    [Senate Hearing 117-988]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                             S. Hrg. 117-988

              TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF: HON. CARO-
                  LINE KRASS, TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF
                  THE DOD; GINA ORTIZ JONES, TO BE UNDER
                  SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE; DR. ELY
                  RATNER, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
                  DEFENSE FOR INDO-PACIFIC SECURITY
                  AFFAIRS; SHAWN SKELLY, TO BE ASSISTANT
                  SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR RREADINESS; AND
                  MEREDITH BERGER, TO BE ASSISTANT SEC-
                  RETARY OF THE NAVY FOR ENERGY, INSTAL-
                  LATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENT
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 JUNE 16, 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
    63-279 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2026
    =====================================================================�

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

    JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman	JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
    �
    JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire		ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
    KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York		DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
    RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut		TOM COTTON, Arkansas
    MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii			MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
    TIM KAINE, Virginia			JONI ERNST, Iowa
    ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine		THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
    ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts		DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
    GARY C. PETERS, Michigan		KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
    JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia		RICK SCOTT, Florida
    TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois		MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
    JACKY ROSEN, Nevada			JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
    MARK KELLY, Arizona                  	TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
    �
    �
    �		    Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
    � 		John D. Wason, Minority Staff Director

                                      (ii)

                             C O N T E N T S
    _________________________________________________________________

                                 june 16, 2021

                                                                       Page
    To Consider the Nominations of: Hon. Caroline Krass, to be            1
      General Counsel of the DOD; Gina Ortiz Jones, to be Under
      Secretary of the Air Force; Dr. Ely Ratner, to be Assistant
      Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs; Shawn
      Skelly, to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness; and
      Meredith Berger, to be Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
      Energy, Installations, and Environment.

                               Members Statements

    Reed, Senator Jack...............................................     1

    Inhofe, Senator James M..........................................     4

                               Witness Statements

    Krass, Hon. Caroline, to be General Counsel of the DOD...........     8
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................    41
      Questions for the Record.......................................    62
      Nomination Reference and Report................................    64
      Biographical Sketch............................................    65
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................    68
      Signature Page.................................................    77

    Ortiz Jones, Gina, to be Under Secretary of the Air Force........     9
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................    77
      Questions for the Record.......................................   107
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   108
      Biographical Sketch............................................   109
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   112
      Signature Page.................................................   120

    Ratner, Dr. Ely, to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-      12
      Pacific Security Affairs.
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................   120
      Questions for the Record.......................................   140
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   144
      Biographical Sketch............................................   145
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   148
      Signature Page.................................................   158

    Skelly, Ms. Shawn, to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for          14
      Readiness.
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................   158
      Questions for the Record.......................................   172
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   174
      Biographical Sketch............................................   175
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   177
      Signature Page.................................................   182

    Berger, Ms. Meredith, to be Assistant Secretary of the Navy for      16
      Energy, Installations, and Environment.
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................   182
      Questions for the Record.......................................   198
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   199
      Biographical Sketch............................................   200
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   202
      Signature Page.................................................   208

                                     (iii)

                  This hearing is printed to include all available
                    information
                    requested or required to be inserted for the
                    record.

                                      (iv)

      TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF: HON. CAROLINE KRASS, TO BE GENERAL
      COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; GINA ORTIZ JONES, TO BE UNDER
     SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE; DR. ELY RATNER, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY
       OF DEFENSE FOR INDO-PACIFIC SECURITY AFFAIRS; SHAWN SKELLY, TO BE
     ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR READINESS; AND MEREDITH BERGER, TO
       BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY FOR ENERGY, INSTALLATIONS, AND
                                  ENVIRONMENT

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 2021

                                  United States Senate,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    room SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Senator Jack Reed
    (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
        Committee Members present: Senators Reed, Gillibrand,
    Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Duckworth, Rosen,
    Kelly, Inhofe, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Scott,
    Hawley, and Tuberville.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED

        Chairman Reed. I would like to call the hearing to order.
    The Committee meets this morning to consider several nominees
    for positions in the Department of Defense (DOD). I recognize
    that these nominations cover a wide range of positions, so the
    discussion today may be broad. But given the large number of
    nominees we need to confirm, we are slating them as soon as the
    nomination is ready for a hearing rather than by related
    positions. So please bear with us.
        Today we will consider the nominations of Ms. Caroline
    Krass to be General Counsel of the Department of Defense; Ms.
    Gina Ortiz Jones to be Under Secretary of the Air Force; Dr.
    Ely Ratner to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-
    Pacific Security Affairs; Ms. Shawn Skelly to be Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Readiness; and Ms. Meredith Berger to
    be Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations,
    and Environment. I thank the nominees for their service to the
    United States and their willingness to assume these important
    roles.
        I would also like to welcome the guests and family members
    who are here today. Ms. Krass, I welcome your husband, William,
    and son, James, and I thank Senator Bennet for joining us to
    introduce you, and he will be her shortly.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones, I welcome your mother, Victorino, and
    sister, Christi, and thank Senator Duckworth for her
    introduction via Webex, and Dr. Ratner, I welcome your wife,
    Jennifer, and mother, Esther.
        I know each of the nominees have family members who would
    have liked to have been here but due to pandemic restrictions
    they are proudly watching from home.
        Ms. Krass, you are nominated to be General Counsel of the
    Department of Defense. In addition to your current role as the
    Senior Vice President and General Counsel at AIG in New York, I
    would note your extreme experience as a senior national
    security lawyer in the Obama and Bush administrations,
    including roles as General Counsel of the CIA [Central
    Intelligence Agency], Acting Assistant Attorney General, and
    multiple legal counsel positions for the White House, National
    Security Council, and Department of Justice.
        If confirmed, you will serve as the principal legal advisor
    to the Secretary of Defense and guide the legal framework under
    which the Department operates. In the immediate future, it will
    be your responsibility to assist the Secretary of Defense in
    addressing extremism in the military, and implementing the
    administration's recommendations regarding prevention and
    response to sexual assault and harassment, based on the work of
    the Independent Review Commission and the Congress. You will
    also be charged with coordinating the Department's legislative
    program and improving its process for legislative proposals,
    which, unfortunately, too often miss the deadlines required by
    this Committee. I would ask that you share with the Committee
    today how you will approach these duties.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones, you have been nominated to serve as the
    Under Secretary of the Air Force. Your experience as an Air
    Force officer, DIA analyst, and advisor to the U.S. Trade
    Representative during the Obama administration will serve you
    well in this role.
        If confirmed, you will be faced with a number of pressing
    challenges for the Air Force. The next Under Secretary will
    need to run the day-to-day operations of the Department while
    simultaneously taking steps to build up the acquisition
    workforce and acquisition system to expand the size of the Air
    Force. You will also need to improve the falling retention rate
    of pilots and maintainers, a situation that may very well get
    worse before it gets better. All of these duties will be
    further complicated as you aim to regain and maintain high
    levels of readiness in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.
        Dr. Ratner, you currently serve as Special Assistant to the
    Secretary of Defense and Director of the Department's China
    Task Force. If confirmed as Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Indo-Pacific Security Affairs, you will undertake the immense
    responsibility of guiding the Department's efforts in the most
    strategically important region of the world. I trust that your
    expertise gained through senior roles with then Vice President
    Biden, the State Department, the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee, and the Center for New American Security will inform
    your future role.
        Last week the DOD China Task Force, which you led,
    completed its work, and Secretary Austin initiated several
    efforts to better focus the Department's strategy to address
    the challenge from China. I hope you will share with the
    Committee the key findings of the task force and the
    deficiencies that the Department must improve. If confirmed,
    your purview will also include Southwest and Central Asia, and
    I would ask that you outline how the Department will conduct
    counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan through an over-the-
    horizon presence.
        Ms. Skelly, you have been nominated to be Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Readiness. With over 20 years in
    uniform as a Naval Flight Officer, and a distinguished civilian
    career with senior roles at the Department of Defense and
    Department of Transportation, and as the Commissioner on the
    National Commission on Military and National Public Service,
    your understandings of the duties demanded of this position
    will be critical.
        There are several readiness concerns that will require your
    attention should you be confirmed. Among them, accurate, timely
    readiness reporting is a constantly evolving process. This
    Committee has historically used the NDAA [National Defense
    Authorization Act] to compel DOD report, but there is an
    argument that readiness reporting needs to adapt further to
    account for a deeper picture of readiness instead of simply
    listening availability. Operational safety across the Services
    also must be improved. We have sustained far too much self-
    inflected damage from training mistakes and recklessness, and I
    would ask that you explain how the Department can get the most
    out of training opportunities while ensuring maintenance and
    safety gaps are fixed.
        Finally, Ms. Berger, you have been nominated to be
    Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations, and
    Environment. In addition to your current work at Microsoft, I
    would not your prior experience in this subject area as the
    Deputy Chief of Staff for the Department of the Navy and as a
    policy advisor at the EPA during the Obama administration. You
    will be responsible for managing the Navy's physical footprint.
    Within that, you will need to address several issues that have
    come to this Committee's attention, including the replacement
    of the existing AF3 firefighting foam and the reformation of
    the Military Housing Privatization Initiative, which has yet to
    be implemented with respect to various components of the Tenant
    Bill of Rights.
        Additionally, in the last few years, the Navy has seemingly
    abandoned its pursuit of hybrid electric drives and certain
    classes of ships, despite documented fuel savings of roughly 37
    percent. I would ask that you address this issue as well as how
    you would approach restoring Navy labs, which continue to
    struggle to secure sufficient funding for demolition,
    modernization, and new construction of facilities.
        Thank you again to the nominees. We all look forward to
    your testimony.
        Now let me now recognize the ranking member, Senator
    Inhofe.

