle, the AMPV. This program currently is in
production. It begins fielding to soldiers later this year.
If AMPV resolves significant capability gaps associated
with some of the legacy systems that we have and will provide
the Army with a more survivable and more mobile vehicle, as
well, could you speak to the importance of this program and
your commitment of providing soldiers the modernized equipment
that they need, if confirmed as Secretary of the Army.
Ms. Wormuth. Certainly, Senator. You know, again, I think
it is worth reflecting on the fact that the Army has not
comprehensively modernized itself in over 40 years, really,
since we had the big 5. So it is very important going forward
that a big part of our modernization portfolio is next-
generation vehicles and that is something that I will be
focused on and paying attention to. It is absolutely a
capability set that we have to have, and that we have to
modernize. Just as we will modernize helicopters, for example,
or, you know, actual equipment for soldiers, in terms of their
own lethality.
Senator Peters. My time has expired.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Peters.
Let me recognize Senator Sullivan, please.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, it is good to see you again. I really enjoyed
our meetings and discussions. Thanks for your patience on that.
Let me kind of follow-up on what we talked about. I would
like to get your commitment here to visit Alaska soon. You
know, there is a lot going on in terms of good things. There
are a couple of troubling things I want to talk about, too, but
I want to get you up there with some of our top military
leadership.
Can I get that commitment soon in your tenure?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator, I would be happy to visit.
Senator Sullivan. Then we talked about the Army's Arctic
Strategy. I think it is a really good document. As you and I
talked about, there has been a lot of work, kind of
implementation work at the highest levels of the Army and the
Secretary of Defense, actually, and the deputy secretary were
in front of this Committee saying, they were committed to fully
resourcing arctic strategies by the different services, of
course, including the Army.
So, as you and I talked about, can I get your commitment to
get back to me with General McConville, if confirmed, within 30
days, on looking at the implementation of the Arctic Strategy.
What I worry about is, as you and I talked about, sometimes
these issues can fall back into the bureaucracy, lose the
senses of urgency that we clearly have right now, and I don't
want to lose that.
So, can I get your commitment on that, as well, like we
talked about?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator. Thank you, first, if your
leadership on issues relating to the Arctic and for recognizing
its strategic importance. I would be pleased, if confirmed, to
come and talk with you with the Chief of Staff of the Army
about the implementation plan.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you very much.
So, I always give this book to pretty much every new
nominee. Have you read T.R. Fehrenbach's, This Kind of War; it
is about the Korean War.
Ms. Wormuth. I actually have that book, Senator, yes, I do.
Senator Sullivan. Good.
Ms. Wormuth. I haven't read it in a while. It has been
awhile.
Senator Sullivan. All right. Well, then, I guess I don't
have to give it to you.
Good, I am glad you have read it because it is called a
study, essentially, in lack of readiness. The United States in
1945 probably had the most fearsome military in the history of
the world and by 1950, because of civilian and military
leadership decisions and cuts, the lack of readiness was
horrendous and thousands of Americans died senseless deaths in
the summer of 1950 because of the Korean War-era's military
lack of readiness.
We never want to go back there. The Army has a saying, ``No
More Task Force Smiths,'' that I am sure you are familiar with,
all your leadership in the Army is familiar with.
So, can I get your commitment to make sure we don't fall in
this hole of readiness plummeting. The last term of the Obama-
Biden administration saw defense spending cut by 25 percent,
and as you know, the readiness of our forces plummeted.
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, certainly. The Army has worked very
hard in the last few years to rebuild its readiness, as you
know, and I think has done quite a good job on that. If
confirmed, I would certainly want to ensure that we maintain
our readiness.
Senator Sullivan. Great. It is a high priority.
There will be battles, right. The Biden administration is
floating their defense budget, which will be cuts, which I
think is ridiculous. If we are going to fight, if we are going
to have the ability to compete against China, we have to do a
lot of things, but cutting our military is a cause for
celebration in Beijing.
I hope you get in there and fight for a strong budget. Can
I get your commitment in that regard, as well?
I know you have to support what the President ultimately
does, but as you are battling, we need people in there who are
fighters for a strong military and a strong budget.
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator. As I said, if confirmed, I
intend to be the strongest possible advocate no the Army,
inside the building and outside the building. I believe in a
strong defense and you have my commitment that I will make my
views heard on that matter.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Speaking of a strong Army, I am
going to raise a really troubling topic. Over the past 5 years,
U.S. Army Alaska has experienced 32 suicides. In that same
period from 2016 through 2021, soldiers deployed under
Operation Freedom Sentinel in Afghanistan experienced 41 combat
deaths, due to hostile action.
Any death is horrible but think about that juxtaposition;
32 soldiers in my state in Garrison, compared with 41 total in
Afghanistan. That is just a difference of nine. This year
alone, USAREC [United States Army Recruiting Command] has
experienced six suicides, an average of one soldier per month.
Of course, we all believe this is unacceptable.
Can I get your commitment, and by the way, I do think the
command, Major General Andrysiak and others have put their
heart and soul into this issue. General McConville has, even
General Milley, as chairman, has. But we have challenges. Some
of it relates to training. Some of it relates to remote
locations.
Can I get your commitment to fully resource the initiatives
that USAREC and the Army have put forward on ``quality of
life'' initiatives and infrastructure aimed at reducing this,
really, let's call it a horrendous trend level that we can get
beyond. There is a lot of tension to it, but I need your
commitment to provide the utmost attention to this issue, which
is really a horrible issue. Not just for Alaska, not just for
the Army, but for America; these are some of the best young men
and women our nation has and they are taking their lives.
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, I share your deep concern for the
suicide rate in the Army, which right now is high; higher than
it has been in some time. I am particularly concerned about the
concentration and number in Alaska.
So, if confirmed, you certainly have my commitment to do
everything possible to try to make sure there are programs in
place and quality of life in place to do our best to prevent
further suicides.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Sullivan.
Let me now recognize, via Webex, Senator Duckworth.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Wormuth, I was very pleased to see you nominated to be
the first woman to serve as Secretary of the Army, especially
given your considerable experience as a civilian national
security leader and your previous tenure in the DOD.
After speaking with you the other day, I am confident that
you are the right person to lead the Army. I would like,
however, to follow-up on our discussion on the Army's major
modernization programs. As a former soldier and as the chair of
the Airland Subcommittee, I understand deeply how important it
is that our Army have modern weapon systems to compete with our
near-peer challengers.
However, resources are not unlimited and I take my duty to
safeguard taxpayer dollars very seriously. It is absolutely
critical that the Army leverage best practices to run its major
programs efficiently and to deliver high-quality systems to
soldiers on time, on budget, and in alignment with Army
modernization priorities. That is why I am encouraged by
programs like Future Vertical Lift, which so far as delivered
impressive results.
If confirmed, how would you work with the Army's cross-
functional teams to discover lessons learned from programs like
FVL and apply best practices across programs, where possible,
to deliver the necessary capability to soldiers and improved
values for taxpayers.
Ms. Wormuth. Thank you, Senator Duckworth. It is nice to
see you.
I will, if confirmed, will want to be working closely with
each of the cross-functional teams to understand where we are
in the six big modernization priorities. To the extent that
there are valuable lessons learned, for example, coming out of
the Future Vertical Lift set of programs, will want to make
sure that we share those lessons with other cross-functional
teams, you know, whether they are in the long-range, precision
fires portfolio, or the air and missiles defense portfolio,
just to name a couple.
I think that is an area where I would like to see the
strongest possible collaboration between Army Futures Command
and the acquisition staff and the Department of The Army.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Based on our conversation, I know you share my concern
about the unacceptable rise of white nationalism and other
extremist ideologies in the military, when servicemembers hold
these hateful views, it undermines unit cohesion and violates
the oath that they took to protect and defend our Constitution.
Since his confirmation, Secretary Austin has taken the
first steps to root out extremism among military members,
starting with the DOD-wide stand down. If confirmed, how would
you support Secretary Austin's efforts and what policies would
you pursue to detect extremist ideology in our military ranks,
prevent its spread, and improve media literacy and access to
reliable information in the DOD?
Ms. Wormuth. Well, Senator, first of all, I want to say
that I think, you know, the vast majority of our Army soldiers
serve with honor and I think that the numbers of soldiers who
hold extremist views is likely small. But as you noted, and as
Secretary Austin has noted, extremism is our ranks undermines
unit cohesion and can have a disproportionately negative
effect, so it is very important that we work to identify it and
get it out of the ranks.
I am very interested, if confirmed, in getting briefed on
the lessons learned that came from the DOD-wide stand-down that
you referenced. I would like to better understand what we think
was particularly successful coming out of that process that
could be applied more broadly and on a routine basis going
forward.
I do think there is probably more that could be done in
terms of educating our soldiers when they join the Army about
the use of information and disinformation and social media and
things like that to try to help our soldiers become more savvy
customers in terms of being able to identify when they are
perhaps being targeted with this information.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
My final question is about the Army's SHARP program. Like
many members of this committee, I am committed to addressing
the scourge of sexual assault in the military and was proud to
help Senator Gillibrand introduce her Military Justice
Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act as an original co-
sponsor. I have appreciated your responses so far on this topic
but would like to add that in the wake of Vanessa Guillen's
tragic death last year, I asked the GAO [Government
Accountability Office] to conduct a review of the Army's SHARP
program. That work is underway and they should deliver that
report later this year.
If confirmed, will you commit to reviewing GAO's work when
it is released and incorporating it as appropriate to improve
the Army's SHARP program?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, Senator. I am committed to taking good
ideas from wherever they come from. I am very familiar with the
kind of work that the GAO does and I would be very interested,
if confirmed, in looking at the results of their review of the
SHARP program and seeing how we can strengthen it, in addition
to what the Army has already undertaken in terms of a redesign
as a result of the independent review commission.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. I look forward to being able
to vote for your confirmation.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Duckworth.
Senator Sullivan has an additional question.
Senator Sullivan?
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to follow-up on my friend, Senator Duckworth's line
of questioning. By the way, she is, when you look at soldiers
who have sacrificed for our nation, I think it is probably safe
to say she has sacrificed probably more than anyone in the
entire Congress as a soldier, so I always have a deep respect
for her views on all of these issues.
But, you know, she touched on, really, what I think the
Army leadership has been referring to as bad behaviors that
hurt unit cohesion. It hurt the ability for the Army to be an
effective fighting force. Those, of course, include sexual
assault, sexual violence, which is completely unacceptable.
We need to do more in that regard. I actually have a lot of
respect, a lot of respect for Senator's Gillibrand's hard work
in this regard.
Suicide, we have already talked about that.
I do want to mention this issue of extremism, racism. Of
course we don't want that in the ranks at all, at all, and I
have put forward legislation that tries to address this issue
and asked deep questions of the Pentagon, particularly at
promotion rates for our senior officers, you know, are we
promoting? Is there something going on at the top ranks that we
need to address that relates to, you know, sometimes the lack
of diversity? I have had a lot of discussions with Secretary
Austin on this topic. Of course that have can negative effects,
as you just said.
But here is what else can have negative effects, in my
view, and I think it is possibly having negative effects,
because I talk to military members all the time. There are wild
claims, wild claims, just pick up the Washington Post every
day, they seem to make them, through anecdotes that somehow our
U.S. military is a hotbed of extremists, racists, at very high
levels.
So, I care about this issue, because we don't want that,
but every time someone makes it, I will give you an example,
the now Under Secretary of Defense for DOD, the number-three
guy in the DOD came here in this confirmation hearing and said
he was going to stamp out systemic racism in the ranks. Well,
that is a pretty big claim.
Then I asked him, did he have any data to back that up? You
are kind of besmirching a lot of people. An organization that
throughout American history, hasn't been perfect, but has
probably been on the forefront of bringing the races together;
again, not perfect, but an organization, the military that has,
in many ways done more to advance racial equality than almost
any other organization in the country. Yet there are these
claims, the number-three guy in the Pentagon right now made a
claim. When I pressed him on it, no, Senator, I don't have any
data.
Well, then, why are you making that claim?
I am hearing from troops saying, look, we agree we don't
need this, but there is this counterargument that if you pick
up the Washington Post and every day there is an article about,
10, 15, 20 percent of the military is extremist. That is just
bologna, and I am going to tone down my rhetoric here in a
hearing.
So, can I get your commitment to protect these troops from
these kinds of wild claims until you look at the data. I have
had senior military members here just in the last couple of
weeks asking them, do they think it is 10 percent? Do they
think it is 5 percent? Do they think it is 20 percent?
To be honest, they are offended. As you just said, it is
probably not many at all. If they are there, we should crush
them and get them out. But at the same time, we need to make
sure that the military is not, we are not letting people who
don't know anything about the military like these Washington
Post reporters, make claims that somehow the military is a
hotbed of tens of thousands of racists. I don't think it is
true. What is your view on that?
But the key is data. Let's get data before we make these
giant, sweeping claims like the Under Secretary of Defense did.
I don't know how in the hell he is going to lead the Pentagon,
number-three guy at the Pentagon after he made some wild claim
that he had no data on. He even told me in this hearing, no
data, I just said it.
What is your view on this?
It is a really important issue and, trust me, the average
soldier is watching and they want someone to try to defend
them, not besmirch them.
Ms. Wormuth. Senator, as I said, in my experience, the vast
majority of soldiers serve with honor.
Senator Sullivan. Yes.
Ms. Wormuth. I think the vast majority of soldiers are
tolerant and inclusive in terms of working with their peers.
So, again, I don't think that this is a case where there are
large numbers of extremists, for example.
I do think it would be useful to have additional data. You
know, as you said yourself, there are certainly surveys, I
think, that show that there are some pockets in some cases of
racist behavior. There are still some institutional barriers to
promotion, for example, but I think things like something that
I am very encouraged by is the Army's new command assessment
program that is going to, which is a whole new terrific new
evolution of how we select our leaders. But one of the things
that that program helps us look at is attitudes and making sure
that our future leaders are intrusive and tolerant.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Well, if you can just commit, get
the data before any of these wild claims continue, I think that
would be helpful for our forces, helpful for our military,
helpful for broader society. But the military has been, in many
ways, on the forefront of a lot of these issues and we want to
keep it that way. Thank you.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Sullivan.
Thank you, Ms. Wormuth, for your testimony today, for your
service for many, many years, and your willingness to serve
again, and I look forward to that service.
With that, I will adjourn the hearing.
[Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
------
[Prepared questions submitted to The Honorable Christine E.
Wormuth by Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers
supplied follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties and responsibilities as secretary of the army:
Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
the Secretary of the Army?
Answer. The Secretary of the Army is the senior official and head
of the Department of the Army with authority and responsibility for
conducting all affairs of the Department of the Army, subject to the
authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense (10
U.S.C. Sec. 7013). The Secretary of the Army is solely responsible for
the functions of Acquisition, Audit, Comptroller, Information
Management, Inspector General, Legislative Affairs, Public Affairs and
Research and Development (10 U.S.C. Sec. 7014). The Secretary of the
Army is also responsible for the supervision and control of Army
intelligence activities as well as any other activities as may be
prescribed by law, the President, or the Secretary of Defense. If
confirmed as Secretary of the Army, I would make any necessary
recommendations to Congress relating to the Department of Defense after
informing the Secretary of Defense.
Question. What background and experience do you possess that render
you highly qualified to perform these duties and responsibilities?
Answer. While almost no single experience could prepare someone for
a job as demanding and complex as the Secretary of the Army, a twenty-
five-year career in national security has given me many opportunities
to develop much of the knowledge, skills and judgment that will be
needed to perform the duties and responsibilities of the position. If
confirmed, I would bring to the role of the Secretary of the Army an
insider's knowledge of the Pentagon's complex bureaucracy and an
outsider's desire to challenge Service orthodoxies in service of the
changes we must make to prepare the Joint Force for the challenges of
great power competition. During more than 14 years as both a career
civil servant and senior political appointee in the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, I have had the opportunity to directly observe
and support the Services in many aspects of their organize, train, and
equip functions. Over the years I have worked regularly with Congress
and have both an understanding and deep respect for its critical
oversight functions and its essential role in providing authorities and
resources to the Department of Defense. Through years working in the
Pentagon and in various think tanks I am very familiar with how the
Army plans, programs, and budgets, as well as the importance of
developing a strong program and being able to successfully defend it to
the Secretary of Defense and Congress.
My career to date, and in particular my years in the Pentagon have
given me a strong sense of the Army's roles and missions relative to
those of the other services, its institutional culture, and a strong
network of professional relationships with Army leaders at many
different levels. Multiple trips to Iraq, Afghanistan, Jordan, and the
Korean peninsula have given me many opportunities to see for myself the
difficult service and sacrifice of Army soldiers and families. My
research at CSIS and RAND have also given me ample opportunities to
understand in depth all three components of the Army--Active, Guard and
Reserve--as well as to develop an appreciation for the complexity of
personnel issues confronting a service as appropriately people-centric
as is the U.S. Army. Multiple positions over the years inside and
outside of government have provided me opportunity to focus on strategy
development, force planning and posture and force development and
design. My work during the 2013 Strategic Change and Management Review,
many hours spent around the Deputy's Management Action Group (DMAG)
table, and my tenure as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy gave me a
strategic understanding of the complexities and challenges confronting
our acquisition community and defense industrial base in our efforts to
modernize the Joint Force.
I began my career in the Pentagon shortly after the collapse of the
Soviet Union, I was a civil servant when we were attacked on 9/11, and
I was back in the Pentagon as we began shifting our sights from
counter-terrorism to the challenges posed by People's Republic of China
and Russia. I firmly believe we are once again at a moment of strategic
inflection and that the next few years will be some of the most
challenging the Department of Defense has ever faced. I believe my
practical experience with strategy development, force planning and
force development, my track record at CSIS and RAND providing
independent, analytically grounded policy recommendations coupled with
my years of experience as a senior leader in the Pentagon will serve me
well if confirmed in helping the Army navigate the difficult terrain
that lies ahead.
Question. In particular, what management and leadership experience
do you possess that you would apply to your service as Secretary of the
Army, if confirmed?
Answer. Having served as a senior political appointee both at the
National Security Council and in the Department of Defense, I have good
understanding of what is required of a senior executive involved in
enterprise-level decision making, how to work successfully with other
senior officials and the nature of the difficult decisions that are
required when operating at that level. Many years of serving as a
manager and leader in government, think tanks, and the private sector
has given me the opportunity to work closely with range of senior
leaders with different leadership styles, as well as to lead a large
organization, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy,
myself. If confirmed I will seek to lead as a hands-on Secretary of the
Army that works closely with the Army's uniformed senior leaders,
empowers our staffs, delegates appropriately, models ethical and
transparent leadership, and who demonstrates care day in and day out
for Army soldiers, their families, civilians and our Army veterans.
Question. In light of the lines of effort set forth in the 2018
National Defense Strategy (NDS), what other duties and responsibilities
do you anticipate the President or the Secretary of Defense would
prescribe for you, if confirmed?
Answer. The Army's primary mission is to deploy, fight, and win our
Nation's wars. If confirmed as the Secretary of the Army, my objective
will be to ensure the Army is prepared to meet the complex global
challenges of tomorrow.
Recognizing that a forthcoming new defense strategy will likely
make some changes to the lines of effort outlined in the 2018 National
Defense Strategy, I anticipate that other duties and responsibilities
the President or the Secretary of Defense might prescribe for me would
continue to emphasize ensuring the Army is ready to meet future
challenges. As the world becomes more technologically connected, it
will be imperative for the Army to outpace peer-competitors and ensure
it is able to operate and compete against adversaries with advanced
technological capabilities. I also anticipate that the Army will be
asked to further develop and strengthen relationships with allied and
partner land forces.
Question. To the extent that the functions of the Army overlap with
those of other DOD entities, what would be your approach, if confirmed,
to consolidating and reducing unnecessary duplication?
Answer. If confirmed I will fully support Department efforts to
drive consolidation where appropriate and reduce duplication through
review of the Services, OSD and the rest of the Fourth Estate relative
to the Department of the Army. Unnecessary redundancy among DOD
entities is a source of potential savings that could be used to
generate warfighting capability for the Army and the other services. If
confirmed, I will work with DOD leaders to analyze potential
redundancies to optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of the Joint
Force and supporting operations.
Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to ensure
that your tenure as Secretary of the Army epitomizes the fundamental
requirement for civilian control of the Armed Forces embedded in the
U.S. Constitution and other laws?
Answer. As a former career civil servant and senior civilian
political appointee, I am deeply committed to the fundamental American
principle of civilian control of the military. I share the concerns
expressed by the members of the National Defense Strategy Commission
that ``civilian voices have been relatively muted on issues at the
center of U.S. defense and national security policy, undermining the
concept of civilian control.'' If confirmed, I will diligently and
energetically fulfill my Constitutional and statutory responsibilities
to exercise control and oversight of all affairs of the Army, and I
will work closely with the Under Secretary and Assistant Secretaries of
the Army to assist me in the performance of this critical
responsibility.
Question. If confirmed, what duties and responsibilities would you
assign to the Under Secretary of the Army?
Answer. The Under Secretary of the Army performs such duties and
exercises such powers as the Secretary of the Army prescribes.
Headquarters, Department of the Army General Order No. 2020-01
specifies that the Under Secretary is the Secretary's senior civilian
assistant and principal adviser on matters related to the management
and operation of the Army. If confirmed, I will look to the Under
Secretary to regularly represent and advocate for the Army in senior-
level DOD management forums and to help integrate and lead progress on
Army priorities across the Department of the Army. To that end, the
Under Secretary is charged with communicating and advocating Army
policies, plans, and programs to external audiences, including
Congress, foreign governments, and the American public. In addition,
the Under Secretary is assigned to the position of Chief Management
Officer of the Army. In that position, the Under Secretary is the
principal adviser to the Secretary on the effective and efficient
organization of the Army's business operations and initiatives for the
business transformation of the Army. If confirmed, I would continue to
assign the Under Secretary of the Army those duties and
responsibilities.
Question. If confirmed, over which members and organizations of the
Army would you direct the Chief of Staff of the Army to exercise
supervision and what would be the scope of such supervision? What other
duties would you assign to the Chief of Staff of the Army?
Answer. As the senior military advisor to the Secretary of the Army
and senior military officer of the Army, the Chief of Staff of the Army
presides over the Army Staff, communicates plans and recommendations of
the Army Staff to the Secretary of the Army, and advises the Secretary
of the Army on those plans and recommendations. In addition to his role
as an advisor, the Chief of Staff of the Army is responsible for the
effective and efficient functioning of Army organizations and commands
in executing their statutory missions and assisting the Secretary of
the Army in the performance of acquisition-related functions such as
developing requirements for equipping the Army. Furthermore, the Chief
of Staff of the Army also performs the duties prescribed for him as a
member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under section 10 U.S.C. Sec. 151.
Additionally, there are direct reporting units which answer to the
Chief of Staff of the Army. These include the U.S. Army Test and
Evaluation Command, the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, the U.S.
Army Military District of Washington, and the U.S. Army War College. If
confirmed I would continue to assign the Chief of Staff of the Army
those duties and responsibilities.
budget
Question. If confirmed, by what standards would you measure the
adequacy of funding for the Army?
Answers: If confirmed, I will measure the adequacy of the Army's
funding based upon the Service's ability to meet the Biden
Administration's March 2021 Interim National Security Strategic
Guidance and when it is completed, by the Army's ability to meet the
requirements laid out in the new National Defense Strategy required by
Congress. Ultimately the Army needs sufficient resources to fulfill its
role as part of the Joint Force responsible for deterring, and if
necessary, defeating military aggression that threatens vital U.S.
interests with acceptable risk to force and mission. I plan to work
within the Army's allocated funding to ensure the most modern, ready,
and lethal soldiers possible. I will also work with the Chief of Staff
of the Army to ensure that the Army's priorities of people, readiness,
and modernization align with the Secretary of Defense's priorities of
defending our nation, innovating and modernizing the Force, maintaining
and enhancing readiness, taking care of our people, and succeeding
through Teamwork.
Question. How will you ensure the Army is appropriately resourced
to simultaneously modernize, grow readiness, and take care of its
people?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of Defense to
ensure resources are adequate to meet our mission based on the Interim
National Security Strategic Guidance, and later by the requirements
described in the new National Defense Strategy. To meet these
requirements, the Army must balance its ability to provide for soldiers
and their families while also resourcing our readiness and
modernization efforts. The Army has been successful balancing and
optimizing appropriated funds against its priorities through three
years of deliberate internal realignment of funds, but if confirmed, I
will need to assess carefully how the Army can continue to succeed in
balancing these priorities in future years.
Question. Section 222a of title 10, U.S. Code, provides that not
later than 10 days after the President's submission of the defense
budget to Congress, each Service Chief must submit to the congressional
defense committees a report that lists, in order of priority, the
unfunded priorities of his or her armed force.
If confirmed, do you agree to support the Chief of Staff of the
Army in providing his/her unfunded priorities list to Congress in a
timely manner?
Answer. If confirmed, I will support the Army Chief of Staff's
statutory requirement to provide a well-prepared Unfunded Requirements
(UFR) list to Congress within 10 days of the release of the President's
annual budget.
national defense strategy:
Question. In your view, does the 2018 NDS accurately assess the
current strategic environment, including the most critical and enduring
threats to the national security of the United States and its allies?
Please explain your answer.
Answer. In my view 2018 NDS was particularly important to
solidifying a bipartisan consensus around the concerning breadth and
depth of growth in People's Republic of China's military capabilities
and the implications of that growth for the United States. If
confirmed, I will support the Secretary of Defense to ensure that we
remain fully ready to respond to and effectively deter nation-state
threats emanating from People's Republic of China, Russia, Iran, and
North Korea, as were identified in the 2018 NDS, and to disrupting
transnational and non-state actor threats from violent extremist
organizations.
Question. In your view, does the 2018 NDS correctly specify the
priority missions and capabilities by which DOD can achieve its
security objectives in the context of the current strategic
environment?
Answer. I believe the 2018 NDS correctly focused attention on the
concerning breadth and depth of growth in People's Republic of China's
military capabilities and the implications of that growth for the
United States, and described the right set of operational challenges
that the Department of Defense must address and use to inform its force
planning and force development. At the same time, there have been
several changes in the strategic environment in the last three years. I
would anticipate that the ongoing strategy review will evaluate changes
in the security environment, identify priority defense objectives and
missions, and identify priorities for modernizing, employing, and
ensuring readiness of the Joint Force. If confirmed, I will continue to
work with the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, the Combatant Commands, and our sister Services to develop these
priorities and deliver the most capable land force in the world.
Question. What do you perceive to be the Army's role in competing
with and countering People's Republic of China?
Answer. I believe that the Army has important roles to play in both
competition and potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific. A unique
comparative advantage the United States has in competing against
People's Republic of China is our network of alliances and partners
around the world. The presence of Army forces in the Indo-Pacific re-
assures allies and partners, occupies the cognitive space of our
adversaries, and directly counters People's Republic of China's malign
activities. The enduring presence of land forces in the Indo-Pacific,
and the resultant Army-to-Army relationships with allies and partners,
is critical to effectively compete with People's Republic of China in
their geographical near-abroad area in this era of great power
competition. Army presence in competition sends clear messages to
friend and foe that the Army understands the importance of preserving a
free and open Indo-Pacific, and is willing to commit our most precious
resource, our people, to compete with and counter malign Chinese
influence globally.
Efforts to deter and counter aggression in the Indo-Pacific will
also include the Army, which has embarked on a comprehensive program to
modernize so that it is well prepared to confront technologically
advanced nation-state competitors. If confirmed, I will ensure that the
Army continues to invest in transformational change to provide
resources and capabilities that support the Joint Force's collective
effort to be prepared to win in conflict. I will consult closely with
the Chief of Staff of the Army and other Army senior leaders to further
develop and refine operational concepts applicable to the region and I
will work closely with them to develop appropriate formations and
associated capabilities for those formations, such as the Army's Multi-
Domain Task Force, that could be employed in a potential future
conflict.
Question. Do you believe the Army must maintain the ability to
conduct large-scale ground combat operations, to deter major-power
competitors such as Russia?
Answer. Yes. The Army must maintain the ability to credibly deter
major-power competitors, People's Republic of China and Russia, and
defeat them decisively in conflict, if necessary. The Army's ability to
conduct large-scale ground combat operations assures our allies and
partners and provides Joint Force Commanders and national policymakers
credible deterrence options in a crisis.
Maintaining the Army's overmatch against major power competitors
requires calibrated force posture and aggressive multi-domain
modernization. This means putting the right capabilities in the right
place to deter, with the power projection platforms necessary to
quickly deploy, fight, and win. The Army's calibrated force posture and
multi-domain transformation are key to ensuring our adversaries think
twice before they choose to coerce U.S. allies and partners with
military force.
Question. Is the Army adequately sized, structured, and resourced
to implement the current strategy and the associated operational plans?
Please explain your answer.
Answer. At this time, I do not have enough information on the
Department's current operational plans to assess their implications for
the size and structure of the Army relative to its resource levels. The
Army has a long history of answering the nation's call when needed, and
our soldiers, who have served with honor and sacrificed much in the
last two decades are the Army's greatest asset. At the same time, our
soldiers can only be effective when we provide them the right
equipment, training, and support. If confirmed, I will work closely
with the Chief of Staff of the Army, other Army senior leaders, the
Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Defense to ensure we
balance modernization, force structure and readiness needs within
allocated resources.
Question. Does the Army have the requisite analytic capabilities
and tools to support you, if confirmed, in evaluating the Army's force
structure and sizing strategies to ensure that it can and will generate
forces that are manned, trained, and equipped to execute current plans
and strategies? Please explain your answer.
Answer. Yes, the Army has the right tools and analytic capabilities
to support me, if confirmed. The Army created Army Futures Command
(AFC) to be the overarching future force modernization architect. AFC
has brought in all key modernization enterprise stakeholders to create
unity of command and unity of effort under one roof. Specifically, AFC
unified the Research and Analysis Center, the Futures and Concepts
Center, the research and development components, the test and
evaluation agencies, and the science and technology enterprise under
one command. The Army also established cross-functional teams to help
synchronize the Army's acquisition enterprise with the future force
concepts and technology. Additionally, the Army leverages the Army's
Center for Army Analysis which conducts modeling and simulation across
the spectrum of conflict to inform critical senior level decisions for
current and future national security issues.
Question. If confirmed, how will you address any gaps or shortfalls
in the Army's ability to meet the demands placed on it by the
operational plans that implement the current strategy?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Army's focus on
modernization and continue evolving Army doctrine to ensure it can meet
the requirements of the forthcoming new National Defense Strategy
(NDS). Over the last four years, the Army placed special emphasis and
focus on modernization, and recent concepts show promise in deterring
and if necessary, defeating a great power adversary. If confirmed, I
will continue to develop and refine the concept for Multi-Domain
Operations (MDO) at each echelon of Command, focus and deliver the
modernization priorities to include cyber, electronic warfare, long
range precision fires, and improved air defense systems, and expand
capacities to support Joint All Domain Command and Control as part of
the MDO evolution.
While this emphasis on modernization and concept development will
close operational gaps, it is only a partial solution to the demands
placed on the Army by operational plans. If confirmed, I will continue
to pursue a global calibrated posture to station or rotate the right
Army forces to key locations or theaters to compete with, deter, or
defeat great power adversaries. To be effective, the Army must find the
appropriate balance between Army forces engaged forward in theater and
those remaining stateside with the opportunity to train, modernize, and
maintain the flexibly deploy to meet any emerging challenge.
Question. If confirmed, what changes or adjustments would you make
in the Army's implementation of the current strategy?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Army continues to nest
its actions within broader policy. I understand that in accord with
statutory requirements, a new National Security Strategy and National
Defense Strategy are under development. These documents will guide
Department of the Army efforts to generate land forces to compete,
fight and win as part of the Joint Force. The Army will continue to
pursue Multi-Domain Transformation to enable the Joint Force in all
domains and retain our decisive role on land.
Question. How would you characterize your familiarity with the
civilian leaders of the Armies of other nations and multi-national and
international land power-focused consultative forums?
Answer. Our country's broad and deep network of alliances and
partnerships is a unique comparative advantage in this time of
strategic competition with technologically advanced nation-states and
if confirmed as Secretary of the Army I will make it a priority to
deepen our relationships with allied and partner land forces. Although
the Secretary of the Army has few peer-to-peer counterparts, I have had
the opportunity in the last 10 years to develop relationships and
engage with a wide range of ministers of defense, chiefs of defense,
and senior uniformed and civilian defense officials in countries around
the world. As Under Secretary of Defense for Policy I held annual
policy talks and made bilateral visits to many important allied and
partner countries in Europe, the Middle East, and the Indo-Pacific and
through those engagements had the opportunity to conduct substantive
talks with senior civilian and uniformed defense officials. As USDP I
attended the Munich Security Conference and the Halifax Defense Forum
at which I conducted many bilateral meetings with senior civilian and
uniformed counterparts. Outside of government I've had the opportunity
to attend many conferences around the world and to maintain some of the
relationships I developed during government service. If confirmed as
Army Secretary, I will draw on these past experiences and focus on
building strong allied and partner relationships through bilateral
engagements, multi-national exercises, and participation in other land-
power focused consultative forums to ensure the land-power dimension of
our alliance network remains robust in a time of strategic competition.
Question. If confirmed, on which leaders and forums would you focus
your engagement with a view to advancing the interests of the Army?
Answer. The Secretary of the Army is the primary communicator of
the Army's interests across the government, nation, and globe.
Secretary of Defense Austin's priority is that we succeed through
teamwork. If confirmed, I will regularly engage with members of
Congress to build the best possible Army. I will engage with DOD
leadership and other Service Secretaries to ensure we have a Joint
Force ready to fight and win. I will engage with allies and partners to
develop approaches for our common security interests. I will engage our
nation through dialogue with the diverse interest groups that are
interested in the Army. I will also engage our soldiers through visits
to installations and units, as well as town hall meetings and smaller
listening sessions.
major challenges and priorities:
Question. If confirmed, what would be your vision for the Army now
and for the future?
The 2018 Army Vision provides a sound foundation upon which to
build for guiding the Army in the next several years. Today and
tomorrow, the Army must be ready to deploy, fight and win decisively
against any adversary, any time in any region of the world. Future
conflicts will be joint, combined, high intensity and unfold in
multiple domains and the Army must be organized, trained, equipped and
appropriately sized to prevail in these types of conflicts while at the
same time protecting the homeland, deterring opportunistic aggression
and remaining able to conduct irregular warfare when needed. To do
this, the Army will employ modernized manned and unmanned weapon and
sustainment systems, paired with strong combined arms formations
centered on world-class leaders and highly lethal soldiers.
To remain ready as the world's premier combat force, the Army
relies on people--its soldiers, civilians, families, and veterans. If
confirmed, I will focus not only on ensuring our Army can compete,
deter and win in future conflicts, but also on taking care of people so
that the Army can recruit, retain and nurture the nation's best talent
to fulfill its critical responsibilities as part of the Joint Force.
This means creating a 21st century talent management system with
policies, programs, and processes that recognize and capitalize the
unique knowledge, skills, and behaviors possessed by every member of
the Army team, allowing us to employ each to maximum effect. It means
recognizing that our soldiers and civilians should have the best
quality of life possible, and requires prioritizing improvements in our
housing and barracks, healthcare, childcare, spouse employment and
permanent change of station moves. Maximizing the talents of our
people, the Army's greatest strength and most important weapon system
is a critical element of my vision for the Army today and in the
future. The Army's people are foundational to the Army's effort to
maintain readiness and pursue its ambitious modernization strategy,
both are which are critical to ensuring the Army can successfully
deploy, fight, and win in future conflicts.
What would you see as your highest priorities for the near-term and
long-term future of the Army?
Answer. The Army's current priorities are people, readiness, and
modernization. To address people, the Army has instituted the ``People
First'' task force to restore an Army-wide culture of dignity and
respect. If confirmed, I will make it a priority to review, understand,
and implement, as necessary, the recommendations of the Fort Hood
Independent Review Committee. As part of the larger Army People
Strategy, the task force is already taking a holistic approach to
reduce harmful behaviors like sexual harassment/sexual assault through
prevention-focused efforts reinforced by improved accountability,
response, and command climate initiatives.
The Army has made significant progress building readiness in recent
years and is working to meet increasing demands in the Indo-Pacific and
in Europe. If confirmed, I will ensure trained and equipped soldiers
are ready to meet the operational requirements they may face.
Looking to the longer-term, the Total Army is modernizing by
focusing on integration within the Joint Force to provide for the most
effective defense of the United States while retaining its ability to
dominate as a land power. To do this, the Army is transforming itself
into a multi-domain capable force. This capability will provide Joint
Force commanders and Congress options in case of a globally integrated,
rapidly developing crisis, while simultaneously assuring U.S. allies
and partners.
Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
challenges you would face, if confirmed as Secretary of the Army?
Answer. One of the most significant challenges I believe I would
face if confirmed is working closely with Army leaders to create a
positive command climate across the entire Army that fosters trust
between soldiers and between the Army and the American public. Harmful
behaviors like sexual assault, domestic violence and extremism break
down trust and are inimical to Army values. Managing persistent
operational demands and reducing unpredictability will also reduce
stress soldiers and Army families experience. and exacerbates the
challenges the Army faces with harmful behaviors.
A second significant challenge I would face if confirmed is
ensuring the Army is able to execute its aggressive modernization
strategy while maintaining a sustainable level of readiness to meet
current demands. The Army is undertaking its first comprehensive
modernization effort in almost 40 years and given the anti-access and
area denial threats we now face, it is very important to succeed in
these efforts so that the Army remains the world's premiere land force.
If confirmed, I will begin to address each of these challenges on
day one.
Question. What plans do you have for addressing each of these
challenges, if confirmed?
Answer. To rebuild a positive command climate Army-wide and reduce
stress on soldiers and their families I would strive to address harmful
behaviors head-on by holding perpetrators accountable while also
building a climate and culture of trust, dignity, and respect. I
believe the People First task force, the ``This is My Squad''
initiative and the Cohesion Assessment Teams are important tools in
beginning to address command climate shortcomings. The Army's new unit
life cycle model, which seeks to manage demand for personnel over time
and bring predictability back to the Army's soldiers and families can
also be helpful in reducing stress on the force.
To ensure success in the Army's modernization efforts while also
maintaining readiness, I would plan to continuously ensure alignment
between the Department's new operational concepts and the Army's
modernization initiatives, and provide vigorous oversight of the 31+4
initiatives to ensure programs are developed and fielded on schedule
and within planned resources. As part of those oversight efforts I will
emphasize close, productive working relationships between Army Futures
Command, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Acquisition,
Logistics and Technology and the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
end strength:
Question. Is the Army's current end strength sufficient to meet
current national security objectives and execute the associated
operational plans?
Answer. At this time, I do not have enough information on the
Department's current operational plans to confidently assess their
implications for Army end-strength. The Army has a long history of
answering the nation's call when needed, and our soldiers, who have
served with honor and sacrificed much in the last two decades are the
Army's greatest asset. At the same time, our soldiers can only be
effective when we provide them the right equipment, training, and
support. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Chief of Staff of
the Army, other Army senior leaders, the Deputy Secretary of Defense,
and the Secretary of Defense to ensure we effectively balance end
strength, modernization, and readiness needs.
Question. If not, what end strength do you believe is necessary?
Please explain your answer.
Answer. If confirmed, I will draw on a range of analytical
capabilities, including the Army's Total Army Analysis (TAA) process,
to comprehensively assess the implications of the forthcoming National
Defense Strategy for future force structure requirements across all
components, to determine how to provide the best possible Army within
available resources.
recruiting/retention:
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the Army maintains
sufficiently high recruitment and retention standards, even if such
standards result in the Army not achieving authorized end strength
levels?
Answer. In fiscal year 2020, the Army was able to leverage
historical recruiting metrics which lead to data-driven decision making
to enable a precise recruitment mission that did not exceed the
approved End-Strength. In fiscal year 2021, the Army again utilized
those metrics, and is continuing to make recruiting efforts more
efficient. This optimization allows the Army to have a more agile
recruitment approach that not only focuses on high quality applicants,
but also focuses on the skill sets required to support the Army's
modernization needs. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Army's
retention program only allows those soldiers who have maintained a
record of acceptable performance to be offered the privilege of
reenlistment. Instrumental to the success of the retention program is
the empowerment of the Commander to evaluate their soldiers to ensure
both compliance with Army policy and alignment with the Army's
professional code of ethics.
Question. What impact do current medical and other qualifications
for enlistment in the Army have on the number of individuals eligible
for military service?
Answer. I understand there is a significant impact on the number of
individuals eligible for military service due to medical and other
qualifications. Most young people in the Army's recruiting target age
group are disqualified due to medical reasons, with nearly a third
being disqualified for being overweight. To address these concerns, I
understand the Army has recently undertaken an effort to pilot a
program, the Assessment of Recruit Motivation & Strength (ARMS 2.0),
which will allow the Army to screen and assess into the Service a small
number of applicants who slightly exceed body fat standards.
Participants in this program will serve in the Army in physically
demanding and combat arms career fields and will be carefully monitored
to ensure they maintain their fitness. If confirmed, I will support
these efforts and programs.
Question. If confirmed, what changes to such qualifications, if
any, would you recommend to increase the number of individuals eligible
for service without degrading the quality of recruits?
Answer. If confirmed, I would look at the many methods available,
including cognitive, non-cognitive, and physical methods to measure
quality recruits to ensure the Army could meet its recruitment goals. I
am informed that the Army, working with OSD, is actively looking at
more holistic models for qualification for military service. The Army
developed and implemented the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment
System (TAPAS) that measures an applicant's non-cognitive `stick-to-it-
ness' that can be an accurate predictor of success in training;
qualities that more traditional methods of qualification assessment are
not able to measure. If confirmed, I will work with OSD on the review
and refinement of the qualifications for military service to ensure
that we maintain the most qualified and effective All-Volunteer Force
without sacrificing quality for quantity.
Question. Rather than relying solely on ever-higher compensation
for a shrinking pool of volunteers, what creative steps would you take,
if confirmed, to expand the pool of eligible recruits and improve Army
recruiting?
Answer. If confirmed, I would explore the use of the Career Options
Optimizer (COO) concept, a combined effort between U.S. Army Recruiting
Command (USAREC) and RAND. My understanding is that the COO creates a
multitude of enlistment options that are valued by both prospective
recruits and the Army. The COO provides a means for potential recruits
to develop tailorable and adaptable enlistment contracts based on their
unique individual qualifications and needs. The COO provides the
ability to evaluate and capture the value of each enlistment option,
both monetary and non-monetary, improving cost savings for the Army.
The COO should result in improved recruit satisfaction, cost savings
for the Army, and recruit cohorts with characteristics (knowledge,
skills & behaviors) that are desired by the Army.
Question. What do you consider to be key to the Army's future
success in retaining the best qualified personnel for continued service
in positions of greater responsibility and leadership in the Army?
Answer. I believe there are several keys to retaining the best-
qualified personnel, but it starts at recruitment. First is identifying
the best match for the recruit's talents within the needs of the Army.
This match will allow soldiers to select the best position for
themselves and give them the best opportunity to build a sense of pride
within their respective Military Occupational Specialty (MOS).
Additionally, this matching process allows for soldiers to sustain
professional growth and career satisfaction within their chosen MOS.
Further, this process will allow soldiers to continue to progress
toward their career goals in the Army while maintaining a sense of
fulfillment and satisfaction. In addition to providing the soldiers the
best chance for success in their MOS, I believe the key to retaining
quality soldiers is the personal engagement between Commanders,
leaders, and their soldiers. Third, ongoing quality of life
initiatives, leadership training, and a renewed focus on diversity,
equity, and inclusion, will result in a more lethal, educated, and
better postured force to solve the complex problems of tomorrow while
allowing the Army to compete for talent. If confirmed, I will support
these initiatives and make recruitment and retention a priority for the
Army.
Question. What steps, if any, do you feel should be taken to ensure
that current operational requirements and tempo do not adversely impact
the overall recruiting, retention, readiness, and morale of soldiers?
Answer. I understand the Army has, for nearly two decades, worked
to keep operational requirements and tempo from adversely impacting
recruiting, retention, readiness, and the morale of the force. Leaders
at all levels should, in my view, work to balance mission requirements
with the needs of individual soldiers and their families. The Army is
employing new strategies like assignment preferences for both officers
and enlisted soldiers. Soldiers are also being offered a multitude of
opportunities to reenlist for specific duty locations, training, or
retention bonuses based on their desires. The Army is working to
provide predictability of training and missions to soldiers in support
of the Army People Strategy. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Army
recruits, develops, and retains top talent through an agile 21st
Century talent management system that identifies the right applicants
and leverages existing talent to capitalize on our incentives, world
class training, and significant investments to improve soldier quality
of life. Continued focus on these efforts will allow the Army to
attract and retain soldiers with the skills needed to maintain
overmatch against great power competitors.
Question. In your view, do current recruiting standards--
particularly DOD-wide criteria for tier-one recruits--accurately
predict recruit attrition and/or future success in the Army?
Answer. Yes, my understanding is that current DOD recruit
benchmarks for high school graduation rates and performance on the
Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) are good predictors of
trainability and of completion of an applicant's term of service. If
confirmed, however, I will work with Congress and DOD to implement
improvements to our screening methods, particularly using additional
fitness screens like the Army's Occupational Physical Assessment Test
and through use of the planned ARMS 2.0 and TAPAS pilots, which have
already demonstrated the potential to minimize recruit attrition and
expand the recruiting market.
Question. Do you believe that current military entrance testing
methods unnecessarily restrict the pool of eligible recruits, for
example, by penalizing prospective recruits for whom English is not
their native language?
Answer. No, I believe the current DOD military entrance testing
methods are sufficient for manning the all-volunteer Force. The Army
has made significant strides using English as a Second Language
programs for applicants who demonstrate sufficient aptitude for
service, but who struggle with English as a second language.
reserve components:
Question. In your view, what is the appropriate relationship
between the Active Army and the Army Reserve and Army National Guard?
Answer. The Army operates under a Total Force construct, which I
fully support. The Army National Guard and the Army Reserve serve as
the Combat Reserve of the Army, providing trained and ready units in
support of Combatant Command requirements around the globe, as well as
providing relevant capabilities to federal, state, and local
authorities for domestic response. The training and operations between
the Regular Army, Army Reserve, and Army National Guard are, in my
view, well integrated. If confirmed, I will support the Army's efforts
to improve integration and interoperability across the force including
working closely with the Chief, National Guard Bureau and the Chief,
Army Reserve. I will look for opportunities to expand these critical
relationships and ensure that future equipping efforts continue to
improve interoperability. I will strive to ensure that units that
deploy together, especially early deploying units, will have similar
mobility, lethality, survivability, and network communications
architecture regardless of the component from which they originate.
Question. What is your vision for the roles and missions of the
Army Reserve Components?
Answer. As an operational Reserve, the National Guard and Army
Reserve play a vital role in supporting our national interests. These
components also provide the strategic depth to safeguard those
interests. The Army's vision for these components should be as full and
equal partners in Multi-Domain Operations. The Army must ensure that
these components have the capabilities that allow for the full spectrum
of operations from competition to large-scale combat operations against
near-peer competitors.
Question. If confirmed, what new objectives would you seek to
achieve with respect to the Army Reserve Components' organization,
force structure, end strength, and readiness?
Answer. If confirmed, I will explore improvements to
interoperability and readiness that lead to the best possible force
within available resources, striking a balance between operational use
of Reserve Component soldiers' and their commitments to their
communities, employers, and Families. The Reserve Components face
similar challenges as the Active Component to maintain a sufficient
amount of readiness to support our Combatant Commanders while investing
in the needed modernization efforts required to meet future threats. I
believe the Army must create a responsible methodology tailored to
Reserve Component timelines to address this effort and ensure
interoperability of forces regardless of component. This modernization
is critically important as the Reserve Components, at approximately 52
percent of the Total Force, provide capacity depth to ensure the Army
can support national interests. Total Army integration,
interoperability, and balance are key to achieving national interests
and that will always be the goal.
Question. Are you concerned that continued reliance on Army Reserve
Components to execute operational missions--both at home and around the
globe--is adversely affecting the ability to meet their recruiting and
retention missions? Why or why not?
Answer. In my judgement, maintaining the Congressionally directed
end strength of the Reserve Components is a critical element in
maintaining the Army as a Total Force. Army marketing and advertising
efforts are synchronized across all three components to support the
recruitment of new members to serve. The Army Reserve Components'
historically high-level of readiness is principally due to a Total
Force policy that recognizes their role as an operational force. This
operational use of the Reserve Component is beneficial to recruitment
efforts as Reserve Component soldiers want to perform meaningful
service and contribute to the total fight. These soldiers are also
highly motivated to be able to serve in their own communities, helping
American citizens through missions like the Army's response to the
COVID pandemic. It is imperative, however, that the operational demand
on the Army Reserve Components is monitored so that soldiers can
balance meaningful service with thriving civilian careers and strong,
supportive Families. Additionally, the continued economic recovery
post-pandemic, may pose some challenges to recruiting and, if
confirmed, I will closely examine the balance between operational
requirements and commitments that the Army National Guard and Army
Reserve members have to their Families and employers.
diversity and inclusion:
Question. In general, data shows that Army racial demographics
align with those of the broader U.S. population, with the notable
exception of Army General Officers. In your view, what factors underpin
the lack of representation of racial minorities at general officer
grades?
Answer. I am aware that, in 2019, the Army directed its Office of
Economic and Manpower Analysis to research the root causes behind the
lack of diversity in the Army General Officer population. The resulting
effort identified that almost 60 percent of all Army General Officers
served in or had backgrounds in five branches--Infantry, Armor,
Aviation, Engineer, and Special Forces. The Army also found that these
five branches have the lowest racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of
all Army branches. If confirmed, I will strongly support Army
initiatives that seek to increase racial, ethnic, and gender diversity
in its combat arms branches. Three of these initiatives are Talent
Based Branching, the Urban Access Initiative, and the Combat Arms
Outreach Engagement Teams.