                  STATEMENT OF SENATOR JAMES M. INHOFE

        Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I echo your
    comments and thank our nominees for being here, for the time
    and effort that you have spent helping our nation, and this
    would be a great continuation.
        Our top military leaders have told us over and over again
    that we are probably likely in the most dangerous position we
    have been in. I believe we are. I believe we are. I quite often
    say I look back wistfully at the days of the Cold War. Things
    were predictable then. They are not predictable any longer now.
        That is why I continue to highlight the national defense
    roadmap to we have right here, and I want to make a request now
    of each one of you. I suspect you probably already read this,
    but do it again. That is why I am very much concerned with the
    budget that is recommended in here for our military is
    considerably more than the budget that the President is
    proposing at the present time. So our competitors are not
    letting up at all, and just last week General Milley told us,
    in this Committee, that combined, Russia and China budgets far
    exceed ours. This is something we have not been dealing with in
    the past.
        I would just elaborate one more time, like the chairman
    did. First of all, Dr. Ratner, Secretary Austin has praised
    your efforts for leading the China Task Force. You have great
    expertise in that area. Ms. Berger, you are charged with
    overseeing the Navy housing. Housing has been probably the most
    labor-intensive addressing this thing for the last 3 or 4
    years, so you have got your work cut out for you there. Ms.
    Krass, we would like to hear how you are going to advise the
    Secretary of Defense in addressing DOD's number one pacing
    challenge, which is China. Ms. Ortiz Jones, you will need to
    balance the readiness of your modernization of the Air Force
    while also handling the space obligations. Ms. Skelly, you are
    going to have to end up carrying out duties with an inadequate
    budget, so that is going to be a difficult thing. We want to
    hear how you are going to be able to do that, and we look
    forward to the testimony of each one of you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe. Now I
    will ask a series of questions which are required of all
    civilian nominees. Simply answer appropriately after the
    question.
        Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations
    governing conflicts of interest?
        Ms. Krass. Yes.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Yes.
        Dr. Ratner. Yes.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes.
        Ms. Berger. Yes.
        Chairman Reed. Have you assumed any duties or taken any
    actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the
    confirmation process?
        Ms. Krass. No.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. No.
        Dr. Ratner. No.
        Ms. Skelly. No.
        Ms. Berger. No.
        Chairman Reed. Exercising our legislative and oversight
    responsibility makes it important that this Committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress
    receive testimony, briefings, reports, records, and 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. Krass. Yes.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Yes.
        Dr. Ratner. Yes.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes.
        Ms. Berger. 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 1 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. Krass. Yes.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Yes.
        Dr. Ratner. Yes.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes.
        Ms. Berger. 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. Krass. Yes.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Yes.
        Dr. Ratner. Yes.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes.
        Ms. Berger. Yes.
        Chairman Reed. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses
    and briefers in response to congressional requests?
        Ms. Krass. Yes.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Yes.
        Dr. Ratner. Yes.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes.
        Ms. Berger. Yes.
        Chairman Reed. Will those witnesses and briefers be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
        Ms. Krass. Yes.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Yes.
        Dr. Ratner. Yes.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes.
        Ms. Berger. Yes.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you. I understand that Senator
    Duckworth is on Webex, and she is going to introduce Ms. Ortiz
    Jones, so I would recognize Senator Duckworth for her
    introduction, and then we will begin the testimony of the
    witness. We are still waiting for Senator Bennett for Ms.
    Krass.
        Senator Duckworth?
        Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize
    that I am not there in person. I am actually on campus at a
    mark-up in the Commerce Committee. That is not an indication of
    my enthusiasm for Ms. Ortiz Jones. I think she is fabulous.
        So thank you so much for the opportunity to introduce
    President Biden's nominee to serve as the next Under Secretary
    of the Air Force. Gina Ortiz Jones is a former Air Force
    captain and a veteran of the Iraq war. She is a first-
    generation Filipino American and a member of the LGBTQ
    [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer] community. But
    most of all, Gina is a dynamic leader who is dedicated to
    serving her country.
        I am here today to introduce Gina because I am confident in
    her ability to steer the Department of the Air Force through a
    time of significant change with agility, determination,
    inspiration, and steadfast commitment to mission
    accomplishment. It will not be an easy job. If she is
    confirmed, Gina will be tasked with organizing, training,
    equipping, and providing for the welfare of nearly 700,000
    active-duty Guard and reserve servicemembers, civilians, and
    their families worldwide, alongside the Secretary of the Air
    Force. She will have to do so during a time when the Department
    of the Air Force is rapidly modernizing to operate more
    effectively in the Indo-Pacific region and to lead in the space
    domain, while maintaining enduring strategic capabilities. All
    of these missions are vital to our national security. The Air