If confirmed, I will work to ensure the combat arms branches
reflect the Army population.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to work toward
the goal of ensuring that the Army, at all levels, especially within
the senior officer ranks, reflects the broad diversity of those
eligible to serve?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Army's focus on the
initiatives included in the Army People Strategy: Diversity, Equity,
and Inclusion Annex. The Annex serves as the five-year strategic plan
mandated by Congress in the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense
Authorization Act. The Annex contains goals, objectives, and numerous
tasks, which are driving the Army's current diversity and inclusion
efforts. Specifically, the Annex seeks to address increasing diversity
in the senior officer ranks. One such initiative is the Expanding
Diverse Talent in the Army Officer Corps plan, which includes 25
initiatives specifically address increasing Army Officer Diversity. I
understand there are other promising initiatives including Talent Based
Branching, the Urban Access Initiative, and the Combat Arms Outreach
Engagement Teams. If confirmed, I will promote these efforts and others
to ensure more diversity in our senior ranks.
Question. What is your assessment of diversity in the Department's
civilian workforce, especially at the senior General Schedule and
Senior Executive Service levels?
Answer. My understanding is that the Army's Annual Federal EEO
Progress Report revealed that the Army has a lot of work to do at
senior grades and SES levels to achieve higher levels of diversity. The
Army's challenge continues to be identifying and eliminating barriers
to participation in senior grades and SES positions for women and
minorities. If confirmed, I will focus the Army on continuing with its
efforts to achieve greater diversity in the civilian workforce by
ensuring access to opportunity and choice for all.
Question. If confirmed, how would you increase geographical
diversity in the Army from areas of the country and communities that
are currently underrepresented?
Answer. I understand that the Army's enlisted recruiting efforts
are doing well in attracting recruits from across the country and our
territories. I support the Army working to actively increase both
geographical and minority diversity in the officer ranks.
If confirmed, I will be committed to work in support of these
efforts and will seek other means to ensure America's Army of the All-
Volunteer Force is representative of the Nation it serves.
Question. What is your assessment of the diversity of cadets at the
United States Military Academy?
Answer. West Point has a rigorous and comprehensive application and
nomination process that allows the Army to attract a Corps of Cadets
with a diversity of talent. West Point is an avenue for diversity
within the officer corps and, if confirmed, I look forward to working
with the West Point team to continue acquiring the diversity of talent
that is so crucial to the Army's success.
Question. What measures can be taken to increase diversity in the
Academy?
Answer. I believe the United States Military Academy (USMA) is
dedicated to developing and maintaining a diverse and inclusive
community where everyone is treated with dignity and respect. I support
USMA's efforts that strive for a Corps of Cadets that is reflective of
the Nation and the Army they will lead.
The Congressional nomination process is, in my view, one of the
best ways to ensure that the Corps of Cadets is representative of the
nation. If confirmed, I intend to harness the collective efforts of
West Point, Congress, the network of Civilian Aides to the Secretary of
the Army (CASA), and the Army more broadly to continue building the
diverse Corps of Cadets that our Army and nation require.
military health care reforms:
Question. The Acting Secretary of the Army recently stated that the
Army is now ``all in'' on military health care reform. Yet the Army
Medical Command's (MEDCOM) has persistently advocated that the
Department of Defense (DOD) abandon the market construct for healthcare
delivery and return to a component model of health delivery that would
contradict congressional mandates and direction.
The Army's actions, and in some cases, inactions have put
congressionally directed reform deadlines at risk. In June 2020, a
Deputy Secretary of Defense memo approved sourcing 12 additional Flag
Officer/General Officer positions from the military departments to the
Defense Health Agency (DHA). To date, the Army has not filled two of
these billets for which they are responsible. Additionally, the Army
has non-concurred in participation by military personnel assigned to
Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) in market offices through MTF
personnel request memos. In fact, Army MEDCOM has prohibited its
product line leads in San Antonio from providing support to the
incoming DHA Market Director's efforts to establish that market.
Moreover, Army MEDCOM has opposed the Commander, DHA's service as rater
for MTF Directors, as required by law. MEDCOM leadership has failed to
provide information to DHA regarding the future organization of its
readiness-focused successor to MEDCOM or readiness commands, but it has
denied additional resources to DHA because of its supposed need to
staff its still un-defined MEDCOM reorganization. Finally, the Army
told DHA in April 2021 that it would transfer responsibility for 500
contracts to DHA by the end of this fiscal year, but has not provided
details for DHA to assume contract responsibility.
Do you support the purpose and implementation of section 702 of the
Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), as
clarified by sections 711 and 712 of the Fiscal Year 2019 NDAA?
Answer. Yes. Ensuring the DHA's successful assumption of the
healthcare delivery mission is in the Army's best interest. The Army is
reliant on DHA to run the military medical treatment facilities. These
facilities are readiness platforms to facilitate the training of the
Ready Medical Force and to provide efficient and effective healthcare
to ensure soldiers are healthy and ready to deploy. If confirmed, I
would ensure the Army continues to transfer the healthcare delivery
mission, resources and personnel to the DHA in accordance with the law
and will seek to understand what factors may lie behind recent delays
in the Army's ability to support congressionally directed reform in
this area.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take immediately to
comply with congressional mandates to reform the military healthcare
system?
Answer. I believe ensuring the health and readiness of the Army's
soldiers is critical as the Army undertakes the reform actions directed
in the NDAA. If confirmed, I will take all necessary steps to achieve
successful implementation of congressional mandates for reform of the
Military Health System while ensuring the Army maintains its readiness.
I will support current efforts to complete S.702 transition of the
Medical Treatment Facilities (MTFs) to the Defense Health Agency (DHA)
by September 30, 2021.
At this time, I do not have sufficient knowledge of the
complexities surrounding reform of the Military Health Care System to
outline what immediate steps I would take to bring the Army into
compliance, but if confirmed, I am committed to working with the
Secretary of Defense to develop a mutually beneficial implementation
plan that will ensure DHA can execute its mandated missions to enhance
and sustain support to the Army and the Joint Force while ensuring the
Army can carry out its Title 10 responsibilities to man, train and
equip medical forces.
non-deployable issues:
Question. Do you agree that soldiers who are non-deployable for
more than 12 consecutive months should be subject either to separation
from the Army or referral into the Disability Evaluation System?
Answer. I believe that every soldier who is non-deployable for 12
consecutive months must be evaluated for continued service. Soldiers
must be able to deploy, fight, and win when the nation calls. If a
soldier is unable to deploy for a prolonged period, an assessment is
needed to determine if continued service is in the best interests of
the servicemember and the Army.
Question. In your view, under what circumstances might the
retention of a soldier who has been non-deployable for more than 12
months be ``in the best interest of the Army''?
Answer. In my judgment, the Army must assess the unique
circumstances of each soldier who is classified as non-deployable for
12 consecutive months and who wants to remain in the Army. I believe
there may be circumstances where non-deployability may not impede a
soldier's ability to complete their mission or when the non-deployable
condition has a known recovery point that is beyond 12 consecutive
months. As an example, soldiers may possess a high-demand, low-density
military occupational specialty such as cyber or military intelligence.
A soldier may have highly skilled capabilities and through various
means could execute missions from a non-deployed environment. Another
example is when the non-deployability of a pregnant soldiers exceeds a
12-month non-deployability period consistent with DODI 1332.45, but the
soldier can then continue to serve after the recovery period. Retaining
soldiers in both these circumstances may be in the best interest of the
Army and demonstrate why these cases should be evaluated on an
individual basis.
The new transgender policy (DODI 1300.28) states ``any
determination that a transgender servicemember is non-deployable at any
time will be consistent with established Military Department and
Service standards, as applied to other servicemembers whose
deployability is similarly affected in comparable circumstances
unrelated to gender transition.'' The same policy requires commanders
to review and approve servicemember requests to transition gender in a
manner that ``maintains military readiness by minimizing impacts to the
mission (including deployment, operational, training, and exercise
schedules, and critical skills availability).''
Question. What Army standards and policies related to a soldier's
ability to deploy will be applied to transgender servicemembers
undergoing gender transition procedures or treatment?
Answer. My understanding is that the Army uses Army Directive 2018-
22 (Retention Policy for Non-Deployable Soldiers) as its standard to
determine soldier deployability. All soldiers are considered deployable
unless they have a Service-determined reason that precludes them from
deployment. The gender transition process will bring with it a profiled
time period. Those soldier's profiles and profiled time periods should,
in my view, be treated like any other soldier whose profiles similarly
affect deployability.
Question. As the Army implements the DOD policy, what level of
commander will be responsible for balancing servicemember requests to
transition gender while maintaining military readiness?
Answer. I understand the Army intends to make Brigade Commanders
responsible, but all Commanders, in my view, should approach a soldier
undergoing gender transition in the same way they would approach a
soldier undergoing any medically necessary treatment. Commanders should
continue to minimize effects to the mission and ensure continued unit
readiness. I believe Commanders should balance the needs of the
individual transitioning soldier and the needs of the command in a
manner that is comparable to the actions available to the commander in
addressing comparable medical circumstances unrelated to gender
transition.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that commanders have
the authority to minimize mission impacts of requests for gender
transition?
Answer. I understand the Army is expected to soon publish an Army
Directive regarding service by transgender persons and persons with
gender dysphoria that aligns with Department of Defense guidance. If
confirmed, I will assess whether this guidance is sufficient to ensure
commanders have the authority needed to minimize mission impacts of
requests for gender transition.
suicide prevention:
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to prevent
suicides in the Active Army, the Army Reserve, and the Army National
Guard, and in the families of soldiers across all Components?
Answer. A death by suicide is a tragedy as each suicide affects the
lives of a significant number of Family members, teammates, co-workers,
and first responders. If confirmed, I will focus my efforts on
providing leaders with the resources needed to foster a sense of
belonging, strengthen resilience, a significant protective factor, and
enhance unit cohesion. I understand the Army Resilience Directorate
provides command teams with the ability to access Suicide Prevention,
Resilience, and Junior Leader Development training through 32 Ready and
Resilient (R2) Performance Centers across the globe. In addition, the
Army is piloting and fielding leader visibility tools to help Command
Teams better ``see'' their soldiers. This increased awareness should
enable the development of comprehensive prevention strategies and allow
for timely intervention opportunities to mitigate factors that may
adversely impact soldiers' wellbeing. If confirmed, I will make suicide
prevention a priority.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to enhance the reporting
and tracking of suicide among family members and dependents of soldiers
across all Components?
Answer. The Army has established procedures for reporting and
tracking deaths by suicide for family members. The process of ensuring
accurate suicide counts and rates for soldiers, family members and
Department of the Army Civilians, I believe, is a collaborative effort
between the Army and Department of Defense. If confirmed, my intent is
to ensure leaders are equipped with the resources, training, and time
to create more cohesive teams, develop prevention strategies, and
recognize intervention opportunities. Through improved training,
increased leader visibility, and heightened awareness about warning
signs, and help-seeking, I believe the Army can take useful steps to
reduce and prevent these incidents of suicide.
U.S. Army Alaska has experienced 32 suicides from 2016 through
2021. Of these, 19 soldiers assigned to Fort Wainwright committed
suicide. Of the total number of soldier suicides in Alaska, 59 percent
occurred off-post, 78 percent percent died by gunshot wound, and 60
percent were either infantry or ordnance soldiers. Army leadership has
taken steps to improve the quality of life for soldiers in Alaska,
particularly at Fort Wainwright, and to provide more mental health
resources for soldiers, but suicides continue.
Question. If confirmed, what additional steps would you take to
improve the Army's suicide prevention efforts in Alaska?
Answer. I understand Army leaders in Alaska have taken numerous
steps to reduce deaths by suicide to include a Behavioral Health
Epidemiological Consultation, focused Master Resilience Training, and
quality of life improvements. While these efforts have not yielded a
near-term reduction in suicides, they should improve the overall
behavioral health and wellness of soldiers in Alaska over time. If
confirmed, I will evaluate whether to direct widespread adoption of
this public health approach throughout Army communities. I will also
ensure Commanders have the policies, resources, and training to develop
effective prevention strategies and improve services and environmental
conditions in Alaska and at all other Army's installations.
sexual harassment and assault prevention and response programs:
Question. What is your assessment of the findings and
recommendations of the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee?
Answer. I read the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee report
cover to cover and was angry and frustrated when I was finished. Its
findings are accurate, deeply disturbing and suggest that the Army has
significant work ahead of it to address the failings in climate and
culture, in crime prevention and investigation, and in its SHARP
program. If confirmed, I will be fully committed to implementing all of
the recommendations in the report, and to determining how to better
identify in advance where there are negative trends in command climate
at Army installations so that the Army can get ahead of problematic
behavior before it starts and risks breaking trust between the Army and
its soldiers.
Question. Do you believe these findings and recommendations are
applicable Army-wide?
Answer. Yes, I believe that the findings and recommendations in the
Fort Hood Independent Review Committee's report should be applied
across the Army, to include in the Army National Guard and Army
Reserve.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take with respect to
the findings and recommendations of the Fort Hood Independent Review
Committee?
Answer. My intent, if confirmed, is to ensure that the Army
carefully considers how best to implement the 70 recommendations in the
Fort Hood Independent Review Committee's report across the entire Army.
I understand the Army is taking action to address the recommendations,
both locally at Fort Hood, and in some areas across the Service. I am
also aware that the Army is executing several related actions to
improve its climate and culture and to select the right leaders,
particularly through its ``This is My Squad'' initiative and through
its Command Assessment Program. If confirmed, I will reinforce these
efforts to ensure that the Army addresses all of the Fort Hood report's
recommendations and applies them broadly across the Service.
Question. In particular, what actions would you take with regard to
the structure, leadership, and operations of the U.S. Army Criminal
Investigation Command?
Answer. I have read the FHIRC report and, if confirmed, I am fully
committed to continuing the work being done to implement the
recommendations. I understand the Army is in the process of making
significant changes to the structure, leadership, and operations of the
U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) based on the Army
Provost Marshall's General intensive five-month structural redesign.
The redesign is meant to create an organization with enhanced
capabilities and capacity, organized with and led by civilian and
military agents, military officers, and enlisted soldiers. I look
forward to examining the changes proposed by CID to address the
underlying concerns identified in the FHIRC.
Question. In your view, are the policies, programs, and training
that the Army has put in place to prevent and respond to sexual
harassment and sexual assault adequate and effective?
Answer. Simply stated, my view is sexual assault, sexual
harassment, and associated retaliation are unacceptable and have no
place in any professional setting, and definitely not in the Army.
Sexual harassment, assault and retaliation against victims are contrary
to the Army Values, harm members of the Army Team, detract from the
readiness of the force, and undermine the Army's trust with the
American people. If confirmed, I plan to enact the approved
recommendations from the People First Task Force and the 90-Day
Independent Review Commission, with an emphasis on those initiatives
that prioritize the care and support of victims. The Army needs to
prevent these harmful behaviors from occurring in the first place,
which is why I believe it's imperative it enhance prevention efforts.
If confirmed, I am committed to providing Leaders at all echelons of
command with the resources and training necessary to establish and
sustain healthy unit climates, integrate and support soldiers as they
transition to new duty stations, and the knowledge and skills to
recognize intervention opportunities along the continuum of harm.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to increase focus on the
prevention of sexual assaults?
Answer. If confirmed, I will place emphasis on the prevention of
sexual assault, sexual harassment, and associated retaliatory
behaviors. I believe prevention of these harmful behaviors starts with
Commanders, who are centrally responsible and accountable for
establishing healthy unit climates. Permissive environments
exponentially increase the likelihood of a host of harmful behaviors
along the continuum of harm. I believe it is imperative the Army
continues investing in research on culture, climate, unit cohesion, and
other factors to inform a holistic prevention approach. In addition, if
confirmed, I will support the Army's current effort of encouraging
reporting so victims can get the support they need to heal and
offenders can be held accountable.
Question. What is your view of the necessity of affording a victim
both restricted and unrestricted options to report sexual harassment?
Answer. I believe it is imperative to offer both restricted and
unrestricted reporting options for victims of sexual harassment. Having
additional options should increase the likelihood that victims will
feel comfortable reporting and boost confidence in the system. This, in
turn, should lead to an increase in the number of overall reports,
presenting a better understanding of the dimensions and dynamics of
sexual harassment.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to improve the
quality of investigations into allegations of sexual harassment?
Answer. I am aware that the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee
(FHIRC) Report identified independence as an essential aspect to ensure
the quality and integrity of investigations. I understand the Army
recently made a policy change to the way it appoints the officers who
will investigate allegations of sexual harassment. The new policy
requires investigating officers to be appointed from a separate,
brigade-sized unit from the one in which the subject is assigned. This
policy change implements one of the FHIRC's specific recommendations
and creates independence in the investigation process. If confirmed, I
will support this change and work to ensure that it is implemented
expeditiously across the Army. I will also explore new initiatives that
can build upon those recommended by the FHIRC to further stamp out the
scourge of sexual harassment and assault.
Question. What is your understanding of the adequacy of Army
resources and programs to provide victims of sexual assault and sexual
harassment the medical, psychological, and legal help they need?
Answer. I understand the Army has a comprehensive response system
that includes medical, psychological, and legal services to support
victims of sexual assault and harassment. If confirmed, I will ensure
these services remain properly resourced and effective components of
the Army's response system. In addition, I will support the continued
expansion of the Special Victim's Counsel Program, which currently
serves victims of sexual assault and domestic violence. I also support
increasing the Army's telehealth capabilities. This service, which was
expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, appears to reduce the stigma
associated with accessing behavioral health care. I would support the
continued expansion of this program post-pandemic.
Question. What is your assessment of the Army's protections against
retaliation or reprisal for reporting sexual assault and/or harassment?
Answer. Although the Army continues to make progress in encouraging
reporting, fear of retaliation remains a significant barrier for
victims and bystanders. If confirmed, I will continue to emphasize the
importance of protecting all victims and work to provide Commanders
with the resources, training, and policies they need to develop and
sustain healthy climates, enhance unit cohesion, develop prevention
strategies and put an end to retaliatory practices and victim-blaming
Question. What is your assessment of the potential impact, if any,
of proposals to remove Army commanders from case disposition authority
over felony violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice,
including sexual assaults?
Answer. Despite years of efforts to reduce sexual harassment and
sexual assault in the military, the problem is not getting better. I am
particularly concerned by the lack of trust young enlisted soldiers
have in the current system, as revealed by the Fort Hood report
investigation. As a result, I am open to new approaches to improve
accountability and if confirmed, will carefully review the Independent
Review Commission's assessment of the feasibility, opportunities, and
risks of such a proposed change, as well as the Commission's
recommendations.
sexual harassment in the civilian workforce:
Question. In responding to the 2018 DOD Civilian Employee Workplace
and Gender Relations survey, 17.7 percent of female and 5.8 percent of
male DOD employees indicated that they had experienced sexual
harassment and/or gender discrimination by ``someone at work'' in the
12 months prior to completing the survey.
In your view, do Army policies and processes for tracking the
submission and monitoring the resolution of informal complaints of
harassment or discrimination provide leaders, supervisors, and
managers, with an accurate picture of the systemic prevalence of these
adverse behaviors in the Army?
Answer. The Army has EEO Officials to review, monitor, assess and
advise leaders on EEO complaint activity. Officials with a ``need to
know'' e.g., Leaders, Supervisors and Managers are advised of complaint
trends through advisory functions, program evaluations, staff
assistance visits and annual reporting. The Army Complaints Tracking
System has the capability to query by a variety of data fields to
acquire specific information. Allegations can be identified as well as
the disposition of the complaint. At the same time, given what is known
about underreporting of sexual harassment and discrimination, it is
reasonable to assume that despite sound Army policies for tracking
complaints in these areas and their resolution, this does not mean
those policies in and of themselves ensure an accurate picture of the
systemic prevalence of these adverse behaviors. If confirmed, I will
work to continue exploring ways that the Army can prevent harmful
behaviors in the workplace.
Question. Do the Army's policies and processes for recording the
outcomes of informal complaints of harassment or discrimination provide
leaders, supervisors, and managers, with a means of identifying repeat
perpetrators?
Answer. Yes, I understand that they do. EEO Officials have the
responsibility to review, monitor, and assess EEO complaint activity
and inform supervisors of complaint trends. The Army Complaints
Tracking System has the capability to query by a variety of data fields
specific information. Alleged repeat perpetrators can be identified, as
can the disposition of any complaints against them. In addition, I
understand the Army is establishing a separate Anti-Harassment Program
for Civilians, which will be able to and identify alleged repeat
perpetrators.
Question. What actions has the Army taken to establish a modern,
comprehensive harassment prevention and response policy and program for
the Army's civilian workforce?
Answer. I understand the Army has developed a comprehensive
Harassment Prevention and Response Policy. In addition, the Army's
Prevention of Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault Annex to the Army
People Strategy guides the collective efforts that constitute a
comprehensive approach across the Total Army. To better serve the
civilian workforce, the Army is in the process of seeking an Exception
to Policy to allow the Army to provide SHARP services to Department of
the Army Civilians whether assigned to the CONUS or OCONUS.
If confirmed, I am committed to ensuring that appropriate resources
are dedicated to preventing and addressing all forms of harassment and
discrimination. I am dedicated to providing a workplace that is free
from all forms of harassment and where individuals are treated with
dignity and respect.
domestic violence and child abuse in army families:
Question. What is your understanding of the extent of domestic
violence and child abuse in the Army, and, if confirmed, what actions
would you take to address these issues?
Answer. I am aware that the Army has seen a consistent decrease in
domestic violence and child abuse over the past five years, however,
one incident of abuse is too many. To that end, I would emphasize
increased command oversight and thorough and impartial review of abuse
incidents. I would be open to exploring expanded services and resources
for adult and child victims to best support Army Families. If
confirmed, I will work to ensure command teams and leaders have the
necessary tools and training to help them best handle these complex
family cases, provide support to victims, and hold soldiers who commit
acts of abuse appropriately accountable.
Question. In your view, what more can the Army do to prevent child
abuse and domestic and intimate partner violence?
Answer. I know that the Army is committed to preventing and
responding to all acts of domestic violence and child abuse and
neglect. I share this commitment, regardless of whether the victim is a
soldier or a civilian. Active prevention and rapid response to family
violence is critical, and I recognize that civilian spouses who live
off-post may experience added challenges accessing services or even
knowing about installation resources. If confirmed, I will support the
continued advancement of the Army's family violence prevention and
intervention capabilities through ongoing research initiatives and
outreach, and by ensuring these important programs are appropriately
resourced.
Question. Do you believe that the Army Family Advocacy Program
strikes the right balance between healing families and holding
individuals accountable for acts of domestic violence and child abuse?
Answer. The Family Advocacy Program provides a wide range of
services aimed at preventing and responding to abuse. Specially trained
domestic abuse victim advocates at each installation support victims
and help to coordinate services. Clinicians offer evidence-based
treatment to mitigate the traumatic impact of abuse. Accountability is
handled through the military justice system, which allows the Family
Advocacy Program to focus on prevention and treatment. The Department
of the Army is dedicated to striking the right balance between healing
victims and holding abusers accountable. For FAP to be fully successful
it must be understood as a social service response that is completely
separate but which runs parallel to the military justice system
response and consequent command actions. Together, I believe we are
heading in the right direction.
It is equally important that commanders understand their
responsibility to foster a climate where the Family Advocacy Program is
fully supported and abusive behaviors are not tolerated. If confirmed,
I will ensure that leaders at all levels are fully trained and
understand the impact of family violence. I will empower them to
intervene to ensure victim safety, hold offenders appropriately
accountable and encourage soldier and family participation in the full
range of available services, when needed.
juvenile problematic sexual behavior:
Question. What actions has the Army taken to regularize policies
and programs for responding to, investigating, adjudicating, and
documenting allegations of juvenile problematic sexual behavior on Army
installations?
Answer. I am aware that the Army published a policy in 2019
requiring installation commanders to ensure the investigation of
juvenile misconduct and referral of allegations of problematic sexual
behavior of children and youth to Family Advocacy for assessment,
treatment, and victim assistance. The most serious cases may warrant
referral to civilian authorities for further investigation and/or
determination of disposition. If confirmed, I will fully support this
policy.
Question. How does the Army ensure that the victims of juvenile
problematic sexual behavior receive the care, treatment, support, and
advocacy services they need?
Answer. I understand there are multi-disciplinary teams that ensure
juvenile victims receive the care and treatment they need. Members of
the multidisciplinary teams include Family Advocacy, law enforcement,
healthcare professionals, Department of Defense schools, and child
development professionals. These teams help address the safety, risks,
and specific needs of the children and Families impacted. Furthermore,
I understand that the Army uses established standards of prevention,
treatment, and referral to ensure victims receive the care and support
they need. If confirmed, I will continue to support this approach to
ensure the best care, treatment, and support is readily available.
Question. In your view, does the Army have a mechanism to hold
accountable, as appropriate, and provide treatment to juveniles who
engage in problematic sexual behavior?
Answer. In terms of offenders, I understand that the Army requires
each case of major juvenile misconduct to be investigated either by
installation military law enforcement, or other appropriate civilian
authorities. While commanders do not have UCMJ authority over juvenile
offenders, they are responsible for considering if administrative
action is warranted. Such command action could include barring
juveniles from the installation, removing them from on-post quarters,
or ordering an Early Return of Dependents (if living overseas).
Installation multi-disciplinary teams address the safety and risk-based
needs of military children, youth, and Families. These teams also
develop intervention plans, parent engagement strategies, and potential
treatment for juvenile offenders.
Question. Does the Army require any additional authorities to
establish and maintain the centralized database on child and youth
problematic sexual behavior required by section 1089 of the Fiscal Year
2019 NDAA?
Answer. I am aware that the Army is currently working with the
Office of the Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a
centralized database for juvenile problematic sexual behavior required
by section 1089 of the Fiscal Year 2019 NDAA. If confirmed, I would
assess whether additional authorities are needed and inform OSD of such
requirements.
extremism:
Question. What is your view of the prevalence and effect of
extremism in the Army?
Answer. I believe the vast majority of Army soldiers serve with
honor. At the same time, as Secretary Austin, General Milley and
General McConville have said, extremism in the military is detrimental
to the good order and discipline of the force and can impact unit
morale and cohesion. Extremism is antithetical to the Army Values and
is not in keeping with the oath soldiers take upon entry and reaffirm
during their careers. I understand the Army has conducted extremism
stand-down days to better educate the force on indicators and warning
signs of extremism as well as its detrimental impacts while reinforcing
Army Values through engaged leadership at all levels.
Question. In your view, what beliefs and actions should constitute
``extremism?''
Answer. The Army has a regulation, AR 600-20 that defines extremism
as participation in organizations and activities that advocate
intolerance, engaging in unlawful discrimination, the use of force to
deprive individuals of their rights, support for terrorist objectives,
use of unlawful violence or force to achieve discriminatory goals,
expressing a duty to engage in violence against the United States,
encouraging military or DOD civilian personnel to engage in subversion,
or seeking to engage in sedition. If confirmed, I am committed to
making eradication of extremist activity amongst the ranks a priority.
Question. In light of ongoing efforts to combat extremism, what are
your views on the current DOD policy that states, ``A servicemember's
right of expression should be preserved to the maximum extent
possible?''
Answer. The Army protects soldiers' constitutional rights afforded
by the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the United States
Constitution. As such, any Army policies regulating speech or
association must be necessary to accomplish a military mission or to
prevent a clear danger to the loyalty, discipline, or morale of
military personnel, and must be the least restrictive means available
to achieve these ends. I believe that soldiers' constitutional rights
must be protected. If confirmed, I am committed to reviewing existing
policies and procedures with the Army General Counsel to ensure these
rights are appropriately protected while still allowing the Army to
effectively combat extremism in its various forms.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to eliminate
extremism within the ranks?
Answer. In recent briefings on the subject, I understand the recent
round of Extremist Policy training, performed in response to the
Secretary of Defense ``Stand Down'' directive, was both well-received
and appreciated by the Total Army Force. This training focused on small
group conversations to facilitate an honest dialogue on the issue. I do
not believe that just one stand down day will sufficiently address this
important issue. Training is effective when the standards are modeled,
understood, and frequently reinforced. If confirmed, I will ensure
there is continued dialogue on this issue and review applicable
accessions policies and procedures.
services provided to servicemembers and their families:
Question. If confirmed, would you advocate for the consolidation of
commissaries and the Service Exchanges into a single defense resale
system?
Answer. I understand that access to commissaries and military
exchanges remains one of the most valued benefits for soldiers and
their families. Any resale reform effort should not divert limited
resources away from the current needs of this population or diminish
the earnings that provide dividends to support military Quality-of-Life
programs. If confirmed, I am open to considering ideas that would
enhance benefits to Army Families and will advocate for all viable
methods to improve the military resale system. I support the ongoing
effort directed in the Fiscal Year 2021 NDAA to validate previous
reform efforts. The Department and Congress need reliable information
on the expected savings and costs of consolidation, as well as the
second and third-order effects to other programs supported by the
Defense Resale System.
Question. If confirmed, how would you support increased employment
opportunities for military spouses and other family members?
Answer. I believe the Army asks much from its Families to ensure
force readiness. Spouses often balance professional careers, family,
health, and well-being, all in the context of deployments, separations,
and other mission requirements. If confirmed, I will continue to build
strong relationships with Congress, Office of the Secretary of Defense,
the Governor's Association, and the many state and local government and
non-government organizations that facilitate and enable spouse
employment opportunities and professional license portability. I also
will ensure the Army invests in proven programs that demonstrate
effectiveness in helping spouses obtain and maintain meaningful,
satisfying careers. I am supportive of expanding the Army's alliance
and partnership with private sector companies and local or state
government agencies to provide hiring preferences to military spouses
and family members. If confirmed, I would also conduct a review of
Army's civilian employment policies and expand on any gaps to increase
employment opportunities for both military spouses and other Family
members.
If confirmed, I would also support increased opportunities for
telework and/or remote work to allow current, Army civilian military
spouses and Family members to retain employment. I was informed the
Army was successful in managing its workforce while operating in a
maximized telework environment during the COVID-19 pandemic and would
support continued telework and remote work flexibilities. I would
encourage the Army to consider utilizing these flexibilities for
military spouses and Family member employees who are undergoing
permanent change of station moves; especially in cases where the
soldier and family are stationed at remote locations with limited
employment opportunities.
Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to provide
Army families with accessible, high-quality childcare, at an
appropriate cost?
Answer. The pandemic has demonstrated the critical role child care
plays in readiness. If confirmed, I will review the Army's plan to
address child care shortfalls and explore other ways to increase the
child care capacity, such as additional infrastructure, improved
compensation, and further investment in the Family Child Care program
and fee assistance to buy down the cost of off-post care. I will also
work with OSD and the other Services to increase availability of
accredited community child care providers and assess the concept of
providing child care services in a child's home.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure safe
and healthy living conditions for soldiers and their families in
privatized housing?
Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize Army oversight of
privatized housing, at all levels, to ensure that Army Families are
receiving safe, quality housing and will hold privatized housing
partners accountable. Housing is a key factor in the care of soldiers
and Families and can greatly impact Army readiness and retention. I
commit to making this a priority.
Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to establish
accountability in the Army for sustaining the high quality housing that
soldier and their families deserve?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to hold commanders, leaders and
privatized housing partners accountable for ensuring that soldiers and
families are housed in the quality of housing they deserve. I will do
this by ensuring implementation of the Military Housing Privatization
Reform contained in the National Defense Authorization Act by ensuring
Army-owned housing inventory is adequately funded in future budgets,
and by working with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to ensure
Basic Allowances for Housing are adequate to provide quality housing to
those choosing to live off-post.
Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to establish
accountability in Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI)
``contractors,'' particularly given that, in most cases, they have
public-private partnership agreements with the Army that extend for as
long as 50 years?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army Staff and Army Senior
Leaders remain engaged and fully involved in the decisions the MHPI
companies make to maintain and improve quality housing over the course
of the agreements. This will require the enforcement of standards of
performance in existing agreements with MHPI companies, periodically
reassessing MHPI companies' baseline operating and ground lease
agreements and when necessary entering into negotiations with the
privatized housing company owners to modify Army agreements in order to
foster enhanced accountability and facilitate improving the privatized
housing and housing related services provided to Army soldiers and
families. I will also reemphasize the Army's existing requirement that
all privatized housing incentive fee metrics be consistently applied in
a manner that rewards privatized housing companies only when they have
delivered high quality services to soldiers and families.
senior officers:
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure compliance with the
requirements of law and regulation regarding the investigation and
promotion board consideration of adverse and reportable information in
the context of both general officer and O-6 and below promotion
selection processes?
Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure compliance with laws and
regulations regarding promotion boards by only certifying the exemplary
conduct of deserving officers considered for promotion. I understand
that, for nominations above the grade of O-6, the Army uses all
available systems of records to screen officers prior to being
considered by a promotion board, and again at regular intervals through
Senate confirmation, until the officer is ultimately promoted. The same
process has been true of nominations in the grades O-6 and below since
2015, however, only for post-promotion board consideration and
selection. At general officer grades, should the officer have
substantiated adverse information ascribed to them, the promotion board
considers that information when considering the officer's file, and the
adverse information is considered at every level for senior leader
endorsements. As of January 1, 2021, the same consideration
requirements the Army uses at GO grades apply to Army O-4-O-6
nominations in the Active Component. For nominations to 3 or 4-star
where a promotion board is not applicable, the same screening process
is conducted for officers before the Secretary of the Army makes a
recommendation. Any substantiated adverse information is considered
with the nomination at all levels. Although not seen during promotion
boards, any reportable information ascribed to the officer is also
considered at the service secretary level and higher.
Question. Do you believe Army procedures and practices for
reviewing the records of officers pending the President's nomination
for promotion or assignment are sufficient to enable fully-informed
decisions by the Secretary of the Army, the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and the President?
Answer. Yes. I believe the extensive review process outlined in the
previous answer enables fully informed decisions by the Secretary of
the Army, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of
Defense, and the President.
Question. In your view, are these procedures and practices fair to
the individual military officers proceeding through the promotion or
assignment process? Please explain your answer.
Answer. The screening procedures that the Army has in place comply
with law and Department of Defense policy. They are intended to provide
as much information about the officer as possible to enable leaders to
make fully informed decisions on whether he/she meets the exemplary
conduct standards required by law. At this time, I have no reason to
believe this process is unfair to the officers going through the
nomination process.
The fiscal year 2017 NDAA reduced the number of General and Flag
Officers across DOD by about 12 percent, consistent with plans provided
to Congress by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Question. What progress has the Army made in reducing the number of
Amy General Officers (GO) and restructuring its GO grade pyramid?
Answer. I understand the Army is on track to meet the reduction of
eleven General Officers by December 31, 2022, as mandated by the fiscal
year 2017 NDAA. The Army intends to reduce the number of GOs on Active
Duty by balancing promotions to brigadier general with the natural
attrition of general officers through retirements. These reductions do
not require restructuring the General Officer pyramid. Frequently, an
officer will be assigned to a general officer billet as an O-6 and
promote into it later, based on needs of the Army. The reductions will
not alter this process; they will delay promotions until the target of
220 is reached.
Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
in ensuring that the Army is successful in meeting its GO reduction
mandate?
Answer. If confirmed, I am responsible for everything the Army does
or fails to do. This includes complying with the law. I will work with
the Army staff to ensure adherence to the reduction plan to reduce the
number of General Officers on Active Duty from 231 to 220 no later than
December 31, 2022.
Question. In your view, are GO retired pay caps adversely affecting
Army senior officer promotions, assignments, and retention at the 3-
and 4-star grades? Please explain your answer.
Answer. While I am unaware of any concrete statistics on this
topic, I understand that General Officer retired pay may not be helping
the Army retain its best talent. While the private sector increases
salary with promotion, general officers assume greater responsibility
with no increase in salary. Retaining the Army's best talent is a
priority, and if confirmed I will examine this issue in greater depth
to determine whether existing pay caps are adversely affecting the
Army's ability to compete with the civilian sector for leadership
talent.
training/readiness:
Question. How would you assess the current readiness of the Army--
across the domains of materiel and equipment, personnel, and training--
to execute the 2018 NDS and Combatant Commanders' associated
operational plans?
Answer. My understanding is that the readiness of the Army to
perform those Title 10 functions associated with generating Army forces
to meet the totality of the National Defense Strategy with the
requisite readiness across the domains of equipment, personnel, and
training, remains strained. However, the Army, with support from
Congress, has made gains to improve the overall readiness of brigade
combat teams. The Army is entering into a period of intense
modernization. If confirmed, I will closely monitor and prioritize
resourcing decisions to ensure an appropriate balance between near term
readiness and modernization investments, ensuring future capabilities.
Question. In your view, what are the priority missions for which
current and future Army forces should be trained and ready in the
context of day-to-day activities, as well as for contingencies?
Answer. The Army's priority missions for which current and future
forces must prepare include defense of the homeland, preparation for
large-scale combat operations, and continued disruption of state and
non-state adversaries. Global demand for Army forces remains high, but
thanks to Congressional support and Army Senior Leader focus, the Army
has more ready units, available more often, than at any time in the
last three years. I believe the Army's core warfighting readiness to
defeat a near-peer adversary has improved, but the Army must continue
to modernize, and align efforts in support of the President's Interim
National Security Strategic Guidance.
The Army is currently aligned with the prioritization of People's
Republic of China as a pacing threat, as laid out in the President's
Interim National Security Strategic Guidance, and in Secretary Austin's
4 March ``Message to the Force''. In my view, current and future Army
forces must continue to train for conflict, and success will be
determined by its ability to fight across all domains while remaining
integrated with the Joint Force.
Question. What is your assessment of the risk the Army has accepted
in regard to its readiness to execute operational plans in furtherance
of the 2018 NDS?
Answer. While the Army has made significant strides in recent years
in terms of improving its readiness for large scale combat operations,
at this point in time I do not have access to sufficient information
about the Department's operational plans to assess with confidence the
level of risk the Army has accepted in regards to its readiness. In my
view it is likely that the Army continues to confront challenges and
difficult tradeoffs in terms of balancing risks to readiness arising
from sustained and unforeseen global commitments, as well as the need
to resource an ambitious modernization agenda. If confirmed, one of my
earliest priorities will be to fully understand the analysis
underpinning current Army assessments of operational risks and
readiness, as well as its assessment of risks to ensuring future
readiness.
Question. If confirmed, how would you oversee compliance by the
Army with readiness goals and timelines?
Answer. Title 10 empowers the Secretary of the Army with a broad
range of man, train, and equip responsibilities and functions. If
confirmed there are two ways in which I would oversee compliance with
Army readiness goals and timelines.
First, I would monitor the readiness of forces that are either
assigned to combatant commands and/or aligned to operational plans
(OPLANs). The Department cannot afford costs associated with generating
readiness to meet broad percentage bands that are not associated with
OPLANs.
Second, I would support the Joint Staff's global force management
process focus on weighing the near-term military risk to current
operations against the long-term strategic risk associated with
sustained un-forecasted commitments.
Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize maintaining
readiness in the near term, with modernizing the Army to ensure future
readiness?
Answer. If confirmed, I would continue the Army Strategy to rebuild
readiness to dominate in large-scale combat operations while continuing
efforts to modernize towards a force capable of multi-domain
operations. The Army is implementing a new unit life cycle model
(ReARMM-Regionally Aligned Readiness & Modernization Model) that will
balance readiness with modernization in a predictable manner, which
better balances operational and personal demands. In the near-term,
this means the Army will prioritize efforts to provide ready and lethal
forces organized, trained, and equipped for prompt and sustained ground
combat in war and other contingency operations. If confirmed, I would
simultaneously continue working to modernize the Army to deploy, fight,
and win decisively in multi-domain operations against any adversary,
anytime, and anywhere.
munitions:
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the
Army has sufficient inventories of munitions to meet combatant
commanders' needs?
Answer. If confirmed, I would coordinate closely with combatant
commanders to understand their operational requirements and continue to
support proven efforts to increase joint munitions readiness. Efforts
like realigning funding to modernize munitions and improve inventory
levels would continue to improve the Army's support of the combatant
commanders. The Army has worked with its industry partners to increase
production and procurement for critical munitions. Initiatives like
stockpile reliability programs and shelf life extension programs have
helped ensure current stocks meet the appropriate standards, reducing
the burden on new production and procurement.
Question. Is the ammunition industrial base, including the Army's
organic ammunition plants, capable of supporting current and future
munitions requirements, in your view?
Answer. My understanding at this time is that current analysis
indicates the Army can meet today's munitions requirements. With the
support of Congress, the Army has expanded several sectors of the
munitions industrial base to meet sustained and surge requirements for
munitions post 9/11. The Army will require continued investment in the
organic industrial base to transform and modernize facilities, ensure
they remain viable to meet expanded explosives capacity, and enable the
manufacturing of future artillery and advanced propellants. Once
planned capacity expansions and new production capabilities are
realized, the Army will have sufficient capacity, commercial and
organic, to meet future and surge munitions requirements.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to reduce
single points of failure and foreign material supplier dependencies in
the ammunition industrial base?
Answer. In its role as the single manager for conventional
munitions, I believe the Army is actively pursuing measures to reduce
single points of failure and source of supply risks in the ammunition
industrial base. If confirmed, I would ensure that the Army continues
to move forward in its efforts to secure the domestic supply chain by
re-establishing US or Canadian sources where warranted. I would ensure
that the Army continues to leverage Defense Production Act authorities
to establish domestic production for critical materials essential to
munitions production. Further, I would pursue policies that promote the
long-term viability of the domestic supply chain, by directing
procurement of critical materials to domestic manufacturers where
prudent. Finally, I would direct that strategic international
partnerships be pursued to add resiliency and capacity to the domestic
supply chain where appropriate.
operational energy:
Question. If confirmed, how would you lead the Army in harnessing
innovations in operational energy and linking them with emerging joint
operational concepts in order to reduce contested logistics
vulnerabilities for warfighters?
Answer. The Army Futures Command has recognized that the ability to
generate, distribute, and store power is a key cross-cutting enabler of
multiple combat capabilities. I believe operational energy capabilities
and efficiency can and should be a priority to support the joint force
in a contested environment and to stay ahead of our adversaries in
developing these technologies. If confirmed, I would lead by ensuring
innovations in operational energy are linked with emerging joint
operational concepts and are backed by appropriate levels of investment
in RDTE and experimentation.
Question. In what specific areas, if any, do you believe the Army
needs to improve the incorporation of energy considerations and
alternative energy resources into the strategic planning processes?
Answer. The Army must plan for energy (fuel, electricity) and water
security and address potential vulnerabilities to these resources both
at installations and while conducting operations. If confirmed, I will
ensure the Army continues to ensure readiness and the ability to
project power by strengthening the energy and water resilience of our
installations and encouraging soldiers and leaders to incorporate
energy security at all levels of planning.
Question. How can Army acquisition systems better address
requirements related to the use of energy in military platforms to
decrease risks to warfighters?
Answer. Army acquisition systems must strive to develop, adopt, and
adapt cutting edge technologies to ensure the greatest warfighting
capabilities. If confirmed, I will work to coordinate these efforts
across the Joint Force to improve interoperability and to reduce costs.
This includes operational energy--which powers the vehicles and systems
used to win wars. I will seek improvements in energy efficiency to
reduce operational costs, as well as reduce the overall logistical
tail, which are all overarching objectives of the Army.
Question. In your view, how can energy supportability that reduces
contested logistics vulnerabilities become a key performance parameter
in the requirements process?
Answer. I understand that Army acquisition offers multiple tools to
address the issue of energy use in military platforms. For existing
platforms, the Army can engage innovative companies to conduct
research, prototyping, and demonstrations of energy-saving technology--
such as hybrid electric and electric motors for vehicles--that will
allow the Army to upgrade older systems with new technology to reduce
energy use. For new platforms, I believe that the Army must look
carefully at requiring more energy-efficient designs up front so to
avoid having to retrofit energy-efficient components after fielding.
Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize energy resilience,
including acquiring and deploying sustainable and renewable energy
assets, to support mission critical functions, and address known
vulnerabilities?
Answer. Energy resilience is key to Army mission effectiveness.
Today's multi-domain operating environment means the Army's
installations are strategic assets for generating readiness. The Army's
approach to installation energy resilience is an ``all of the above''
strategy that includes energy efficiency, onsite generation, and
storage. If confirmed, I would continue to prioritize installation
energy resilience that supports critical missions.
Question. Given that the Army has been charged with Contested
Logistics for the Joint Force, how do you believe operational energy
can and should be used to support this effort?
Answer. I believe operational energy capabilities and efficiency
can and should be leveraged to support the joint force in a contested
environment whenever feasible. If confirmed, I would become more
familiar with the Army's strategy for supporting the Joint Force in a
contested environment before giving specific examples of ways to
leverage operational energy capabilities.
environment:
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Army complies
with environment protection laws, regulations, and guidance from the
Environmental Protection Agency?
Answer. I understand the Army's Environmental Program encompasses a
broad range of efforts that maintain installation compliance with
applicable environmental laws, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
regulations and guidance, operating permits, and Executive Orders. The
Army collects, monitors and analyzes numerous environmental compliance
metrics on an annual basis and reports that information to Congress
along with the other military departments. If confirmed, I will monitor
Army-wide environmental compliance metrics and trends to ensure the
Army's high level of environmental compliance with EPA requirements is
maintained.
Question. What are your ideas for improving collaboration with the
Department of Interior and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to find
cooperative ways to ensure military readiness while protecting the
environment on and around Army installations?
Answer. If confirmed, I would want the Army to continue its
cooperative work with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) to expand
endangered species mitigation. It is my understanding that off-
installation mitigation banking compensates for on-installation Army
mission impacts to endangered species. If confirmed, I would support
the Army's coordination efforts with FWS to safeguard Army training
requirements thereby promoting endangered species recovery and
management at the ecosystem.
Question. If confirmed, how would you further efforts to address
PFAS contamination at Army installations?
Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure the Army remains committed to
making forward progress to address PFAS releases from Army
installations. This includes continuing support for DOD's investments
to evaluate the science on these emerging contaminants and continuing
the Army's nationwide cleanup efforts. I would also make certain the
Army's priority remains the health and safety of our soldiers, their
families, Army civilians, and the communities surrounding our
installations. Moreover, I would continue to prioritize and address
cleanup sites where risk to human health is the greatest.
Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to addressing
the health concerns of servicemembers and their families regarding
alleged exposures to potentially harmful contaminants on U.S. military
installations and in the context of performing military duties?
Answer. If confirmed, I would encourage soldiers and their families
with health concerns or symptoms potentially associated with exposure
to harmful contaminants to seek assistance from their health care
provider. Army Medical policies require health care providers to
assess, manage (to include referrals to appropriate medical
specialists), and document health conditions in accordance with
established, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. If confirmed,
I would make the health and safety of the Army Family one of my top
priorities.
readiness and resource impacts from extreme weather:
Question. How would you assess the readiness and resource impacts
on the Army from recent extreme weather events?
Answer. The Army needs to remain vigilant in protecting its assets
and infrastructure from the adverse impacts of extreme weather events.
If confirmed, I will review the Army's readiness and resource impacts
from recent weather events and ensure that these efforts include
planning for current and projected impacts of climate change and
extreme weather at Army sites.
Question. Based on these readiness and resource impacts, do you
believe it necessary to use more resilient designs in Army
infrastructure?
Answer. Yes. The effects of a changing climate are and will
continue to be a national security issue impacting Army installations
and its ability to operate around the world. If confirmed, I will work
to ensure compliance with provisions of the 2019 NDAA requiring an
amendment to the United Facilities Criteria: ``to anticipate changing
environmental conditions during the design life of existing or planned
new facilities and infrastructure and ensure incorporation into
military construction designs and modifications,'' I would also ensure
all Army installation planners are provided a clear methodology for
planning, design, construction, sustainment and restoration, as
outlined in the Army's Climate Resilience Handbook.
Question. How can the Army better use existing authorities on
extreme weather mitigation granted by Congress in the last few NDAAs?
Answer. I understand that Congress has been supportive of DOD's
climate resilience efforts. The Fiscal Year 2021 NDAA allows for
expansion of existing authorities, like Section 315, on projects that
improve military installation resilience even when they are outside the
borders of the installation. Additional NDAA requirements incorporate
climate considerations into building codes and mandate installation
resilience planning. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army continues to
explore ways to leverage these new authorities.
infrastructure challenges:
Question. Non-DOD funding mechanisms such as energy savings
performance contracts (ESPCs), utility energy savings contracts
(UESCs), and power purchase agreements (PPAs) are excellent means by
which the Army can improve infrastructure, increase resilience, reduce
deferred maintenance, implement alternative energy resources, save
taxpayer funds, and secure other benefits without appropriated funds.
The review and approval of these contract mechanisms by the U.S. Army
Installation Management Command (IMCOM) has taken significantly longer
as compared to other Military Departments. In some cases, IMCOM has
blocked or significantly delayed, de-scoped, or cancelled new contracts
that would have provided significant savings and benefit to Army
infrastructure.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to streamline this process
and how long would it take you to resume entering into contracts that
benefit Army installations?
Answer. I am aware that energy savings performance contracts
(ESPCs) and utility energy savings contracts (UESCs) are a budget
neutral means by which the Army can improve infrastructure, increase
resilience, reduce deferred maintenance, implement alternative energy
resources, save taxpayer funds, and secure other benefits without
appropriated funds. I believe this is a smart approach to our
infrastructure program. If confirmed, I will review and evaluate this
process.
audit:
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions will you take or
direct to enable the Army to achieve a clean financial audit in the
most expedited fashion?
Answer. I understand the Army has developed a roadmap that focuses
on the key activities needed to fix the issues noted by the auditors.
The Army has plans to utilize innovative technology and tools to drive
quick-turn solutions. I have been informed that the Army is investing
more training time and resources for communicating audit requirements
to the field, and helping stakeholders work together to achieve
priority audit objectives.
If confirmed, I will reiterate my senior-level support for
achieving a clean audit opinion and continue to drive short-term fixes
and promote long-term results. I will develop mechanisms to hold
business process owners responsible for improving their processes. I
will prioritize modernization and standardization of business processes
necessary to achieve clean audit opinions.
Question. What are the benefits to Army missions and effectiveness
of achieving and maintaining a clean audit?
Answer. In my view compliance with DOD, Army, and/or other Federal
policies and procedures and responsibly using associated internal
controls is foundational to effective stewardship and maximizing the
impact of every appropriated dollar. The benefits of achieving and
maintaining a clean audit are to optimize the Army's budget, achieve
full visibility of resources, and improve business processes. This
ensures America's Army can be the best steward of the taxpayers'
dollars while building the highest levels of current and future
readiness.