    Force needs leadership to help it navigate these challenges.
        Gina's experiences have helped shape her into the leader
    that she is today. The daughter of an immigrant single mom, she
    attended Boston University on an Air Force ROTC [Reserve
    Officers' Training Corps] scholarship, earning a bachelor's
    degree in East Asian studies and a master's degree in
    economics. She served on active duty in the Air Force as an
    intelligence officer, deploying to Iraq before returning to
    Texas to care for her mother during a time of illness.
        Gina's path to the Air Force mirrors that of many currently
    serving airmen. Her experience in Iraq has given her a personal
    understanding of the toll that deployments take on
    servicemembers and their families. Given that she was
    commissioned while the so-called ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell''
    policy was still in effect, Gina knows what it is like to see a
    military that is not welcoming to her, and yet still want to
    serve her Nation anyway. It is difficult to think of anyone
    better suited to lead the members of the Department of the Air
    Force with understanding and compassion.
        After leaving active duty, Gina continued her career as an
    analyst, both at U.S.-Africa Command and at the DIA, the
    Defense Intelligence Agency, where her portfolio included
    operations in Latin America. Gina also worked in the Office of
    the U.S. Trade Representative, and received another master's
    degree in global and international studies, as well as a
    master's of military arts and science from the U.S. Army School
    of Advanced Military Studies.
        With all that experience, it is safe to say that Gina
    understands the challenges and opportunities that we face
    globally, and know how our military fits into that picture.
        I would say just one more thing about Gina's
    qualifications. When she disagreed with how she saw the
    government being run, she did not just sit back and decide that
    it was someone else's problem. She left a promising career in
    the intelligence community, took a risk, and ran for office
    herself, because she believed in playing a part to help her
    community.
        Gina's desire to be part of the solution and willingness to
    play an active role in shaping the future of America speaks
    volumes about her commitment to her community and to her
    country. This long history of engaged public service gives me
    confidence that if confirmed to be Under Secretary of the Air
    Force, Gina Ortiz Jones would not just be a trailblazer and an
    inspiring figure, though she is both of those things, she will
    also be an experienced, level-headed, and agile service leader
    who is capable of helping to shape the Department of the Air
    Force that America needs.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Duckworth, and now let me
    first commend Senator Bennet for his exquisite timing, like
    clockwork, and ask him to introduce Ms. Krass.
        Senator Bennet. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
    thank you to you and the ranking member to allowing me to join
    you this morning and introduce Caroline Krass, President
    Biden's nominee to serve as the General Counsel of the
    Department of Defense. Caroline and I are long-time friends. We
    have known each other since law school, where she arrived as a
    Phi Beta Kappa from Stanford. I could barely keep up with her
    then, and it turns out she was just getting started, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Pick a job that would qualify someone to serve as General
    Counsel for the Department of Defense and there is a good
    chance Caroline Krass has done it. She has clerked at the U.S.
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. She worked as a lawyer
    for the Treasury Department and the State Department. She
    served as Special Counsel to the President for National
    Security, a Deputy Legal Advisor to the National Security
    Council, Acting Assistant Attorney General at the Office of
    Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice, and as a
    prosecutor.
        In 2014, the Senate confirmed her in an overwhelming
    bipartisan vote as General Counsel for the CIA, the first woman
    confirmed to that role. During her 3 years as the CIA's top
    legal advisor, Ms. Krass oversaw more than 150 attorneys,
    working on highly sensitive legal and policy issues, from
    operational matters to cybersecurity to privacy.
        Over more than two decades of public service, Ms. Krass
    earned accolades from across the political spectrum and
    received a number of awards for her work, including the
    Department of Justice's highest award for an attorney, and a
    medal from the Department of Defense for outstanding service.
        After leaving government, Ms. Krass built a distinguished
    career in the private sector, where she has led a global team
    of lawyers to navigate complex legal issues from privacy to
    innovation. Her colleagues in business have gone out of their
    way to praise her, quote, ``proven expertise'' and described
    her as an outstanding legal talent. I could not agree more.
        Across her career, Ms. Krass developed a reputation for a
    brilliant legal mind, her tireless work ethic, and unfailing
    integrity. I observed these qualities when I first met her in
    law school many years ago, and they are exactly what she will
    need for this important and tough new role.
        As my colleagues on this Committee appreciate the
    intersection of national security and the law has no shortage
    of difficult, weighty questions, many with the gravest of
    consequences, I trust Caroline to make the right call. She has
    the experience, the character, and the judgment. She is a true
    public servant in the truest sense of both of those words, and
    she believes as I do that America's national security goes hand
    in hand with our commitment to American values, including
    privacy, respect for human rights, and the rule of law.
        Ms. Krass has my complete and enthusiastic support, and I
    urge the committee to advance her nomination with another
    overwhelming bipartisan vote.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Bennet, and let me remind
    the witnesses your written statements are part of the record. I
    will recognize Ms. Krass and then we will go down in order.
        Ms. Krass, your statement, please.