Question. How will you hold Army leaders and organizations
responsible and accountable for making the necessary investments and
changes to correct findings and material weaknesses identified in the
audit process?
Answer. I am committed to improving processes to accelerate
positive change, increasing accountability, and delivering results. I
understand recent audit results show opportunities to be more efficient
and productive with Army funding, equipment, and supplies. Success,
across the force, depends on leaders routinely reviewing the progress
of their commands as they implement actions to remediate auditor
findings. At the Department level, leaders should continue to actively
take roles in establishing policies, procedures, and process changes
necessary to support progress towards a clean opinion.
If confirmed, I will continue Army efforts to make accountability
part of the Army culture. I will require the ASA (FM&C) and Senior Army
Leaders to brief me on audit results and hold them accountable to
achieving key operational metrics. I believe full compliance from every
leader in the Army is imperative to saving money on operations,
shifting resources to increase readiness and modernization efforts, and
maintaining the confidence of defense leaders, Congress, and the
American people.
army-related defense industrial base:
Question. What is your assessment of the systems and processes for
identifying, evaluating, and managing risk in the Army's organic,
commercial, and defense industrial base, including the munitions
industrial base?
Answer. It is my understanding the Army employs a number of robust
processes to identify and manage risk in the Defense Industrial Base
(DIB) including assessing the critical capabilities in the organic
industrial base, identifying fragile and critical suppliers, and
assessing financial, operational, geopolitical, and socio-economic
risks within the broader DIB, of which the ammunition industrial base
is a part. If confirmed, I will strive to strengthen the Army's
processes to identify, assess, and mitigate risk in the Army Industrial
Base, as appropriate.
Question. How should Army acquisition leaders consider impacts on
the industrial base when addressing requirements for recapitalization
or modernization of major defense weapons systems and munitions, and
life cycle costs of such systems?
Answer. Recapitalizing and modernizing major defense systems is
dependent on the Army's organic industrial base depots as well as our
manufacturing industry partners. Army acquisition leaders strive to
maintain a healthy and robust industrial base that can meet the current
and future Army requirements, while balancing affordability with
capacity, maximizing competition, and utilizing the optimal mix of
defense depots and industrial manufacturing partners.
Question. If confirmed, what changes, if any, would you pursue in
systems and processes to ensure that risk in the Army-relevant sectors
of the defense industrial base is adequately managed to enable the
development, production, and sustainment of technically superior,
reliable, and affordable weapons systems and munitions?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Army's systems and
processes it uses to identify, monitor, assess, and mitigate supply
chain risk in the Army Industrial Base to assess if there are more
effective ways to ensure a capable and ready supply chain. It is my
understanding that the Army works closely with the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, other military
services, federal agencies, and industry partners to identify,
evaluate, and mitigate supply chain risk in the Army Industrial Base.
Question. If confirmed, what policy tools or programs would you
develop or use to allow the Army to intervene appropriately to support
the vitality of its organic, commercial, and defense industrial base?
Answer. If confirmed, I would seek to leverage the authorities
already provided by Congress, including the Defense Production Act to
maintain, restore, protect, expand, and create domestic production
capabilities to strengthen the Army Industrial Base. I would also seek
to leverage existing DOD and Army programs, including the Manufacturing
Technology (ManTech) Program to reduce acquisition costs of defense
weapon systems and reduce manufacturing and repair cycle times.
equipping/modernization:
Question. What is your assessment of the Army's past modernization
record and current efforts?
Answer. The Army in the past has often struggled to modernize
effectively and efficiently, but in my view Army modernization efforts
in recent years have made notable progress. In the past the Army has
struggled with changing priorities and instances of failed
developmental programs created without an Army-wide shared vision of
the future. The Army took years to develop requirements that created
materiel solutions that were late-to-need, over budget, and short of
expectations. The developmental process was inflexible, lengthy, and
lacked appropriate soldier feedback. Additionally, the Army's Science
and Technology (S&T) effort lacked focus and guidance on difference-
making capabilities required to win in the future operational
environment. Army Futures Command (AFC), created nearly three years
ago, appears to have helped the Army's modernization effort move to
more solid ground. The Army established the six Modernization
Priorities in 2017 and is now on a path to deliver next generation
capabilities for the first time in 40 years. Ensuring the Army stays on
this path will require vigorous leader involvement and oversight, and
if confirmed, providing this oversight with support from the Under
Secretary and Assistant Secretaries of the Army will be one of my top
priorities.
How has Army Futures Command (AFC) contributed to improving Army
modernization programs over previous Army efforts?
Answer. It is my understanding Army Futures Command has energized
and synchronized the Army modernization enterprise by changing the
process for developing requirements. The process now includes inputs
from soldiers, manufacturers, scientists, and engineers to ensure the
Army delivers a desired capability on time and within budget. The Army
refers to this approach as ``Soldier-Centered Design'' which also
incorporates ``Soldier Touch Points'' throughout the development
process to solicit useful input from experienced soldiers on how to
refine the solution to best meet their needs. I am informed that prior
to the establishment of AFC, proponents developed requirements which
were not always fully aligned with Army modernization priorities.
Question. What role do you expect the Command to play going
forward?
Answer. The Army created U.S. Army Futures Command to lead the Army
modernization enterprise. AFC leads the implementation of the Army's
modernization strategy and defines the future operating environment, as
well as the changes needed to adapt to the nation's future needs. I
expect that Army Futures Command will continue to play an important
role in driving persistent modernization in the Army to ensure it
provides the capabilities required to deter and defeat threats to our
Nation.
Question. In your view, how has the establishment of AFC modified
Army Secretariat roles in Army modernization efforts?
Answer. To the best of my knowledge, the statutory authorities and
responsibilities of the Army Secretariat are not altered by the
establishment of the Army Futures Command (AFC) in 2018. The Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology
maintains its statutory responsibility for the overall supervision of
acquisition, logistics, and technology matters of the Army.
Question. If modernization is fundamental to future readiness, how
you would frame future readiness requirements, if confirmed?
Answer. It is my understanding the Army has taken steps to achieve
a cohesive approach toward modernization and enable unity of effort
over the past four years, but our modernization efforts must always
remain in balance with our readiness requirements for current
operations and contingencies, while also building toward the Multi
Domain Operations (MDO) ready force by 2035. Readiness to meet evolving
missions is critical to a successful Army and is a combination of
people, equipment, and training. If confirmed I will work hard to
ensure close relationships between AFC, the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology, and
the other Army commands to ensure all aspects of readiness are
modernized to meet future environments. If confirmed I will work
closely with Congress to ensure Army investments support its
priorities.
Question. What key capabilities must the Army possess for multi-
domain operations?
Answer. To operate across the spectrum from competition, crisis and
conflict in the future Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) environment, the
Army must field the next generation capabilities currently under
development by the eight Cross Functional Teams under Army Futures
Command and the Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies office.
These ``31+4'' signature systems are capabilities identified to counter
the near peer competitors such as People's Republic of China and
Russia. Many of the capabilities in soldiers' hands today are not
viable in the future environment against our near peer adversaries.
Many of today's systems / capabilities are four decades old. They have
served the Army well--but must be replaced or the Army risks a bad
outcome in the future.
Complimentary to these efforts, the Army must also have modernized
intelligence collection and analytic capabilities to identify and
locate near-peer threats.
Question. Do you believe the Army's modernization priorities should
be modified?
Answer. My understanding is the six modernization priorities--long
range precision fires, next generation combat vehicles, future vertical
lift, the network, air and missile defense, and soldier lethality--are
based on assessments of anticipated changes in the operating
environment, our operating concepts, and emerging technologies. At the
same time, the Department is still developing its Joint Warfighting
Concept and four supporting concepts, and the Services continue to
refine their own concepts in parallel--and all these concepts will
inform the department's broader effort to develop future requirements.
If confirmed, I will ensure the Army continues to assess its
modernization priorities and adjust them, if necessary.
Question. If so, and if confirmed, how would you propose to modify
them?
Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to ensure that the Army's defined
modernization priorities continue to support the defense strategy and
the priorities established by the President and the Secretary of
Defense.
Question. Do you see utility in the Army conducting more joint
program development?
Answer. I support joint program development when it decreases
overall costs, increases interoperability, and eliminates seams in the
force.
Question. In what systems or categories of systems do you perceive
see the most potential and benefit in joint development?
Answer. The US Army does not fight alone and must achieve and
sustain a level of interoperability within the Army, across the joint
force, and with our allies and partners. How the Army acquires,
analyzes, stores, and moves data seems to be a very promising joint
effort. Development of artificial intelligence is another capability
that should benefit from joint development.
acquisition:
Question. If confirmed, how would you synchronize your acquisition
responsibilities with those of the Chief of Staff of the Army?
Answer. Service Secretaries and Service Chiefs play critical roles
in ensuring successful acquisition programs. If confirmed, I intend to
work closely with the Chief of Staff to oversee the proper balance of
resources against priorities as it relates to acquisition programs and
to ensure appropriate trade-offs among cost, schedule, technical
feasibility, and performance are made prior to milestone and production
decisions in order to prevent cost growth and mitigate program risks.
Question. If confirmed, what role would you assign to the Chief of
Staff of Army for delivering acquisition programs on time and on
budget?
Answer. The Army Chief of Staff possesses unique operational
experience and perspective that is invaluable when developing and
prioritizing achievable military requirements. In addition to ensuring
that requirements are realistic and achievable, and approving such
requirements prior to program initiation, the Chief of the Staff is
responsible for concurring with cost, schedule, technical feasibility,
and performance tradeoffs at key program milestones, and for ensuring
program cost and schedule estimates are realistic and achievable. If
confirmed, I will work closely with the Chief in the execution of these
duties.
Question. In your view, who should be held accountable for large-
scale acquisition failures?
Answer. The Service Secretary, assisted by the Service Chief, is
ultimately responsible for the outcomes of Army acquisition programs.
While the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and
Technology), Program Executive Officers, and Program Managers share
accountability for the execution of acquisition programs, a variety of
factors ultimately contribute to the success or failure of these
programs. These include resourcing priorities, evolving requirements,
and the technological maturity of the systems developed within
programs. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Chief to balance
these factors, exercise proper oversight, and maintain accountability
across the Army acquisition enterprise to ensure successful outcomes.
Question. Do you perceive benefit to the Army in establishing major
acquisition programs under Section 804 authority? What are the risks?
Please explain your answer.
Answer. It is my understanding the use of the Middle Tier of
Acquisition authority (Section 804) is one of several acquisition
pathways that provides benefit to the Army when used appropriately.
This approach streamlines the acquisition process to get capabilities
in the hands of soldiers more quickly.
I understand there is a potential risk if this authority is used to
develop prototypes that are too far removed from an actual production
version of a system, which requires a lengthy and expensive follow-on
development program. There is also risk if the Army uses
``prototyping'' authority to do what is normally done under Low Rate
Initial Production, but without all the appropriate acquisition steps
needed to ensure program success, such as ensuring sustainment
considerations are designed into a system. If confirmed, I will put
systems in place to ensure appropriate oversight on Army acquisition
efforts and compliance with acquisition authorities.
Question. What best practices can the Army employ to generate
realistic and feasible requirements, particularly in sophisticated,
rapidly-evolving technical areas such as cybersecurity, hypersonics,
and artificial intelligence?
Answer. From my assessment, the Army's best practice in developing
requirements is what the Army currently calls ``Soldier-Centered
Design.'' I understand that this ensures soldiers are part of the
requirements development process every step of the way so that the Army
is developing and procuring is precisely what soldiers need to
accomplish their mission. Additionally, the Army must ensure that
industry can build and field what the Army requires by soliciting
continuous input from industry partners as part of the requirements
definition process. The Army cannot create requirements that its
industry partners cannot build or that the Army cannot afford.
This Committee has been a strong supporter of Army Futures Command
and its focus on future readiness for competition with near-peers--who
we know are investing vast sums of money to update their capabilities
and pull ahead of the United States. That said, the Committee was
troubled by the Army's publication late last year of Army Directive
2020-15. The Directive is written in very ambiguous terms, but, in this
Committee's view, it could degrade civilian control of the acquisition
function and align authorities in ways that don't appear to accord with
the Goldwater-Nichols Act. Because of concerns expressed by this
Committee, the Acting Secretary of the Army has agreed to a holistic
review of the Directive.
Question. Will you commit that, if confirmed, you would continue
this holistic review?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I commit to completing a holistic review
of Army Directive 2020-15 to ensure it appropriately aligns with
statute and preserves civilian control of the acquisition function
within the Department of the Army.
Question. Will you commit that, if confirmed, you would halt
implementation of this Directive until such time as the holistic review
addresses all of the Committee's concerns?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to pausing further implementation of
Army Directive 2020-15 until a holistic review of the document is
completed and concerns expressed by the Committee are appropriately
addressed. While the review is ongoing, I will work to ensure that all
modernization efforts continue to progress expeditiously to ensure
capabilities are delivered to the soldiers.
Question. Will you commit that, if confirmed, you would keep this
Committee informed about the progress of the holistic review and its
findings and outcomes?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will provide information to this
Committee regarding the review findings. I also commit to inform the
Committee of any subsequent actions taken regarding the Directive,
based on the findings of the review.
Question. Will you commit that, if confirmed, you would ensure that
any way forward on this Directive comports with the principles of
civilian control and with governing laws?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will ensure that any actions taken as
a result of the review preserves appropriate civilian oversight of
acquisition, as required by statute.
test and evaluation:
Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it
appropriate to procure weapons systems and equipment that have not been
demonstrated through test and evaluation to be operationally effective,
suitable, and survivable?
Answer. Test and evaluation is a critical aspect of the weapons
systems and equipment procurement. Test and evaluation demonstrate
system performance and shortfalls prior to its use in combat. It offers
an opportunity to identify and correct problems prior to fielding.
There may be cases where procurement of systems that have not yet been
tested are appropriate, such as in response to a Joint Urgent
Operational Needs Statement (JUONS), but these circumstances are the
exception rather than the norm. In most cases, adequate operational
demonstration, or otherwise tailored operational tests, should be
executed to assess and demonstrate operational performance--what the
system can and cannot do--to inform tactics, techniques, and procedures
to remediate system shortcomings. If confirmed, I will always put the
welfare and safety of warfighters and our national security paramount
in any rapid fielding decision.
Question. What do you see as the role of the developmental and
operational test and evaluation communities with respect to rapid
acquisition, spiral acquisition, and other evolutionary acquisition
processes?
Answer: Developmental and operational testing ensures a program
delivers an operationally effective, operationally suitable, and
survivable capability to the Warfighter. The challenge with the rapid,
spiral, and evolutionary acquisition pathways for the test and
evaluation communities is to deliver this capability on a much shorter
timeline and often in spiral fashion, requiring updates and perhaps
expansions to testing and/or evaluations. The test and evaluation
community is accomplishing this by partnering as early as possible with
the requirements development and materiel development communities. By
partnering with industry, the Army can observe their testing so as not
to replicate unnecessary and costly tests. The goal is to gain
information on development challenges as soon as possible to find and
implement fixes. Other acceleration initiatives include involving
warfighters during developmental testing, called Soldier Touch Points,
and gaining operational insights from developmental testing. Both of
these initiatives leverage simultaneous data collection and evaluation,
instead of sequential. Modeling and simulation will also play a vital
role in expediting the delivery of these capabilities. Regardless of
the acquisition pathway, the Army Test and Evaluation Command is the
independent voice to Army Senior Leaders and provides an evaluation of
operational effectiveness, operational suitability, and survivability
prior to fielding. If confirmed, I would optimize integrated test and
evaluation processes and the use of modeling and simulation to deliver
timely information about our programs and work to ensure we can
leverage information faster while still maintaining the necessary due
diligence that Army programs require.
Question. Are you satisfied with Army test and evaluation
capabilities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will gain greater understanding of the
Army's existing testing and evaluation capabilities and areas of
potential need so that the Army's ranges, infrastructure, and workforce
are able to meet the demands of the future. I would ensure that the
Army's Acquisition Executive and the senior leaders of the test and
evaluation enterprise are equipped and enabled to support the Army
Modernization Strategy and Futures Command initiatives.
Question. In which areas, if any, do you believe the Army should be
developing new test and evaluation capabilities?
Answer. My understanding is that there are several areas that need
to be advanced to meet the demands on the future. Examples include,
advancing test and evaluation ranges, laboratories, facilities and
infrastructure to enable more adequate performance assessment of Army
weapon systems and equipment in a cyber-contested and electromagnetic
spectrum contested environment. Moreover, additional improvements are
needed to enable adequate evaluation of the performance of Army
directed energy weapons, hypersonics, autonomous systems, and
artificial intelligence-based systems. The Army needs the ability to
test and evaluate long range fires, both over land and offshore, to
support emerging Army capabilities. Also, the Army needs to align with
the training community to develop better representations of expected
multi-domain operations combat, which can be used in operational
testing and force training. These areas represent the anticipated
challenges related to complex multi-domain operations involving cyber,
electronic warfare, and counter-unmanned aerial systems in urban,
jungle, and artic environments. These areas present new challenges for
test and evaluation across the Services and developing them would be
beneficial for the Department of Defense writ large.
Question. Do you believe the Army should exploit non-developmental
or commercial off-the-shelf solutions to meet Army requirements?
Answer. Yes, absolutely. If industry has solutions to the Army's
toughest problems, the Army should partner with industry and work
through transitioning those solutions to warfighters. I believe strong
business partnerships between the Army and American industry partners--
whether large, medium, or small--are key to modernizing the Army.
Question. How should these systems be checked for operational
effectiveness and suitability?
Answer. It is my understanding the process to ensure a system is
operationally effective, suitable and safe for the Army is the same
regardless of whether a system is a non-developmental / commercial-of-
the-shelf (COTS) system or a government developed system. A COTS item
may not have been designed to operate in the military environment,
under military conditions, or against an adversary utilizing cyber and
electronic warfare. The test community must always ensure that such
systems are safe, suitable, and survivable.
Question. Would this put capabilities into the hands of soldier
more quickly, in your view?
Answer. The Army leverages non-developmental and commercial-off-
the-shelf capabilities (COTS) to reduce the amount of time it takes to
design a potential solution due to development and learning that was
already gained in the commercial sector. These approaches can enable
the Army to equip its soldiers more rapidly but should not be used at
the expense of soldier safety or without properly characterizing the
effectiveness, suitability, and survivability of a weapon system or
piece of equipment.
innovation:
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to support the
Army's in-house innovation enterprise at its labs and engineering
centers?
Answer. It is my understanding the Army is committed to fostering
talent management, STEM education, and partnerships with academia and
industry. Also, I am informed the Army uses special hiring authorities
to fill critical competency gaps expediently, maximizing Army lab and
engineering centers' ability to target and quickly recruit talented
individuals without the need for a lengthy recruitment process. If
confirmed, I will ensure that I am fully familiar with these
initiatives and will ensure the Army uses them to maximum
effectiveness.
Question. If confirmed, how would you make use of the Small
Business Innovation Research program to fund cutting edge research,
diversify the Army's industrial base, and transition capabilities to
Program Executive Offices?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army is leveraging all
statutory authorities to increase the return-on-investment from the
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program. It is my
understanding that mapping SBIR programs to customer transition
milestones is an effective approach to accelerate transformative
technology solutions for Army problems. Equally important is a more
business friendly SBIR approach, streamlining proposal requirements,
reducing time to capital, and incentivizing rapid contracting; sending
a clear message to the American innovation community that commercial
success and technology partnership with the Army are not mutually
exclusive. If confirmed, I will obtain greater familiarity with the
details of these initiatives and ensure the Army uses them to maximum
effectiveness.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that Army labs and
test ranges have sufficient military construction and equipment funding
to maintain world class research and testing infrastructure to maintain
our advantage over People's Republic of China, which is making
significant investments in this type of infrastructure?
Answer. Modern buildings, equipment, and adequate resourcing are
vital to ensuring the Army stays at the cutting edge of technology and
continues to recruit and retain the most talented personnel. Future
success requires strategic planning for critical laboratory and test
range infrastructure to minimize the impact of the Army's aging
infrastructure. Ensuring sufficient funding for any critical activity
when requirements vastly exceed available resources, necessitates tough
choices. The Army must continuously assess the requirements and the
adequacy of the RDT&E facilities and resources to meet those
requirements. Further, the Army must consider whether a capability
needs to be owned and operated by the Army one hundred percent of the
time, or whether we can partner with others to schedule access to
facilities or equipment when or where we need it. If confirmed, I will
engage with the appropriate Army organizations to better understand the
infrastructure challenges and look at possible solutions and new
strategies to ensure the Army is making the necessary investments to
sustain, restore, and modernize laboratories and test ranges.
Question. If confirmed, how would you assess whether the Army has
sufficient investment in science and technology programs, especially
those that are creating new capabilities and possibilities for new
concepts of operations beyond current requirements?
Answer. The Army needs to assess the global landscape against
current S&T investments to determine where we are leading or lagging
and develop a framework that can bridge technological and operational
gaps with iterative processes between future concepts and operational
metrics that can inform technical risks and benefits.
cyber:
Question. In May 2018, the Cyber Mission Force achieved full
operational capability. In September, the DOD released its 2018 Cyber
Strategy.
In your view, how well postured is the Army to meet the goals
outlined in the 2018 DOD Cyber Strategy?
Answer. If confirmed I will want to assess for myself how well the
Army, as part of the Joint Force, is postured to meet the goals of the
2018 DOD Cyber Strategy. I know that the Army has taken steps to meet
the goals of the strategy and this has resulted in a number of
successes, including achieving assigned missions such as defending
networks in the contested cyberspace domain while engaged in great
power competition with People's Republic of China, Russia, and other
adversaries. While adversaries will continue their attempts to
penetrate the Army's defenses and exploit any weaknesses, the Army's
collective efforts have helped in deterring, preempting, and defeating
cyber threats targeting vital U.S. interests but much work remains. If
confirmed, I will review the Army posture to ensure it is in line with
the 2018 DOD Cyber Strategy.
Question. What actions do you think need to be taken in the Army to
address any gaps with the 2018 DOD Cyber Strategy?
Answer. It is my understanding the Army has analyzed the
congressionally directed Cyber Posture Review of the Department of
Defense and is in the process of addressing the gaps. If confirmed, I
will work with the service secretaries, DOD CIO and PCA, and the Army
PCA to ensure the Army is taking steps to resolve the gaps.
Question. In your view, does the Army need to conduct a ``Cyber
Readiness Review'' similar to that conducted by the Navy in 2019?
Answer. I understand that the Army's PCA's first order of business
working with Army Senior Leaders was to initiate a Cyber Posture Review
similar to the Navy. I will work with the PCA to understand the scope
of the Army study. I support efforts conducted by the PCA's office to
review cyber readiness and determine where the Army can gain
efficiencies, close operational gaps, and improve talent management.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to improve the
cybersecurity culture throughout the workforce?
Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure the proper tools are in place
to enable a motivated, competent and professional culture within the
cybersecurity workforce. Cybersecurity is inherent in readiness and
needs to be a primary concern during development of the Army's weapons
systems, operational platforms, and information networks.
Question. How would you empower and hold accountable key leaders
throughout the Army to improve its cybersecurity culture?
Answer. Cybersecurity is inherent in readiness and needs to be a
primary concern during development of weapons systems, operational
platforms, and information networks. My expectation is that Army
leaders at all levels, in all components, would understand
cybersecurity's criticality and enforce it accordingly in every aspect
of the Army's operations. I fully expect a culture of cybersecurity to
permeate throughout the workforce and culture, and for heightened
awareness to begin with leadership. I recognize that the Army, just as
society, continues to be more dependent on the internet. Commanders at
all levels must be accountable for the cybersecurity of their networks,
just as they are for the protection of their tanks, helicopters, and
other major weapon systems. If confirmed, I will make cybersecurity a
priority and a pillar of Army readiness. I will prioritize remediation
of vulnerabilities of the major weapons systems, reinforced by
continuing to modernize the Army network and synchronizing cyberspace
efforts across the enterprise. I will also leverage the Army's
Congressionally mandated Principal Cyber Advisor to look for avenues to
ensure that cybersecurity and accountability become an essential part
of Army culture.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to improve military and
civilian cybersecurity career paths?
Answer. Acquiring and retaining the very best talent in cyber is
critical for the Army. If confirmed, the Army will continue to improve
military and civilian cybersecurity career paths. I believe this
includes increased opportunities existing for training with industry
partners, advanced education, diverse and rewarding assignments, and
career flexibility options that include permeability with the Reserve
component and the commercial sectors. This also, I am told, includes
the full implementation of the Cyber Excepted Service (CES) and
leveraging its authorities to improve career paths, talent management,
education, and training--especially for very technical career tracks.
If confirmed, I intend to make the talent management of the Army
cyberspace forces a priority in the effort to acquire and retain the
most qualified personnel for this critical mission.
Question. Section 1657 of the Fiscal Year 2020 NDAA directed each
Military Department to appoint an independent Principal Cyber Advisor
(PCA) to act as the principal advisor to the Secretary concerned on all
cyber matters affecting that Department.
What do you see as the role of this position?
Answer. I welcome the role of the Principal Cyber Advisor. I see
this position as the focal point for all cyber matters and the
independent advisor affording the Secretary analysis and counsel on
risk-based decisions where trade-offs between competing priorities
occurs. I understand the Congressional intent of the PCA.
Question. If confirmed, how would you personally plan to utilize
the Army PCA within your leadership structure?
Answer. If confirmed, I intend to use the PCA to provide value
across four significant areas. First, I will leverage the PCA for an
objective analysis of the Army's cyber posture, independent of other
organizations. Second, I will look to the PCA to create a unified and
coherent message regarding Army priorities, status, and deficits in
cyberspace to both Congress and internal to the Army. Third, I will
look to the PCA to inform me and my senior leadership team with risk-
based decisions for cyber operations, readiness of cyber forces, supply
chain risk management, and priorities of effort. Finally, as noted in
the PCA responsibilities of the NDAA, I will look to the PCA for
analysis and certification of the adequacy of the Army's cyberspace
budget that is relevant to the PCA's functions or an explanation with
proposed mitigation efforts to address the inadequacies.
Question. If confirmed as Secretary of the Army, how would you best
utilize the PCA to improve cybersecurity and otherwise ensure that the
Army maintains decisive advantage in the Cyber domain?
Answer. If I am confirmed as the Secretary of the Army, I intend to
use the PCA as the focal point for all synchronization and coordination
of cyberspace efforts at the Army level, as well as outside the Army to
the DOD and the interagency. Furthermore, I will look to the PCA to
collaborate across the Army and sister services' PCAs for best
practices, to provide me with independent and objective advice on the
Army's way forward in cyberspace and integration into the Department's
Cyber Strategy.
technical workforce:
Question. A significant challenge facing the Army today is a
shortage of highly skilled data scientists, computer programmers,
cyber, and other scientific, technical and engineering talent to work
at defense laboratories and technical centers.
If confirmed, what actions would you take to increase the
recruiting and retention of scientists, engineers, software coders, and
in other technical positions across the Army's research, development,
and acquisition enterprise?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Army continues to
invest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education
initiatives to ensure a continuing supply of the next generation of
scientists and engineers. It is my understanding Army laboratories and
centers have benefited from the hiring authorities given by Congress to
ensure the Army has the necessary technical experts. If confirmed, I
will be committed to ensuring the Army fully continues to use these
authorities to recruit and retain STEM talent. Additionally, I will
also work seek the input of my staff to determine where shortfalls in
recruiting and retention exist and work to mitigate them, including
identifying new authorities needed to improve hiring and retention.
Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to provide
the directors of labs under the purview of the Army with the civilian
workforce management tools they need to shape their science,
technology, and engineering workforces?
Answer. If confirmed, my goal would be to maximize existing
authorities to shape the labs' workforces. To meet the needs of the
labs' workforce, I understand the Army is currently using the Science,
Technology, and Reinvention Laboratories (STRL), Direct Hiring, and
Expedited Hiring authorities to better attract, motivate, train, and
retain the civilian workforce the Army needs for scientific and
technological excellence. I would encourage each Lab Director to
carefully examine the authorities being utilized and determine if they
meet the needs of the current and future workforce, and if not,
identify the additional authorities needed to optimize the civilian
workforce in the Army's labs.
army intelligence, counterintelligence, and sensitive activities:
Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
in the decisions on and oversight of Army intelligence,
counterintelligence, and sensitive activities?
Answer. I am aware that current Army policy places the Secretary of
the Army at the head of the oversight of intelligence,
counterintelligence, and sensitive activities, which I would maintain
if confirmed. I will be routinely briefed on these activities to ensure
my direct involvement in the oversight structure. I would retain
existing Army policy that reserves authority to the Secretary of the
Army to review and approve the Army's most sensitive intelligence and
counterintelligence activities.
Question. In your view, what limiting practices should guide Army
intelligence organizations in determining the types and amount of
information that can be collected about U.S. persons?
Answer. It is my understanding Army intelligence organizations are
required to adhere to the DOD-Attorney General Intelligence Oversight
Guidelines that specify the types and categories of information about
U.S. persons the intelligence community elements may collect. These
guidelines limit the collection of U.S. person information to no more
than what is reasonably necessary to support the intelligence mission.
While these are the key limits to Army intelligence collection
activities, if confirmed, I would examine Army practices to determine
what, if any, additional limits are necessary to effectively balance
individual liberties with national security.
Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Secretary
of the Army in reviewing and acting on requests for the provision of
DOD physical protection and personal security services to retired DOD
officials and the family members of certain DOD personnel, as
contemplated by section 1074(b) of the Fiscal Year 2008 NDAA?
Answer. I am aware that the Secretary of the Army is the head of
the protection-providing organization for designated high risk
personnel, including retired officials and family members and that
Headquarters Department of the Army is responsible for developing a
personal security threat assessment on the designee to determine if
threat conditions exist that would warrant protection. If confirmed,
and after that assessment is complete, I would review it and make a
recommendation to the Secretary of Defense as to whether protection is
necessary and appropriate.
Question. If confirmed, would you concur in the provision of DOD
protective services to such persons in the absence of an imminent and
credible threat to their safety?
Answer. The Secretary of Defense is granted the authority to
provide Personal Security Detail support to a former or retired
official who faces serious and credible threats arising from duties
performed while employed by the Department of Defense. Protection is
similarly afforded to immediate family of a person authorized to
receive physical protection and personal security. I will ensure that
the Headquarters, Department of the Army, adheres to this law, if
confirmed.
army cemeteries:
Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Secretary
of the Army in the management and oversight of Arlington National
Cemetery (ANC)?
Answer. It is my understanding that, under law, the Secretary of
the Army has the authority to develop, operate, manage, administer,
provide oversight of, and fund the Army National Military Cemeteries.
These authorities extend to both Arlington National Cemetery and the
Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery, through the Executive
Director of Army National Military Cemeteries. In executing these
authorities, I understand the Secretary must ensure the highest quality
standards and ensures periodic inspections occur that assess the
administration, operation and maintenance, and use of applicable
construction elements. Additionally, I am aware that the Secretary of
the Army, with the approval of the Secretary of Defense, has the
authority to prescribe policy and procedures for eligibility
determination and exceptions for interment or inurnment, and to enter
into contracts to provide transportation, interpretive or other
appropriate concessions to visitors at Army National Military
Cemeteries.
Question. What factors would you consider in granting or denying a
request for exception to established ANC interment or inurnment
policies?
Answer. I understand that eligibility for interment/inurnment at
Arlington National Cemetery is established within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Title 32, Part 553. Factors considered upon receipt
of a request should include the individual's specific contributions and
actions both as a servicemember and a civilian that directly and
substantially benefited the U.S. military. Additionally, it is critical
that exceptions to policy be consistent with past decisions and take
into consideration the impact of decisions for future requests and
ultimately exceptions are only made for compelling reasons that would
rise to a level that displace an otherwise eligible veteran.
If confirmed, I would maintain the Army's current due diligence
policy that has a robust panel review that considers the following
factors: (1) the degree to which the decedent meets eligibility
standards for interment; (2) the degree of consistency with past
decisions; (3) the potential impact of decision for future requests;
(4) the compelling reason that will displace an otherwise eligible
servicemember or veteran and that demonstrates the manner and level of
sacrifice or heroism typical of military service; (5) combined military
and civilian service; (6) the decedent's military service, including
specific contributions and actions that directly and substantially
benefit the U.S. military; and (5) the decedent's civilian service,
including those specific contributions and actions that directly and
substantially benefit the U.S. military
Question. What progress has the Army made in executing plans and
programs for the expansion of ANC?
Answer. I understand that ANC, in partnership with U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) and Federal Highways Administration (FHWA),
continues to make progress on the Southern Expansion (SE) Program and
the Defense Access Roads (DAR) Project. I am informed the project will
be complete in 2027. I believe the project will result in over 37 acres
of new interment space which will yield an additional 80,000(+) above-
and below-ground burial opportunities.
u.s. army corps of engineers (usace):
Question. What do you perceive to be the appropriate role for the
Secretary of the Army in the management and oversight of USACE?
Answer. If confirmed, I envision that the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) will continue to be appropriately managed within
Headquarters, Army through two Secretariats in their established roles.
The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations, Energy and
Environment) has oversight of all execution functions performed by
USACE supporting the Army's military construction, real property, real
estate, energy, and certain environmental programs, as well as
development of new technologies, designs, and planning approaches to
advance the Army's approach to the management of installations. The
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) establishes USACE's
strategic direction and has primary responsibility for oversight for
the Army's Civil Works program function, including the Clean Water Act
Section 404 regulatory program.
district of columbia national guard (dcng):
Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Secretary
of the Army vis-`-vis the DCNG?
Answer. I understand that the President, by executive order,
authorized and directed the Secretary of Defense to supervise,
administer, and control the DCNG while in a militia status. The
Secretary of Defense directed the Secretary of the Army to perform the
supervision, administration, and control of the DCNG.
Question. What is the role of the Secretary of the Army with
respect to National Guard from other States in a Title 32 status who
are called in to augment the DCNG? G3
Answer. The Secretary of the Army is responsible to supervise,
administer, and control the DCNG while in a militia status. With
respect to State National Guard members augmenting the DCNG, it is my
understanding that they take direction from the federal entity that
requested their support, and not from the Secretary of the Army. While
the President or the Secretary of Defense may request that a Governor
order National Guard personnel to perform training or other duties,
there is no role for the Secretary of the Army unless the Secretary of
Defense delegates the authority to coordinate tasks. Pre-established
Memorandums of Agreement or Understanding between the States and the
District of Columbia guide how personnel and units may augment the
DCNG. If the Guardsmen are performing duties within their home State
for their State, they remain under the command and control of their
respective Governors.
Question. In your view, should the role of the Secretary of the
Army vis-a-vis the DCNG be changed? If so, for what changes would you
advocate, if confirmed?
Answer. I understand employment of the DCNG is governed by unique
and complex legal constraints. If confirmed, I will work with the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Air Force, the Chief of the
National Guard Bureau, and other stakeholders to carefully review
existing authorities and lessons learned from recent activities to
determine what changes, if any, are necessary related to the Secretary
of the Army's authorities related to the DCNG. I would pursue any
changes to the role of the Secretary of the Army after engaging with
key stakeholders and subject matter experts, and after seeking the
advice of the General Counsel.
the army civilian workforce:
Question. In your judgment, what is the biggest challenge facing
the Army in effectively and efficiently managing its civilian
workforce?
Answer. In my assessment, there are two big challenges facing the
Army to manage its civilian workforce effectively and efficiently. The
first is ensuring sustained access to talent in high demand
professions, such as engineers, scientists, software coders,
cybersecurity analysts, data scientists, and other technical positions.
If confirmed, I would aggressively pursue avenues to secure top talent
in current and emerging high demand professions through targeted
marketing, recruiting, and outreach. The second challenge facing the
Army in managing its civilian workforce is a constrained budget.
Managing a highly skilled and diverse workforce, such as the Army
Civilian Corps, requires investments to programs, resources, and
technology which requires a 21st century talent management environment.
If confirmed, I will pursue efforts to enhance the Army's ability to
acquire, develop, employ, and retain talented civilians in the
workforce.
Question. Would there be value, in your view, to establishing a
unified DOD civilian workforce, as opposed to separate civilian
workforces segregated by DOD Component? Please explain your answer.
Answer. At this time I do not have sufficient information to assess
the potential value of establishing a unified DOD civilian workforce. I
understand the DOD civilian workforce is diverse across a number of
mission sets specific to each DOD Component. The Army has a unique
mission set, and Army civilians directly impact that mission. If
confirmed, I would consult with the appropriate experts to explore the
feasibility of a unified civilian personnel system, with streamlined
authorities, to manage the entire DOD civilian workforce and place the
right person, in the right job, at the right time more easily.
congressional oversight:
Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
electronic communications, and other information from the executive
branch.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
provide this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
communications, and other information, as may be requested of you, and
to do so in a timely manner? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
consult with this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
request, to provide this committee and its subcommittees with records
and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
a formal Committee request? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
this committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
retaliation any military member, federal employee, or contractor
employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
______
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
oversight of senior officials--sexual assault and sexual harassment
1. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, as part of my responsibility as a
member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and to ensure the fitness
of nominees for appointment to senior positions within the Department
of Defense I will be asking the same two questions that I ask nominees
to all of the committees on which I serve. Since you became a legal
adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors, or
committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual
nature?
Ms. Wormuth. No.
2. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, have you ever faced discipline, or
entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
Ms. Wormuth. No.
sexual assault and sexual harassment within the army
3. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, Secretary Lloyd Austin established
an Independent Review Commission (IRC) on sexual misconduct in the
military. One initial recommendation of the IRC is that court-martial
prosecutorial charging decisions for allegations like sexual assault
and sexual harassment be transferred away from the military chain of
command to individual service military judge advocates who are
attorneys. I just reintroduced the ``I Am Vanessa Guillen Act'', in
honor of Army Specialist Vanessa Guillen who was tragically murdered by
a fellow soldier at Fort Hood, Texas, last year. The Guillen Act
includes a nearly identical provision on court-martial transfers, along
with a provision to create a punitive article of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ) for sexual harassment. What are your thoughts
on transferring court-martial charging decisions away from the chain of
command to trained military attorneys for certain sex related
allegations?
Ms. Wormuth. As I said in my opening statement at my confirmation
hearing, there is no place in our nation's Army for sexual assault or
sexual harassment. Perpetrators must be held accountable, but I also
believe the Army needs to place more emphasis on preventing sexual
assault and harassment. Secretary Austin is seeking input from the
leadership of the respective Services on the recommendations from the
Independent Review Commission. I am open to hearing all new approaches
to better combat sexual assault and harassment. If confirmed, I look
forward to reviewing the data, analysis, and recommendations of the
Independent Review Commission, and discussing its recommendations with
General McConville and the Army's subject matter experts, before
providing my assessment to Secretary Austin.
4. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, are you in favor of creating a
punitive article in the UCMJ to address sexual harassment?
Ms. Wormuth. Sexual harassment has no place in our Army, and I
support the expansion of tools to hold accountable those who engage in
sexual harassment.
military training area lease renewals in hawaii
5. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, the Army is currently engaged in
discussions to renew several of the military's training area land
leases in Hawaii, including for the Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) which
expires in 2029, among others. These training areas are critical for
maintaining the readiness of the Army and joint/coalition forces but
many, including PTA, are also located in areas that hold special
significance to the Native Hawaiian community. If confirmed, will you
support transparent communications and respectful discussions with
local community leaders on this issue?
Ms. Wormuth. Noting the importance of these training areas to Army
readiness and their special significance to native Hawaiians, if
confirmed, I will insist that communications on this topic are
transparent and respectful of local community leaders.
strategy for the army in the indo-pacific
6. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, General James McConville recently
released the ``Army Multi-Domain Transformation'' strategy outlining
how the Army plans to transform itself to support the Joint Force in
the Indo-Pacific. The Army's ``Multi-Domain Transformation'' paper
states the Army is uniquely qualified to grow and strengthen U.S.
relationships with partner militaries of Indo-Pacific nations. What can
the Army do to strengthen U.S. relationships with allies and partners
in the Indo-Pacific?
Ms. Wormuth. One way the Army supports the Joint Force in the Indo-
Pacific is by expanding and deepening its relationships with the
region's armies through a variety of security cooperation activities.
The Army uses security cooperation activities and other tools to build
access and presence in the region, while at the same time strengthening
the capabilities of our allies and partners. I understand that 23 of
the 33 Chiefs of Defense of nations in the Indo-Pacific are Army
officers, providing the Army remarkable opportunity to advance
relationships with partner militaries in the region.
extremism in the military
7. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, Secretary Austin recently announced
immediate actions to counter extremism in the military and the
establishment of the Countering Extremism Working Group. One of the
lines of effort for this working group is to evaluate whether seeking
to amend the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is appropriate to
address extremism. A challenge associated with eradicating extremism is
clarifying the definition. I am cognizant of the need to protect free
speech for our servicemembers; however, servicemembers that have ties
to extremist ideologies are a threat to both the military and the
Nation at large. What are your thoughts on creating a standalone
punitive article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to address
violent extremism in the ranks and send a clear message that this
conduct will not be tolerated?
Ms. Wormuth. Experts from across all of the Services are working to
identify solutions to combating extremism in the military. If
confirmed, I look forward to reviewing all the recommendations of the
Countering Extremism Working Group, including any recommendations to
amend the Uniform Code of Military Justice to provide more tools to
combat extremism in the ranks.
army budget and priorities
8. Senator Hirono. Ms. Wormuth, in December, the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs, Army General Mark Milley, acknowledged that the Navy, Air
Force, and Space Force are going to need a larger share of the Pentagon
budget in the future, in large part to counter the rising challenge
posed by China in the Pacific. If the Army's budget does shrink in the
next several years, you may be asked to make difficult decisions about
making cuts to programs that impact the Army's modernization efforts,
readiness, or manpower. What are the top factors you would consider
when making these decisions?
Ms. Wormuth. The United States Army plays a vital role in providing
the Joint Force the required capabilities needed to counter challenges
posed by the People's Republic of China in the Indo-Pacific. To protect
needed modernization efforts, the Army reduced Total Army end strength
and canceled plans for modest end-strength growth. I have also learned
that the Army accepted short-term risk by slowing brigade modernization
efforts. If required to make difficult decisions due to potential
future budgetary constraints, the first commitment is to provide
Combatant Commanders with the required trained, equipped, and ready
forces to meet the demand for today's challenges, while taking care of
our soldiers, families, and civilians. Additionally, the Army must also
field modern capabilities to ensure the Joint Force is prepared for
future threats. If confirmed, I would work closely with Army
leadership, OSD and Congress to address how to make any required
prudent trades between end-strength, modernization and readiness to
field the Army the nation needs within budget constraints.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Gary Peters
tri-care
9. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, the medical readiness of our Forces
is critical to our national defense. Michigan is a State with a rich
history of National Guard service and our soldiers and airmen have
stepped up whenever called upon to serve. Expanding Tricare Reserve
Select to all National Guard servicemembers and also making it
available for purchase to their families is critically important. What
are your views on this?
Ms. Wormuth. The health of all service members is essential to
mission readiness. Ensuring the families of service members have access
to healthcare is also an important component of readiness. I do not,
however, have enough information on the current status of health care
coverage for National Guard members and their families to assess
expanding the current Tricare Reserve Select coverage program. If
confirmed, I will look into this issue in depth and work closely with
the Chief of Staff of the Army, other Army senior leaders, and the
Department of Defense leadership to ensure we balance the health care
coverage needs of our National Guard members and their families within
the Army's allocated resources and statutory authorities.
tri-care demobilization
10. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, additionally, mobilizing soldiers
are eligible for Tricare Prime and are disenrolled from Tricare Reserve
Select (TRS). Upon demobilization, soldiers are disenrolled from
Tricare Prime and have 60 days to re-enroll in TRS or they are treated
as a new client and must pay enrollment fees. If confirmed how will you
ensure Reserve Forces are not subjected to an excessive financial
burden upon redeployment?
Ms. Wormuth. Ensuring that Reserve component soldiers are not
subject to excessive financial burdens is certainly important. At this
time I do not have enough information on the current costs associated
with re-enrolling into Tricare Reserve Select upon redeployment to
assess how best to address this issue. If confirmed, I commit to
looking into the nature of the financial impact to Reserve component
soldiers upon their redeployment and working closely with the Chief of
Staff of the Army, other Army senior leaders, and the Department of
Defense leadership to alleviate any excessive financial impact to
mobilizing soldiers.
active guard support
11. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, the full-time support force in the
National Guard is critical to soldier and equipment readiness. The
National Guard must be ready for domestic missions as well as global
defense missions. The Air Force understands this better than the Army
when it comes to full-time National Guard manning. The Army Guard is
currently funded at about 60 percent of the AGR [Active Guard Reserve]
requirements and 52 percent of the Federal Technician requirements. The
Air Force funds roughly 80 percent of their requirements. In addition,
the Air Force has converted most of their full-time force to AGRs (65
percent over the next 2 years and growing) versus the 50/50 split of
AGRs versus Technicians on the Army side. AGRs are offered Tricare, BAH
[basic allowance for housing] and additional benefits, but more
importantly, AGRs offer commands more flexibility in how personnel are
tasked. If confirmed, how will you ensure that the Army adequately
resources and characterizes its National Guard full-time force
requirements?
Ms. Wormuth. The full-time support force for both the Army National
Guard and the Army Reserve is a critical element to meeting and
sustaining required levels of soldier and unit readiness. From past
work on Guard and Reserve issues, I know that the Army and Air Force
are structured and employed somewhat differently, and it may be
difficult to apply one service's model to another service. There is a
RAND study underway to determine and validate the requirements and
resourcing levels necessary to meet the 2018 National Defense Strategy,
including the proper full-time support allocation under the supervision
of respective State Adjutants General. If confirmed, I will review the
results of that study to help determine how best to ensure the full-
time support force is best postured to ensure the success of units in
both the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve.
facilities modernization
12. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, Michigan is home to the National
All Domain Warfighting Center (NADWC) which facilitates Joint All
Domain Command and Control (JADC2) service concepts including Multi-
Domain Operations (MDO), and Joint All Domain Operations (JADO) through
various live and constructed joint service and multi domain events such
as Northern Strike, Winter Strike, Electromagnetic Spectrum Training/
Electronic Warfare (EMS/EW), and small Unmanned Aircraft Systems
(sUAS)/Counter sUAS training. Michigan's distinct seasonal environments
create four different unique training environments within the NADWC and
position Michigan well for a diverse cadre of training exercises
(including artic missions). These capabilities would not have been
possible without strategic investments. If confirmed, how will you
ensure that National Guard facilities continue to be included in
building total Army readiness?
Ms. Wormuth. The National Guard is a critical component of the Army
and essential to its readiness. If confirmed, I will review all
National Guard strategic investments, including facilities
requirements, to ensure that the Army continues to build total
readiness.
national guard readiness
13. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, Michigan is not home to an Active
Duty military base, however, we have a longstanding commitment to
supporting the national defense through our Reserve components,
especially from the brave men and women of the Michigan National Guard.
They are the backbone of our State's efforts to respond to natural
disasters, current and future pandemics, and have been one of the first
groups to be called on to contribute to national defense missions. If
confirmed, how will you ensure that the Reserve components, especially
the National Guard, are modernized to ensure interoperability within
the Total Force?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army equips units based on Combatant Commander
requirements and the National Defense Strategy, within available
resources. The current Regionally Aligned Readiness and Modernization
Model (ReARMM) is designed to prioritize and synchronize equipment
modernization with specific missions, as well as build predictability
for the Total Force. The Army National Guard and Army Reserve are
critical components of the Total Army and, if confirmed, I will ensure
that they are modernized based on their specific mission priority to
ensure their deployability, interoperability, and sustainability with
the Total Force.
abrams
14. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, the Abrams Main Battle Tank, as
currently upgraded to the M1A2 SEPV3 configuration, remains the world's
best tank and is the backbone of the Army's most powerful formation,
the Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT). Currently, the Army is
upgrading Abrams at a rate of one ABCT per year to modernize all 20
ABCT equipment sets, including the Active Force, National Guard, and
preposition stocks. To date, the Army has fielded the newest Abrams to
only one ABCT in its Active formations and one of its prepositioned
equipment sets. Do you agree that rapid modernization of the Abrams as
the spearhead of the Army's most powerful formation must continue to be
given a top budget priority?
Ms. Wormuth. The Abrams Main Battle Tank continues to be an
important enduring capability for the Army. In ensuring the Army is
both ready and modern, the Army must balance legacy, enduring, and
modernization priorities across the entire equipment portfolio,
ensuring the mix of capabilities is adequate to defeat the Nation's
adversaries. If confirmed, I intend to ensure investment in this
capability is maintained to achieve balance across the larger
priorities of end strength, readiness, and modernization.
15. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, the Army has wisely invested in
new technology for Abrams in response to near-peer competitors like
China and Russia who have invested heavily in modernizing their armored
formations and related capabilities. The opportunity now exists,
however, to further implement next-generation technologies that will
keep Abrams ahead of the pacing threats and retain significant
overmatch. If adopted, these advances would decrease the weight of the
tank, increase its lethality and survivability, promote networking
between manned and unmanned units, and reduce fuel consumption, heat
and sound signature of the power plant. Do you support the Army's
pursuit of these new technologies to ensure the Abrams remains the most
modern tank in the world and will you ensure funding is prioritized to
continue Abrams modernization?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army
appropriately considers all the alternatives to determine how to take
Abrams modernization to the next level, improving lethality,
survivability, and strategic mobility.
stryker
16. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, the Stryker combat vehicle has
proven itself to be one of the Army's most versatile platforms and
continues to expand its missions beyond its core function as an
infantry carrier. For example, Stryker was selected as the platform for
critical fielding of urgently needed short-range air defense systems
using both traditional missiles and cannon, as well as cutting-edge
technology lasers. Stryker is also the platform for the Army's next
generation of electronic warfare and signals intelligence systems and
mobile command posts outside the Stryker Brigade formations. The key to
being able to perform these expanded missions is the Army's decision in
2018 to upgrade to the newest Stryker A1 configuration that provides
more engine and electrical power, a digital network, and a much heavier
suspension. The Army funding profile for Stryker currently buys one
half of a Stryker Brigade's vehicles per annual cycle to update the
Army's nine Stryker Brigades and also build additional Stryker vehicles
for new missions. Do you support continuing the pace of modernization
of the Army's Stryker Brigades and the need to procure vehicles for the
Stryker's expanding missions to support the Army's most pressing urgent
needs for air defense and electronic warfare?