    STATEMENT OF HON. CAROLINE KRASS, TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE
                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

        Ms. Krass. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Inhofe, and
    distinguished Members of the Committee, and thank you very much
    to Senator Bennet for the kind introduction. It is an honor to
    appear before you today as the President's nominee to be the
    General Counsel of the Department of Defense. I am deeply
    grateful to both President Biden and Secretary Austin for their
    trust and confidence in me, and to the Committee for
    considering my nomination.
        I would not be here today without the love and respect of
    my husband, William, who has been by my side for more than 30
    years, and my daughter, Emma, and son, James. I am proud to be
    able to introduce you to William and to James.
        I want to thank each of you on the Committee and your staff
    members for the time you have devoted to the confirmation
    process. I am inspired by the bipartisan nature of this
    Committee, which is consistent with my own experience of
    serving for over 23 years as an Executive branch lawyer in
    administrations of both parties. I am eager to return to
    government service and to continue to foster the critically
    important and cooperative relationship between this Committee
    and the Department of Defense. I strongly believe that it is
    the General Counsel's duty to ensure that the Armed Services
    Committees are kept properly 0 informed to further their own
    oversight responsibilities.
        If confirmed, I believe that my prior experience will serve
    me well in providing sound and clear legal advice to Secretary
    Austin and the Department's leadership team. As General Counsel
    of the CIA, my responsibilities included ensuring compliance
    with all applicable law. I also spent over a decade at the
    Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice, where I
    had the opportunity to provide legal advice on a wide range of
    difficult legal issues to many government agencies, including
    the Department of Defense.
        Over the course of my career, including two tours at the
    National Security Council, I have developed productive and
    collegial relationships with lawyers throughout the national
    security community, including among the career civil service.
    Those relationships will heighten my effectiveness at assisting
    the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces, together with the
    civilian DOD personnel, in protecting our nation's security.
        Finally, I have been fortunate to work with many of the
    lawyers in the Department's Office of General Counsel and
    Chairman's Legal, and I have been impressed by their dedication
    to the rule of law. It would be a privilege to lead the office,
    building not only on the leadership experience I gained as CIA
    General Counsel and at OLC, but 1 also my more recent
    experience leading a global team as an in-house General Counsel
    in the private sector.
        Thank you again for your consideration, and I look forward
    to answering your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Caroline Diane Krass
    follows:]

                 Prepared Statement by Ms. Caroline Diane Krass

        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Inhofe, and distinguished
    Members of the Committee. And thank you to Senator Bennet for
    your kind introduction. It is an honor to appear before you
    today as the President's nominee to be the General Counsel of
    the Department of Defense. I am deeply grateful to both
    President Biden and to Secretary Austin for their trust and
    confidence in me, and to the Committee for considering my
    nomination.
        I would not be here today without the love and support of
    my husband, William, who has been at my side for more than
    thirty years, and my daughter Emma and son James. I am proud to
    be able to introduce you this morning to William and James.
        I want to thank each of you on the Committee and your staff
    members for the time you have devoted to the confirmation
    process. I am inspired by the bipartisan nature of this
    Committee, which is consistent with my own experience of
    serving for over twenty-three years as an executive branch
    lawyer in administrations of both parties. I am eager to return
    to government service and to continue to foster the critically
    important and cooperative relationship between this Committee
    and the Department of Defense. I strongly believe that it is
    the General Counsel's duty to ensure that the Armed Services
    Committees are kept properly informed to further their
    oversight responsibilities.
        If confirmed, I believe that my prior experience will serve
    me well in providing sound and clear legal advice to Secretary
    Austin and the Department's leadership team. As General Counsel
    of the CIA, my responsibilities included ensuring compliance
    with all applicable law. I also spent over a decade at the
    Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice, where I
    had the opportunity to provide legal advice on a wide range of
    difficult legal issues to many government agencies, including
    the Department of Defense. Over the course of my career,
    including two tours at the National Security Council, I have
    developed productive and collegial relationships with lawyers
    throughout the national security community, including among the
    career civil service. Those relationships will heighten my
    effectiveness at assisting the men and women of the U.S. Armed
    Forces, together with the civilian DOD personnel, in protecting
    our Nation's security. Finally, I have been fortunate to work
    with many of the lawyers in the Department's Office of General
    Counsel and Chairman's Legal, and I have been impressed by
    their dedication to the rule of law. It would be a privilege to
    lead the Office, building not only on the leadership experience
    I gained as CIA General Counsel and at OLC, but also my recent
    experience leading a global team as an in-house General Counsel
    in the private sector.
        Thank you again for your consideration, and I look forward
    to answering your questions.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. Ms. Ortiz Jones.

    STATEMENT OF GINA ORTIZ JONES, TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF THE AIR
                                 FORCE

        Ms. Ortiz Jones. 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 Under Secretary of the Air Force. I am grateful for
    your consideration of my nomination, and thank you to Senator
    Duckworth for the kind introduction.
        Today, I am joined by my mother Victorina Medenilla Ortiz,
    and my sister, Christi. My mother immigrated to the United
    States 43 years ago from the Philippines. She raised my sister
    and me by herself, and she reminded us every day of our
    responsibility to give back to a country that had given us so
    much. It is why I served, and why my sister, Christi, proudly
    serves in the U.S. Navy to this day. I am thankful for my
    mother and sister's unwavering love and support. I want to
    thank my partner, Ana, for her unconditional love, endless
    patience, and constant encouragement.
        Perfecto Medenilla Ortiz, my uncle, is not here today, but
    his example and service also helped me be here today. In 1967,
    he enlisted in the U.S. Navy from the Philippines and served as
    a steward, one of the few ratings open to Filipinos at the
    time. Undeterred, he signed up, because he too wanted his
    chance at the American dream.
        My own service started with a 4-year Air Force ROTC
    scholarship that took me from San Antonio, Texas, to Boston
    University. I was honored to wear our nation's cloth. However,
    similar to my uncle's limited career opportunities because of
    his ethnicity, my experience in the Air Force was hindered by
    the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' policy. Yet I, too, remained
    undeterred because of my desire to serve our country. That
    experience cemented my resolve to ensure anyone ready and able
    to serve can do so to their full potential, and accordingly,
    our country's fullest potential.
        If confirmed, that tenet will guide my service. That is
    what our airmen and guardians deserve, that is what the
    American people entrusting us with their sons and daughters
    should expect, and that is what the challenges and
    opportunities we face as a country require.
        The Air Force and Space Force are at the forefront of our
    nation's ability to meet those challenges and opportunities. If
    confirmed, I will work with Department of the Air Force leaders
    to ensure the total force is ready to deter, and if needed, win
    our nation's wars. Great power competition requires we fully
    harness the total force's talents and courageously invest in
    modernization efforts that best equip our men and women for the
    threats they will face.
        If confirmed, as the Department of the Air Force's Chief
    Management Officer, I will lead guided by our need to attain
    and maintain air and space dominance, and our collective
    responsibility to foster an environment where airmen and
    guardians can serve without the fear of sexual harassment,
    sexual assault, and other behaviors that threaten our
    readiness.
        If confirmed, I will focus on preparing the total force for
    emerging challenges, from the Arctic to cyberspace, while
    ensuring the Department's unique value proposition to the
    country, its contributions to the nuclear triad, are ironclad.
        Finally, great power competition requires we compete for
    the nation's top talent. To that end, if confirmed, I will work
    across the Department to eradicate extremist behaviors that are
    antithetical to one's solemn oath to the Constitution and
    degrade our ability to recruit and retain our nation's finest
    talent.
        I have been honored to serve our country in a number of
    ways, as an Air Force Intelligence Officer deployed to Iraq
    supporting close air support missions, to advising on military
    operations on three continents, to serving in the Executive
    Office of the President protecting American intellectual
    property and guarding against threats posed by foreign
    investments. I have seen a range of threats to our country's
    economic and national security. But, as importantly, I have
    seen the indispensability of American leadership. That
    leadership immeasurably rests on the service and sacrifices of
    those within the Department of the Air Force, from the airmen
    and guardians, to the civilians, to their loved ones who make
    their service possible. It would be an honor to help lead the
    total force.
        Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to
    your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Gina Ortiz Jones follows:]