Ms. Wormuth. I support the current pace of fielding of one-half of
the Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) annually, but going forward,
this will need to be balanced against other modernization priorities,
as well as the broader priorities of end strength and readiness. For
the Stryker, modernization includes fielding enhanced capabilities for
electronic warfare, signal intelligence, and cyber warfare.
mobile protected firepower
17. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, the Army recognized a lethality
capability gap in its infantry formations, which lacked a large-caliber
direct fire weapon system to move with the infantry under protection
and engage lightly-armored or bunkered adversaries in open or urban
terrain. This platform is critical to facilitating tactical assault for
the Infantry Brigades. Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) would be
lighter than a tank, allowing two vehicles to be transported on a C-17.
Progress on MPF has been rapid and prototypes are in the hands of
soldiers for the start of assessment and testing. The Army plans to
move into Low Rate Initial Production in early fiscal year 2022. Mobile
Protected Firepower is a promising answer to a known Army capability
gap for its infantry formations that are often the first Army units to
be mobilized during a response to an emerging threat. If testing
progresses on schedule, do you support moving MPF into production as
rapidly as possible?
Ms. Wormuth. I understand that the Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF)
provides the Army much needed lethal, direct fire capability to the
Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT) and I support it moving to
production when it is appropriately tested.
israel operations-technology working group
18. Senator Peters. Ms. Wormuth, section 1299M of the Fiscal Year
2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Report authorizes the
Secretary of Defense to establish a U.S.-Israel Operations-Technology
Working Group (OTWG). I would note that this committee voted 27-0 in
last year's NDAA markup to require the Department to stand up the
working group. The Pentagon owed Congress, by law, a report related to
the working group by March 15, 2021. If confirmed, will you commit to
working with me and my office in examining how the Army conducts
cooperative research and development with tech-savvy countries like
Israel to see if we can more systematically work together to prevent
shared capability gaps from emerging in the first place?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I would ensure that the Army works
closely with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research
and Engineering and the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment to advance collaborative defense research,
development, test, and evaluation with Israel. In addition, if
confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the Army's cooperative research
and development engagements with tech-savvy foreign partners to ensure
that the Army will continue to prioritize cooperative programs that
leverage foreign technology and investments. I am fully committed to
addressing common technology gaps with key coalition partners by
harmonizing and aligning modernization priorities. I believe this
approach will ensure we are lockstep with our allies and partners in
terms of eliminating capability gaps and advancing key technologies to
establish capability overmatch against our adversaries.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Joe Manchin III
national guard apache aircraft
19. Senator Manchin. Ms. Wormuth, the Army has used their Reserve
and National Guard forces extensively over the past 20 years to support
the Global War on Terror. However, I am concerned that we have not
adapted to supporting them with the same training and assets as if they
were an Active component. For example, there are 8 Army National Guard
Combat Aviation Brigades with 4 battalions of AH-64 Apache helicopters,
each only manned by 18 aircraft instead of the 24 typical of an Active
Duty battalion. That number used to be higher, with 8 battalions of
Apaches, all manned with 24 aircraft. The reduction itself was a blow
to readiness for the National Guard, but we've heard that the Army now
plans to phase out its own supply of D-model Apaches without offering
conversion of those aircraft to the National Guard to bring their
brigades back up to full strength. Is there any reason those aircraft
are not appropriate for transfer to the National Guard?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army is committed to equipping each of the four
Army National Guard (ARNG) battalions with 24 AH-64E Apache
helicopters. Most D-model units in the Regular Army (RA) are currently
below their authorized level of 24 aircraft due to induction
requirements to transform the current fleet into E-models. The ARNG
will begin fielding the latest Apache version in FY22 and will be
complete in FY26 with four battalions equipped with 24 E-model Version
Six Apaches each. The RA will continue to maintain and employ the D-
model until 2030. Additionally, at least one ARNG Combat Aviation
Brigade will be among the first four brigades to receive the Future
Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) as part of the total Army
modernization plan.
20. Senator Manchin. Ms. Wormuth, would you commit to working with
my office to exploring that option for inclusion in this year's NDAA?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I would be pleased to work with your
office to ensure the Army is able to fully implement its modernization
plans.
future force
21. Senator Manchin. Ms. Wormuth, part of the Army's future
fighting force message has been to strengthen existing alliance,
develop new partnerships, increase readiness, and build a more lethal
force. Every day I am reminded of how vulnerable we are from the cyber
domain and I am deeply concerned with the cybersecurity capacity and
capabilities to operate seamlessly with our civilian partners. I view
the capabilities of our National Guard in the cyber domain as critical
enablers to support local authorities and to influence national
security, both abroad and domestically. As part of the future 2028 Army
concept, how do you see the National Guard being used to influence
cyber security?
Ms. Wormuth. As I noted during my confirmation hearing, I am quite
concerned about evolving cyber threats and the challenges they pose for
cybersecurity in the Army. I agree that the National Guard is a
critical part of expanding the Army's capacity and capabilities in this
area. The Army has been working closely with the National Guard in
cyberspace operations since 2015. I understand that building capability
is just one consideration; the Army also needs the ability to employ
the capability when necessary. As I understand it, to operate fully in
the cyber domain may require activation of the total force under Title
10. If confirmed, I will assess how we might fully integrate the
National Guard to increase our cybersecurity capacity and I look
forward to working with you on these issues.
22. Senator Manchin. Ms. Wormuth, how will you work to elevate the
Army's National Guard as it relates to their abilities to assist in
detecting and defeating threats like Solar Winds and the most recent
ransomware attacks on the Colonial Pipeline?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army views growth of National Guard capacity and
capability as paramount for the total Army response to protect critical
infrastructure against cyber-attacks. It is imperative that the Army
harness the expertise resident in the Reserve Components to expand
capacity and capability. If confirmed, I look forward to assessing any
limitations on the employment of Reserve Component forces and working
to devise solutions to improve the Army's cyber protection posture.
budget
23. Senator Manchin. Ms. Wormuth, the Army has stated over the last
2 years that the budget request supports its 2028 future force that is
capable of operating amongst a joint and multi-national team that is
capable of winning in a multi-domain battlespace. I completely agree
with your opening statement where you mentioned that we have a window,
a strategic inflection point, to make changes necessary for the next
fight. One of these changes that I support is concluding the direct
conflict within Afghanistan. However, I am deeply concerned that our 20
years of high spending in a counterterrorism paradigm does not
accurately account for today's high-intensity conflict against
strategic competitors while also standing ready to engage in low-
intensity conflict. What specific weapons systems do you believe are
most critical requirements for the Army's future 2028 force?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army Modernization Strategy lays out the path to
the future force of 2035, with 2028 as a key waypoint for Army leaders
to make sure it is on the right path. Materiel modernization, including
weapons systems--``what we fight with''--is an essential part of this
transformation. Army materiel modernization is based on six enduring
materiel modernization priorities. Within the six modernization
priority categories are the ``31+4'' signature modernization efforts,
which are led by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, the Rapid Capabilities and
Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO), and Army Futures Command. Those
signature efforts will provide critical capabilities to the joint
force, including the ability to deliver lethality from the ground and
air, and the ability to defend Army's people, partners, and assets.
These materiel modernization efforts are shaped and informed by the
Army's warfighting concept, Multi-Domain Operations, which is based on
overall defense strategy, and describes ``how we fight'' as part of the
joint force.
personnel and families
24. Senator Manchin. Ms. Wormuth, I think we all can agree that our
servicemembers, civilian employees, and their families are the most
important assets within our Armed Forces and there is likely never
enough that we can do to support them. As we conclude direct combat
operations within Afghanistan, I think this is the prime opportunity
for us to address critical issues within our Forces as well as each
program that was meant to support them. What are the most important
issues for our families that are affecting readiness and their own
growth and how will you address them?
Ms. Wormuth. As I said in my confirmation hearing, the Army's
people, including soldiers, whether Active, guard, or Reserve, their
families, Army civilians, and our Veterans, are fundamental to the
Army's readiness. I intend to prioritize quality of life issues which
include housing, healthcare, child care, spouse employment, and
permanent change of station moves. If confirmed I also will do
everything in my power to ensure we have a healthy command climate at
every Army installation that fosters Army values and ensures the well-
being of all our people. There is no place in our nation's Army for
sexual harassment and assault, domestic violence, racism, extremism or
other harmful behaviors that inhibit readiness. These issues are all
critical to supporting soldiers, families, and readiness.
If confirmed, I will work to improve and invest in military housing
and barracks, partner with the Defense Health Agency to deliver world-
class health care, and expand access to quality child care through
additional infrastructure, improved staff compensation, and further
investment in the Family Child Care program and fee assistance. I would
also engage the National Governors Association, state and local
governments, and non-government organizations that facilitate and
enable spouse employment opportunities. If confirmed, I will support
those efforts and any additional efforts within the Army's available
authorities and resources that can improve the experience of Army
families.
25. Senator Manchin. Ms. Wormuth, what are your thoughts on how we
can better support retaining talent through the promotion process for
Active, Reserve, and Army National Guard personnel?
Ms. Wormuth. I have learned that the Army has made significant
changes in the promotion process to enable greater focus on attracting
and retaining talent. For officers the Army has successfully used
brevet promotions, the authority to Opt-In and Opt-Out of promotion
consideration, market-based assignment processes, and merit-based
promotions for the Active Component to retain talented officers. If
confirmed, I will continue to use these programs and likely expand them
to the Army National Guard and Army Reserve.
For the noncommissioned officer corps, the Active Army and U.S.
Army Reserve recently launched the noncommissioned officer evaluation
board that leverages a talent-based order of merit list to promote
based on requirements rather than the legacy process of a time in grade
sequence number. The Army has launched its third iteration of the
Assignment Satisfaction Key--Enlisted Module (ASK-EM) which is enabling
the enlisted force to select preferences for future assignments, like
their officer counterparts, which in turn is increasing the assignment
satisfaction of Army NCOs.
The Army is in the final stages of releasing the Corporal
Initiative directive to create a seamless transition into the
noncommissioned officer corps as the Army grows its junior leaders. A
byproduct of the success of these efforts can be seen in historical
rates of Army Retention statistics. The Army continues to excel in
retaining talent as exhibited by closing the FY21 ETS retention mission
five (5) months ahead of schedule and remaining 11% ahead of glide path
in retaining soldiers scheduled to ETS in Fiscal Year 2022. The Army
closely monitors officer and enlisted retention rates and if confirmed,
I will not hesitate to ask for any additional authorities required to
support our people strategy as new opportunities arise.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jacky Rosen
army cybersecurity personnel
26. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, if confirmed, how do you envision
retaining high-skilled cyber soldiers when non-commissioned officers
(NCO), warrants, and even officers can often find more lucrative and
more balanced work-life opportunities in cybersecurity jobs in the
private sector?
Ms. Wormuth. As I stated during my confirmation hearing, the Army
needs to think creatively about how it recruits and retains qualified
cyber experts. I understand that the Cyber Operations Force is already
leveraging pay incentives, advanced training and education
opportunities, training with industry partners, and improving the
ability to share talent between the three components to improve
retention. If confirmed, I will continue to fully leverage the
authorities Congress has provided to ensure flexibility in our
retention programs, while meeting the mission requirements of the Total
Army force.
tactical cybersecurity
27. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, in recent years, Army Cyber Command
has been fielding units to enhance ground commanders' tactical cyber
capabilities--such as the Intelligence, Information, Cyber, Electronic
Warfare, and Space detachment and the 915th Cyber Warfare Battalion. If
confirmed, what are your plans for the growth of this mission and in
which theatres do you see the Army employing these cyber units?
Ms. Wormuth. Cyber operations continue to increase in importance.
If confirmed, I will work to ensure our capabilities and capacity match
future requirements. Army cyber units must be able to provide
responsive cyberspace and information operations to tactical commanders
in any theater. I understand that the Army is building cyber forces
with a priority toward Europe and the Indo-Pacific but these
capabilities will not be unique to one theater and must be able to meet
cyber threats worldwide.
28. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, is this a capability the Army
envisions for the Indo-Pacific, in Europe with our NATO [North Atlantic
Treaty Organization] allies, or in current contingency operations in
Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan?
Ms. Wormuth. As noted above, the Army is creating new cyber units
with a focus on countering adversaries in the Indo-Pacific and in
Europe but threats in the cyber domain are not limited by geography.
The Army must focus on cyber threats wherever they manifest, and
regardless of from where they originate. If confirmed, I will work to
ensure that the Army's cyber force structure is postured to support
Army Commanders globally.
29. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, what is your vision for these
missions?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed it is my intention that the Army's cyber
forces will provide responsive cyberspace and information operations
capabilities to Army Commanders in competition and conflict, worldwide.
Army Commanders at all levels must have the capability to effectively
counter cyber and information threats.
reserve components and army fitness test
30. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, the Reserve components face their
own set of challenges as citizen soldiers, with two careers to manage
and without access to the day-to-day services available to Active Duty
troops on a military installation. One such challenge for the Reserve
component will be the transition to the Army Combat Fitness Test
(ACFT). This will require Reserve component soldiers to have to pay
for, and have access to, specialized gym equipment in order to train
for the ACFT, whereas soldiers are able to train for the Army Physical
Fitness Test without equipment. While Active Duty soldiers will have
ACFT equipment on base--their everyday place of work--Reserve component
soldiers will not. This will be especially difficult for soldiers in
rural areas and for those without the financial resources to pay for a
gym membership. If confirmed how will you ensure the Army addresses
this disparity as they implement the ACFT and what is your
understanding of the Army's current plan?
Ms. Wormuth. I understand that the Army Reserve continues to train
for the ACFT and has placed more than eight thousand sets of equipment
in the field for soldiers to use. If confirmed, I will ensure that the
Army provides appropriate resources to the force, including both
equipment and alternative methods for training. I am committed to
ensuring that no soldier, regardless of component, is required to pay
out of pocket to be prepared for the ACFT.
31. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, throughout 2020, the Army and
specifically U.S. Army Forces Command acquired significant numbers of
Gym-in-a-Box container gyms, as well as other commercial-off-the-shelf
fitness equipment solutions to help improve soldier health, fitness,
and performance, via the SAT [Simplified Acquisition Threshold] Supply
Procurement Program. If you are confirmed, what will be the Army's
acquisition strategy (contract vehicle, type of funding, management
component etc.) for sustaining that equipment over the next 3 to 5
years, and how is the Army going to ensure sustainment and resupply
efforts for current and future fitness equipment, facility, and
technology requirements are being adequately met and addressed?
Ms. Wormuth. United States Army Forces Command (FORSCOM) has
purchased all the Gym-in-a-Boxes required for its subordinate units.
There are no current plans to purchase any more sets. Sustainment for
this equipment is a unit responsibility, but broken or deteriorated
equipment can be replaced through the normal supply process. Funding
will need to be programmed for out years to purchase any necessary new
equipment but, in the meantime, unit supply clerks can order any needed
items through the Defense Logistics Agency's procurement mechanism.
32. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, what is your understanding of their
current acquisition strategy?
Ms. Wormuth. My understanding is that the sustainment of this
equipment is now a unit level requirement. Units are responsible for
maintaining an adequate and to-standard supply of ACFT equipment to
meet unit training and testing needs. The ACFT equipment is available
through the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) which is responsible for
procurement policy and oversight of managed defense items. Going
forward, unit supply clerks can order what they need through DLA's
procurement mechanism.
33. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, given the scale of the fitness
equipment products and facilities previously purchased and planned to
be purchased throughout the Army, what authorities and contract
vehicles is the Army leveraging to ensure fitness equipment,
facilities, and technology are designed, developed, and sourced by U.S.
based companies and are specifically and uniquely made for soldiers as
Tactical-Athletes?
Ms. Wormuth. My understanding is that the US Army is using the
standard acquisition process to purchase ACFT equipment. If confirmed,
I will ensure that the Army continues to use approved US sources for
its equipment needs. Any exceptions to this are only those allowed by
law and appropriately justified and approved. Additionally, engagement
with industry groups and participation in industry showcase events will
ensure that the Army's needs are well-known to ensure that the
requisite quality equipment is available to meet the Army's demand.
34. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, if confirmed, how will you ensure
this takes place?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I will reaffirm the Army's preference
for U.S. domestic production whenever possible, in strict accordance
with procurement laws and regulations. I will also encourage
participation by appropriate leadership in key industry showcases
across the country, as well as engagements with industry to allow them
to demonstrate and display their equipment for the Army's
consideration.
35. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, for the fitness equipment,
facilities, and technology required by the Army, what is your
understanding of what controls are in place to ensure all products and
facilities meet specs/requirements for the Army in the areas of
durability, use case (i.e. predominantly outdoor use), safety, and are
consistent with existing equipment that already meets these
requirements?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I intend to become more familiar with
the details of this program to ensure that all equipment purchased to
support the ACFT is both safe for soldiers to use and able to withstand
its rigorous use as part of a predominantly outdoor physical fitness
test. Additionally, I intend to ensure that the Army's equipment
standards remain compatible with commercial and collegiate-level
equipment.
36. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, according to Army Field Manual FM
7-22, a Health and Holistic Fitness campus includes container gyms,
ACFT testing fields, Terrain Run Obstacle Courses, Outdoor Training
Areas, and Soldier Performance Readiness Centers. If confirmed, what
will be the Army's plan (to include timelines, contract vehicles, and
management component) to rapidly support soldiers with these key
training areas and facilities so they can properly train for the new
Army Combat Fitness Test, as well as improve and maintain their
operational readiness?
Ms. Wormuth. I understand that the Holistic Health and Fitness
(H2F) Campus provides a road map for future modernization of the Army's
fitness enterprise. This concept allows for modernization planning as
new construction and recapitalization is established in the Facilities
Improvement Plan. However, the H2F Campus is not required for any unit
or individual to train for and pass the ACFT. The Army already has
drills and exercises for soldiers to train for and pass the ACFT. If
confirmed, I intend to ensure soldiers have the facilities, equipment,
time, and doctrine to ensure they physically ready for the battlefield.
37. Senator Rosen. Ms. Wormuth, what is your understanding of their
current plan?
Ms. Wormuth. I understand that the priority investment for Holistic
Health and Fitness (H2F) fielding is the ``H2F Performance Team,''
consisting of physical therapists, occupational therapists, registered
dietitians, cognitive performance specialists, strength and
conditioning coaches, and athletic trainers, with the expertise to
improve Physical and Nonphysical readiness, either in person or through
a virtual means. I understand that the plan is to field 28 Brigade
Combat teams in FY21, and additional brigades each year as funding is
available. I understand that the Army National Guard and Reserve are
currently conducting the analysis needed to field H2F performance teams
for their formations.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator James M. Inhofe
future to combat the threat of drones
38. Senator Inhofe. Ms. Wormuth, commercial drones have lowered the
entry fee to the combined arms race, demonstrating that drones and
drone swarms are one threat. Drone synchronized with maneuver and
fires, whether that is lethal/non-lethal or combined with electronic
warfare, establishes a true combined arms fight. What is the Army
working on to defeat drones, both single and swarm, today and in the
future?
Ms. Wormuth. It is my understanding that the Department of Defense
recently released a comprehensive strategy for countering drones as
well as an implementation plan. The Army is prepared to support this
strategy and has established the Joint C-sUAS Office (JCO) to lead and
direct C-sUAS doctrine, requirements, materiel, training, and
developing joint solutions to address a host of UAS threat
capabilities, including drone swarm attacks.
39. Senator Inhofe. Ms. Wormuth, does the Army currently have the
ability to defeat a drone swarm attack and ensure it does not impact
our drone and equipment?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army was designated as the Department of Defense
Executive Agent for Counter Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS).
The Army established the Joint C-sUAS Office (JCO) to lead and direct
C-sUAS doctrine, requirements, materiel, training, and developing joint
solutions to address a host of UAS threat capabilities, including drone
swarm attacks.
40. Senator Inhofe. Ms. Wormuth, are you aware of any factors
limiting the Army's ability to deploy additional and more capable
counter-UAS [unmanned aircraft systems]?
Ms. Wormuth. I am unaware of any factors limiting the Army's
ability to deploy additional and more capable counter-UAS at this time.
If confirmed, I will continue every effort to ensure that the Army and
the JCO continue to synchronize critical C-UAS efforts across the Joint
Force to mitigate any challenges that would limit our warfighter's
ability to deploy, fight, and win.
41. Senator Inhofe. Ms. Wormuth, if confirmed, how would you
address the threat of single drones and swarms, to the U.S. Army and
Joint Force?
Ms. Wormuth. The Department of Defense, through the Joint Counter
Small UAS Office, recently released a comprehensive strategy for
countering drones as well as an implementation plan to facilitate its
accomplishment. This strategy and supporting implementations plan
addresses both single and swarm threats. If confirmed, I will ensure
that the Army's efforts are aligned to these strategic guiding
documents and that our approach is synchronized with the joint services
across the spectrum of doctrine, organization, training, materiel,
leadership and education, personnel, facilities, and policy.
strategy
42. Senator Inhofe. Ms. Wormuth, in your confirmation hearing, you
commented that ``we have to make sure . . . that we have a strategy
that aligns to its resources.'' To clarify, when you said that, did you
intend to mean a budget-driven or a budget-informed strategy?
Ms. Wormuth. I firmly believe that our national defense strategy
should be resource informed, but not resource driven. I have
participated in several Quadrennial Defense Reviews and other strategy
development efforts over the years, and through those experiences I
have come to the view that defense strategies that are wholly resource
unconstrained are not useful to senior DoD leaders. At the same time, I
have also seen from past experience that it is critical that senior DoD
leaders advocate energetically for the defense budget required to
provide for the nation's defense. If confirmed, I will advocate for the
resources the Army needs to execute its responsibilities in the
National Defense Strategy, including ensuring that it is ready for
current operational needs and modernized for the future.
43. Senator Inhofe. Ms. Wormuth, do you commit to advocating for a
defense budget that is adequate to execute the National Defense
Strategy?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I will absolutely advocate for a defense
budget that will enable the Department of Defense, including the
Department of the Army, to execute the National Defense Strategy.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Roger Wicker
oversight of senior officials--sexual assault and sexual harassment
44. Senator Wicker. Ms. Wormuth, the Army serves as DOD's executive
agent for theater integrated air and missile defense. The Navy has been
looking to transfer responsibility for the Aegis Ashore ballistic
missile defense program, which currently has sites located in Romania
and Poland. In January, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael
Gilday described Aegis Ashore as a non-core mission, saying,
``Transferring shore-based ballistic missile defense sites to ground
forces enables sailors to focus on their core missions at sea and frees
up resources to increase our lethality.''
As DOD's executive agent for air and missile defense, would the
Aegis Ashore program be better suited for the Army than the Navy?
Ms. Wormuth. In the 2021 NDAA, Congress directed the Department of
Defense to re-examine the roles and responsibilities of each service
with respect to integrated air and missile defense and I understand
that review is underway. If confirmed, I look forward to the
opportunity to contribute to that review, and to assess any
implications for the Aegis Ashore program, including proponency.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Joni Ernst
counter drone activities
45. Senator Ernst. Ms. Wormuth, commercial drones have lowered the
entry fee to the combined arms race, demonstrating that drones
(commercial and state) can serve as a localized air force (Azerbaijan,
Syria, Ukraine, Afghanistan). Drones and drone swarms are one threat.
Drones synchronized with maneuver and fires, whether that is lethal/
non-lethal or combined with electronic warfare, establishes a true
combined arms fight. Do you believe the Army currently has the ability
to defeat a drone swarm attack and ensure we do not take out our own
drones?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army continues to improve its ability to defeat
drone swarm attacks. Ensuring Army systems do not take out our own
drones is an important task capability. I expect that the
identification of friend or foe (IFF) technology will continue to
evolve.
46. Senator Ernst. Ms. Wormuth, can you describe any factors
limiting the Army's ability to deploy additional and more capable
counter-UAS systems?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I will continue every effort to ensure
that the Army and the Joint Counter Small UAS Office continue to
synchronize critical C-sUAS efforts across the joint services,
mitigating any challenges limiting our warfighter's ability to deploy,
fight, and win. At this time, I am unaware of any factors limiting the
Army's ability to deploy additional and more capable counter-UAS.
47. Senator Ernst. Ms. Wormuth, if confirmed, how would you address
the emerging threat of single drones and drone swarms to the U.S. Army
and Joint Force?
Ms. Wormuth. The DoD, through the Joint Counter Small UAS Office,
recently released a comprehensive strategy and implementation plan for
countering drones, addressing both single and swarm threats.
If confirmed, I will ensure that the Army's efforts are nested
within these strategic guiding documents and that our approach is
synchronized with the joint services.
iowa army ammunition plant
48. Senator Ernst. Ms. Wormuth, the Army owned the only ``Elmes
Press'' in the Federal Government, a specialized piece of equipment
used to make large warheads for both the Departments of Defense and
Energy at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant. In December 2018, it had a
catastrophic failure that the Army attributes solely to age/fatigue,
resulting in an explosion that destroyed the press and caused
incidental damage to nearby buildings, interrupting active Army
ammunition production lines. We had a great discussion about this when
we met in my office, and I appreciate your willingness for the Army to
address these important issues. If confirmed by the Senate to be the
next Secretary of the Army, is it your intent to work with the
Committee to resolve all outstanding contractor claims related to Army-
directed actions needed to respond to mitigation of damage from the
explosion and to restore normal operations of active ammunition
production lines?
Ms. Wormuth. I am aware that the Army continues to work closely
with the operator of the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant (IAAP), American
Ordnance (AO), to modernize the IAAP's core production processes and
infrastructure. The Elmes Press was unfortunately damaged while AO was
operating the press in support of a Department of Energy contract; a
non-DOD requirement. While AO did not replace the Elmes Press, they did
repair the damaged areas impacting Army production operations and
normal operations of active Army ammunition production lines have been
restored. Subsequent to my hearing, I have been told that the Army has
encouraged AO to approach their insurance carrier for restitution since
the use of the Elmes Press was not under a DOD contract and AO did not
have indemnification while using the Elmes Press. If confirmed, I will
work with the Committee to help resolve outstanding contractor claims.
49. Senator Ernst. Ms. Wormuth, if confirmed by the Senate, is it
your intent to work with the Committee to begin the engineering design
of a new Advanced Warhead Manufacturing Facility to serve the
Departments of Defense and Energy (nuclear weapons) for our vital and
ongoing nuclear modernization efforts?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army remains committed to modernizing the IAAP's
core processes and infrastructure that include the manufacturing of
artillery, mortar, tank, 40mm, Mine Clearing Charge, C-4 products and
warhead production. As part of the Army's Government Owned, Contractor
Operated (GOCO) AAP Transformational Modernization Plan, the Army is
investing in the design and construction of a modern pressed energetics
facility to support DOD requirements. The Army will work with the DOE
to collaborate jointly on any unique warhead requirements that benefit
National Defense. The Army does not have any nuclear weapons programs
but supports the other services, as needed, in this area.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Thom Tillis
infantry squad vehicle
50. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, GM Defense delivered the first
Army Infantry Squad Vehicles (ISV) within 120 days of award, and
established a production facility in 90 days. The ISV program is an
important example of successful implementation of acquisition reform,
leveraging commercial capabilities and best-practices, rapidly
delivering needed capabilities to the warfighter. The ISV program is in
a good position to grow both in production and in expanding to
different configurations--use ISV acquisition model to accelerate
getting additional capabilities to the warfighter.
I recently visited the Army Infantry Squad Vehicle production
facility in Concord, NC and had the opportunity to drive the ISV and an
all-electric military concept vehicle based on the ISV. Both vehicles
handled like my pickup truck. I raise this because what this program
seeks to do is address the acquisition problems currently impacting the
Department--delays in getting needed capabilities to the warfighter,
time from concept to delivery, supply chain issues, cost overruns, and
other issues that have plagued the Department over the years. This
program is in a good position to grow both in production and different
configurations--use ISV model to accelerate getting a much needed
capability to the warfighter. What other vehicle programs can benefit
from this approach?
Ms. Wormuth. Balancing commercially available vehicles with the
necessary modifications to ensure those vehicles can operate and
protect our military in combat environments is key. I understand that
with the Infantry Squad Vehicle, a strong partnership between the
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisitions, Logistics, and
Technology) and Army Futures Command ensured that strategies and
decisions were strongly linked to requirements, which supported a
creative acquisition approach and the use of multiple Soldier Touch
Points. The Army's Heavy Dump Truck is another example where the Army
leveraged a commercial truck chassis manufactured by Mack Defense. If
confirmed, I will explore the many effective acquisition strategies
available for vehicles such as the electric Light Reconnaissance
Vehicle (eLRV) and Common Tactical Truck. My intent, if confirmed,
would be to use lessons learned and commercial investments wherever
possible to give the Army more opportunities to reduce total ownership
cost and leverage commercial capabilities such as electric or hybrid
electric vehicles.
51. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, about 90 percent of the ISV's
parts (including the chassis, engine, drivetrain, electronic locking
differentials, transfer case, suspension, and more) are off-the-shelf
components that one could walk into a Chevy dealership and buy. As we
have discussed over the last year, supply chain improvement is an
important area that needs to be considered for our military assets--
General Motors economies of scale and global supply network are helping
to address this issue. How can the Department further leverage
commercial off-the-shelf components to reduce costs, grow efficiencies,
and further secure our supply chains on additional vehicle platforms?
Ms. Wormuth. As the Army continues to modernize its Tactical
Wheeled Vehicle Fleets, the Army must continue to use commercial
content, where appropriate, to support affordable and military capable
vehicles. Many of the Army's current tactical wheeled vehicles rely on
the commercial supply chain for key components, including engines and
transmissions. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Army continues to
engage with the U.S. commercial truck market to understand product
lines and component life-cycles--important factors to consider as the
Army not only procures new capabilities, but considers long-term
sustainment and fleet readiness. This exchange would also inform
optimizing operational requirements to support maximum use of
commercial content to deliver more affordable vehicles. Additionally,
feedback from the commercial sector will help the Army fine tune future
competitive procurements.
data analytics
52. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, as budget constraints continue to
challenge Army readiness goals, it is critical to ensure Army training
programs are leveraging technology advancements such as simulation
training capabilities that are capable of robust data collection and
analytics to maximize and validate soldier training and readiness
outcomes. An area that has the opportunity to benefit significantly
from data focused technology advancements is the Army's small arms
simulation training program. Unfortunately, while the Army has made the
important decision to replace its legacy small arms simulation training
systems, which do not meet the Army's new .40 small arms qualification
requirements, the Army has struggled for several years to implement an
effective replacement program. It is the Committee's understanding the
Army's planned Soldier Virtual Training (SVT) program is not currently
slated to be fielded until 2025 and the intended gap filler program,
Squad Advanced Marksmanship Trainer, does not provide data collection
and analytics capabilities or advanced cognitive and human performance
training protocols essential to achieving a more lethal, decision
dominant force, creating a significant training gap for small arms
training between now and 2025.
If confirmed as Secretary of the Army, do you commit to
prioritizing the Army's use of data analytics and human performance
capabilities to achieve and validate a more lethal and cognitive,
decision dominant Force to support Army Talent Management and critical
readiness goals?
Ms. Wormuth. I agree that the Army must ensure training programs
using simulation leverage the latest technology and are capable of
robust data collection and analytics to maximize soldier training
outcomes. I understand the current marksmanship training simulation--
the Engagement Skills Trainer II--gathers limited data from
instrumented weapons, but it uses old technology, which does not meet
the objectives that can be achieved by current and future technologies.
I am aware that earlier this year, the Army implemented software
updates to the Engagement Skills Trainer II that allow soldiers to
train qualification tables for the Army's new .40 small arms
qualification requirements while the Army continues to work toward
acquisition of the next generation trainer--the Soldier Virtual Trainer
(SVT). I understand that the Squad Advanced Marksmanship Training
(SAMT), as an interim capability, does not provide the desired level of
data collection and the Army has decided to end the SAMT program in
November of this year. The SVT procurement funding is programmed
beginning in FY25. TRADOC is working with AFC to determine new
acquisition strategies for SVT with the goal of beginning procurement
in FY24. Additionally, the SVT program is already moving forward with
research and development funding in FY22 to ensure the latest
technology advancements are leveraged for this critical program.
53. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, can you also 1) commit to
prioritizing a review of the Army's SVT program to ensure it includes a
focused approach to data collection, analytics, and cognitive, human
performance training, and 2) provide the Committee with the Army's plan
for addressing the current small arms simulation Program of Record
training gap to ensure the Army can train to the Army's new .40 small
arms qualification requirements and achieve human performance and data
analytics goals, between now and its planned delivery of a new SVT
program in 2025?
Ms. Wormuth. I understand the Abbreviated Capability Document for
the Soldier Virtual Trainer clearly states the requirement for
collection of individual performance data, biometric data, and
collective performance data, and the use of tutorials to improve
Soldier Lethality. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring it will not be
delivered to the force without these capabilities. I also understand
the Army has already provided an interim solution for meeting current
.40 small arms qualification Table II requirements by providing an
Army-wide software update for the Engagement Skills Trainer II systems
this year. As SVT is procured and delivered to the force, it will also
meet these qualification requirements with the added capability to use
data analytics and biometrics to improve performance. If confirmed, I
will ensure the Army provides you the details you seek on this plan.
budget
54. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, I submitted several questions for
the record to Secretary Lloyd Austin following his confirmation
hearing. One of the issues that I am concerned about is Pope Army
Airfield (AAF) and the current state of the infrastructure at that
airfield. As you know, Pope was transferred from the Air Force to the
Army, and it supports some of the units at Fort Bragg that are national
level assets. I was pleased with Secretary Austin's answer that stated:
``The Army remains committed to ensuring Pope Army Airfield can support
all deployment missions. In fiscal year 2021, the Army is funding a $90
million project to make critical improvements to the primary runway and
lighting system. The Army has also identified future requirements to
improve the airfield, totaling $224 million in Military Construction
[MILCON], as well as in Restoration and Modernization funding. These
requirements will be a priority for funding within the Army's Facility
Investment Plan.'' We still haven't seen the President's Budget but I
understand that it has undergone significant revisions since Secretary
Austin's confirmation hearing. Is the Secretary's statement still
accurate?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I am committed to ensuring that Pope
Army Airfield can support all deployment missions. I understand that
the Army has committed over $200M to the repair of Pope Army Airfield
(AAF) over the last ten years. Most recently, in Fiscal Year 2021 the
Army funded a $90M project to improve the primary runway and lighting
system. This project repairs the main fixed wing runway, intersecting
taxiways and aprons, the storm water infrastructure and the lighting
system. The Army is also tracking future requirements to improve and
sustain the airfield totaling $224M in Military Construction,
Sustainment and Restoration and Modernization funding. The Army is
continuing to assess revisions to the President's Budget to determine
funding impact on the Pope AAF projects and all other priority MILCON
and R&M projects in the Facility Investment Plan.
55. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, we are well into fiscal year 2021,
is the Army executing $90 million as promised?
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, I am told that the Army has funded and awarded a
$90M contract to improve the primary runway and lighting system. This
project repairs the main fixed wing runway, intersecting taxiways and
aprons, the storm water infrastructure and the lighting system. This
project is currently in execution.
56. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, does the Army still plan to invest
$224 million in MILCON and FSRM [facilities, sustainment, restoration,
and modernization] funding?
Ms. Wormuth. I understand that the Army remains committed to
ensuring Pope Army Airfield can support all deployment missions. The
Army is tracking future requirements to improve and sustain the
airfield totaling $224M in Military Construction, Sustainment,
Restoration and Modernization funding. The Army is continuing to assess
revisions to the President's Budget to determine funding impact on the
Pope AAF projects and all other priority MILCON and R&M projects in the
Facility Investment Plan.
57. Senator Tillis. Ms. Wormuth, Secretary Austin also stated that
the Army recognized the requirement to extend the Pope AAF runway to
accommodate strategic airlift to support some of the unique military
units stationed at Fort Bragg. Is this runway lengthening being
budgeted for and included in the Army's Future Years Defense Program
(FYDP)?
Ms. Wormuth. I am aware that the Army is tracking the requirement
to extend the Pope AAF runway by 3,000 feet to accommodate strategic
airlift associated with the Global Response Force, 82nd Airborne
Division, and Army Special Operations Command. This requirement will be
assessed against total Army requirements within the Army's Facility
Investment Plan.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
great power competition in the arctic
58. Senator Sullivan. Ms. Wormuth, given the National Defense
Strategy's focus on great power competition and the rapid development
of Russia and China's capabilities in the Arctic, would you agree that
the Arctic is an emerging front-line for great power competition and
rivalry? Please elaborate.
Ms. Wormuth. Yes, as noted in the unclassified version of the
Army's Arctic Strategy, the Arctic is a region of increasing strategic
competition. The Russian Federation has built up its military
capability in the region, while also making claims to sovereignty over
the Northern Sea Route. The People's Republic of China has declared its
interest in the Arctic and has been active in the area, particularly in
terms of pursuing research and exploring economic opportunities. Many
of our allies share U.S. concerns about protecting national interests
and territory in the Arctic. I anticipate that competition in the
region will increase in the future, in part because climate change is
increasing access to and activity in the region.
59. Senator Sullivan. Ms. Wormuth, in your personal opinion, what
makes Alaska an important strategic region for the United States, and
why would our adversaries want to limit our presence and power
projection capabilities in the Arctic region? Please elaborate.
Ms. Wormuth. Alaska is an important strategic location for several
reasons. Alaska is important in terms of its role in ensuring defense
of the U.S. homeland, which is DoD' highest priority. Its geographic
location makes it a potential avenue of attack for air and missile
strikes on the continental United States. Alaska also has a critical
position astride lines of communication and resource-rich areas that
due to climate change will see increased traffic and economic
exploitation in the years and decades to come.
60. Senator Sullivan. Ms. Wormuth, in your personal opinion, what
capability gaps presently exist that inhibit our ability to effectively
project and sustain power in the Arctic, and compete with Russia and
China in the northern latitudes? Please elaborate.
Ms. Wormuth. I agree with the conclusion in the Army's Arctic
Strategy that over the last two decades, the Army's ability to operate
in the Arctic, as well as other extreme cold weather, mountainous, and
high-altitude environments has eroded. At this time, I cannot speculate
about what specific capability gaps might exist, but I've noted that
the Arctic Strategy commits the Army to conduct a capability gaps
assessment. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the results of
that assessment.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
afghanistan
61. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, I understand that you support
President Biden's decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan by
September 11, 2021, because we have ``achieved what we set out to do
there''. Could you please elaborate on your support for President
Biden's decision?
Ms. Wormuth. I support the policy decision. The United States sent
troops to Afghanistan to deliver justice to those who attacked us on
September 11 and to disrupt terrorists from using Afghanistan as a safe
haven to attack the United States. We have achieved that objective, and
the Administration has assessed that the threat to the United States
emanating from Afghanistan today is at a level that can be addressed
without a persistent footprint in the country. If confirmed, I will
ensure the Army supports bringing operations to a responsible close
within the timelines set by the President.
62. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, what would be your specific
priorities for the Army over the course of the current withdrawal
timeline in Afghanistan?
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I will work with the CENTCOM Commander,
as well as joint and coalition partners to ensure conditions for a
responsible withdrawal, the coordinated transfer to our Afghan
partners, and the safe return of our soldiers.
63. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, in your assessment, how will
the conflict in Afghanistan evolve without a stable U.S. military
presence in the country? Please explain.
Ms. Wormuth. Regrettably, based on existing assessments, I am
concerned of the likelihood that the high levels of violence will
continue after we depart. However, we have long known there is no
military solution to Afghanistan's internal conflict. If confirmed, I
will ensure that as the Army supports bringing operations to a
responsible end.
great power competition
64. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, in your assessment, how will
the United States' withdrawal from Afghanistan likely impact China's
activities in the Middle East? Please explain.
Ms. Wormuth. I see little-to-no change in the People's Republic of
China's activities in the Middle East as a consequence of the United
States' withdrawal from Afghanistan. China will likely continue to
apply a mix of economic and diplomatic ``carrots and sticks'' to try to
increase its influence in the region. The People's Republic of China
would follow this course of action irrespective of U.S. involvement in
Afghanistan. That said, I would expect to see the PRC attempt to paint
the U.S. withdrawal as a sign of declining power and influence.
65. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, in your advance policy question
responses, you wrote ``Over the last 4 years, the Army placed special
emphasis and focus on modernization, and recent concepts show promise
in deterring and, if necessary, defeating a great power adversary.''
What capabilities--unique to the Army--are either resident, or may be
in development, that will posture the Service for Great Power
Competition?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army Modernization Strategy lays out the path to
the future force of 2035, with `2028' as a key waypoint enabling Army
leaders to make sure it is on the right path. Army materiel
modernization is based on six enduring materiel modernization
priorities. Within the six modernization priority categories are the
``31+4'' signature modernization efforts, which are led by the Office
of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and
Technology, the Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office
(RCCTO), and Army Futures Command. These materiel modernization efforts
are shaped and informed by the Army's warfighting concept, ``Multi-
Domain Operations,'' which is based on overall defense strategy, and
describes ``how we fight'' as part of the joint force.
66. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, do you believe land power to be
indispensable to U.S. National Security in the Indo-Pacific? If so,
please identify the challenges and capabilities that make landpower
indispensable.
Ms. Wormuth. Land power is indispensable to U.S. National Security
and will play an important role in the Indo-Pacific for several
reasons. First, history demonstrates that conflicts and their resultant
political settlements are often ultimately decided on land. Army land
power needs to be positioned and postured to support the joint force
and policy makers as they manage strategic competition, while also
having the ability to prevail in conflict and shape political outcomes
favorable to the United States.
The Army will enable and support the multi-domain nature of
competition, crisis, and conflict in the Indo-Pacific in the 21st
century through its land-based multi-domain operations and
capabilities. Appropriately postured Army forces equipped and trained
for multi-domain operations can provide speed and range to the joint
force, opening or enabling avenues of approach into competitive spaces
and contested environments.
Finally, nothing signals a nation's commitment to friend more than
the presence of Army soldiers forward postured, working alongside
allies and partners, on mutual security interests. These three things
make land power indispensable in the Indo-Pacific in the era of great
power competition.
67. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, during the next 5 years of
Great Power Competition, how do you see the Army integrating modern
capability, forward posture, and synchronization with sister services,
partners, and allies? Please explain.
Ms. Wormuth. The Chief of Staff of the Army Paper #2, The Army in
Military Competition, provides an extensive description of how the Army
can: achieve national objectives; support other services and other
elements of the U.S. government; and allies and partners in strategic
competition. As the Army experiments, develops and fields multi-domain
capabilities it will work with the other services and our Allies and
partners to seek integration and, ultimately, interoperability. The
Army's Project Convergence effort is already working with other
services to ensure interoperability with respect to experimentation.
The Army's Defender and Pathway series of exercises have also begun to
incorporate Allies and partners as required. As the Army develops and
fields these capabilities, ongoing engagement with Allies and partners
as part of a whole of government approach will help determine where the
Army postures these--leading to a calibrated force posture of Multi-
Domain capabilities.
innovation
68. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, do you agree that the
Pathfinder Program improves technology outcomes through incorporating
soldier feedback into the research and development process? Please
explain.
Ms. Wormuth. Yes. Pathfinder programs are designed to identify
soldier problems that are not addressed in current requirements. They
integrate soldier input early into solution design cycles through
engagements with universities to rapidly develop new solutions to meet
soldier needs.
69. Ms. Wormuth, what opportunities do you identify for the Army to
continue solving its challenges through the incorporation of soldier
insights in the formulation and execution of projects?
Ms. Wormuth. The Army currently incorporates `Soldier-Centered
Design' into every aspect of its modernization programs. This
innovation model involves frequent soldier touchpoints which bring
together engineers, scientists, industry experts, and soldiers from
operational units. Soldier touchpoints allow the Army to `learn early
and often' and refine requirements in a more thoughtful and iterative
manner. The process has proven efficient and effective, and delivers
materiel that soldiers want and need.
70. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, do you identify opportunities
for the Pathfinder model to grow to deliver emerging technologies and
software at the speed of relevance? Please explain how the Pathfinder
might spread to additional States and units.
Ms. Wormuth. Pathfinder programs have been established in Tennessee
and North Carolina. Although these programs are in their initial stages
of execution, the Army expects that forthcoming results will provide a
template for further expansion of the program to other States and
additional Army units.
71. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, if confirmed, as a Member of
the Defense Acquisitions Board, will you commit to safeguarding the
U.S. research enterprise against the Chinese Communist Party's
intellectual espionage within graduate and post-graduate STEM [science,
technology, engineering, and math] programs aligned to support
Department of the Army? Please identify the near-term actions you would
take to reflect this commitment.
Ms. Wormuth. A strong research program is necessary to keep the US
Army the best equipped and advanced land force in the world. I also
recognize that we must ensure that the Army's research efforts are
protected from the risk of adversarial exploitation and compromise
beginning in the science and technology phase and continuing through
development and acquisition. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army is
collaborating with Research and Technology Protection stakeholders
across DoD and leveraging best practices to identify and mitigate
recruitment and retention activities by competing talent recruitment
programs and enhance protection for critical programs and technologies.
industrial base analysis and sustainment
72. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, within the Army, what specific
opportunities do you identify to invest with appropriated Industrial
Base Funds? Please explain the desired outcomes of these potential
investments.
Ms. Wormuth. If confirmed, I would continue the Army's
collaboration with OSD to identify opportunities to expand the
Industrial Base, address supply chain vulnerabilities, and to develop
and implement advanced manufacturing processes. I would work with OSD
to leverage the existing authorities within the Defense Production Act
Title III Program, Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Program,
and Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Program to address these
critical challenges.''
73. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Wormuth, how can the Army better
leverage the power of public-private partnerships in order to identify,
attract, and cultivate next generation and emerging defense
manufacturing and technology sectors? Please explain.
Ms. Wormuth. The Army uses Title 10 United States Code (USC) 2474
to designate its depots and arsenals as Centers of Industrial and
Technical Excellence (CITE) in order to encourage public-private
partnerships (PPP) with commercial firms and other entities such as
academia. The Army also designated the Rock Island Arsenal Joint
Manufacturing and Technology Center (RIA-JMTC) as a Center of
Excellence (CoE) in advanced and additive manufacturing. Additive
manufacturing, also known as 3D printing, uses a layer-by-layer
approach to manufacture products vice the conventional subtractive
approach. The CoE designation at RIA-JMTC allows that facility to be
the focal point for Army to create and implement advanced and additive
manufacturing policy, especially in the Army Organic Industrial Base,
thereby increasing opportunities for PPPs. The Army also uses 10 USC
2474 in conjunction with its CITE designations and the Army
Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Program to generate PPPs with
commercial firms and other entities to improve efficiencies, reduce
costs, and increase the knowledge base in the Army Organic Industrial
Base.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
army combat support capabilities
74. Senator Hawley. Ms. Wormuth, Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri is
home to the Army's Engineer, Military Police, and CBRN [chemical,
biological, radiological and nuclear] schools. In your view, why are
the combat support capabilities provided by the Army's engineer,
military police, and CBRN units so important for our Nation's defense,
especially as Department of Defense (DOD) shifts focus to China?
Ms. Wormuth. I view these three combat support branches and Fort
Leonard Wood as critical to the Army's mission to deter or defeat our
Nation's adversaries in the Land Domain. As you know, Fort Leonard Wood
is one of four Army installations within TRADOC that conducts Initial
Military Training for every new Solder that joins the Army's ranks;
also, nearly 80,000 service members across the Department of Defense
train there annually. The three branch schools located on Fort Leonard
Wood--Engineers, Military Police, and CBRN (Chemical, Biological,
Radiological, and Nuclear)--are critical enabling capabilities for the
Joint force. In competition and conflict, soldiers in these three
branches deliver critical, specialized skills that deter, mitigate and
defeat battlefield obstacles and hazards that the Joint Force would
likely face in a conflict with a near-peer competitor. They are equally
critical to our Homeland Defense mission, providing key skills and
capabilities to Defense Support to Civil Authorities when called upon
to do so.
china
75. Senator Hawley. Ms. Wormuth, we also spoke about how the Army
can contribute to America's ability to deny a Chinese fait accompli
against Taiwan. From a deterrence standpoint, why is it so important
for us to be able to convince Beijing not just that taking Taiwan will
be costly but that they simply won't be able to do it?
Ms. Wormuth. The best way to deter aggression and prevent a future
conflict is to convince a potential adversary that it cannot achieve
its objectives so that it consistently assesses the costs of such an
undertaking outweigh the benefits. To deter Chinese aggression against
Taiwan, and in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, the Joint
Force and the Army must possess the capabilities and posture to deny
China's military objectives and maintain the capacity of the United
States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that
would jeopardize the security of the people of Taiwan. While deterrence
relies in part on the ability to impose costs, convincing China it will
not be able to accomplish its objectives through deterrence by denial
is a more appropriate strategy.
76. Senator Hawley. Ms. Wormuth, how do you see Army long-range
precision fires contributing to our ability to execute sea denial
operations in the early stages of a conflict with China?
Ms. Wormuth. Army contributions to anti-ship warfare and sea denial
operations will free up US Navy and Air Force platforms to prioritize
other targets and maximize their use of limited resources. The Army is
developing and procuring several land based anti-ship missile (LBASM)
systems. Forward postured LBASMs could contribute to deterring China
during competition and below the level of armed conflict, and thus help
shape the larger strategic environment to benefit the United States
should competition escalate to crisis or conflict
army future long range assault aircraft program
77. Senator Hawley. Ms. Wormuth, why is speed and range so critical
for the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, especially as the Army
shifts its focus to the Indo-Pacific?
Ms. Wormuth. Speed and range are critical to Army aviation in the
Indo-Pacific because of the rapidly increasing pace of war in the
information age and the great distances over which a war would be
fought, which includes vast expanses of water between hundreds of
potential sites for bases to refuel and rearm. Army modeling has
demonstrated the value of transformational speed, range, and endurance
required to operate successfully across the Indo-Pacific. Recent
experimentation at western test ranges validates Army analysis.
------
[The nomination reference of The Honorable Christine E.
Wormuth follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of The Honorable Christine E.
Wormuth, 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
Christine E. Wormuth 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.]
[all]