                   Prepared Statement by Ms. Gina Ortiz Jones

        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
        Under Secretary of the Air Force. I am grateful for your
    consideration of my nomination, and thank you to Sen. Duckworth
    for the kind introduction.
        Today, I am joined by my mother Victorina Medenilla Ortiz.
    She immigrated to the United States 43 years ago from the
    Philippines. She raised my sister and me by herself, and she
    reminded us every day of our responsibility to give back to a
    country that had given us so much. It is why I served, and why
    my sister, Christi, proudly serves in the U.S. Navy to this
    day. I am thankful for my mother and sister's unwavering love
    and support. I want to thank my partner, Ana, for her
    unconditional love, endless patience, and constant
    encouragement.
        Perfecto Medenilla Ortiz, my uncle, is not here today, but
    his example and service also helped me be here today. In 1967,
    he enlisted in the U.S. Navy from the Philippines and served as
    a Steward, one of the few ratings open to Filipinos at the
    time. Undeterred, he signed-up, because he too wanted his shot
    at the American Dream. Before retiring, he earned the
    distinction of being the first Filipino to serve as a gas
    turbine electrician in the fleet.
        My own service started with a 4-year Air Force ROTC
    scholarship that took me from San Antonio, Texas to Boston
    University. I was honored to wear our Nation's cloth. However,
    similar to my uncle's limited career opportunities because of
    his ethnicity, my experience in the Air Force was hindered by
    the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' policy. Yet I, too, remained
    undeterred because of my desire to serve our country. That
    experience cemented my resolve to ensure anyone ready and able
    to serve can do so to their full potential, and accordingly,
    our country's fullest potential.
        If confirmed, that tenet will guide my service. That is
    what our airmen and guardians deserve. That is what the
    American people entrusting us with their sons and daughters
    should expect. And that is what the challenges and
    opportunities we face as a country require.
        The Air Force and Space Force are at the forefront of our
    Nation's ability to meet those challenges and opportunities. If
    confirmed, I will work with Department of the Air Force leaders
    to ensure the Total Force is ready to deter, and if needed, win
    our Nation's wars. Great power competition requires we fully
    harness the Total Force's talents and courageously invest in
    modernization efforts that best equip our men and women for the
    threats they will face.
        If confirmed, as the Department of the Air Force's Chief
    Management Officer, I will lead guided by our need to attain
    and maintain air and space dominance, and our collective
    responsibility to foster an environment where airmen and
    guardians can serve without the fear of sexual harassment,
    sexual assault, and other behaviors that threaten our
    readiness.
        If confirmed, I will focus on preparing the Total Force for
    emerging challenges, from the Arctic to cyberspace, while
    ensuring the Department's unique value proposition to the
    country--its contributions to the nuclear triad--are ironclad.
        Finally, great power competition requires we compete for
    the Nation's top talent. To that end, if confirmed, I will work
    across the Department to eradicate extremist behaviors that are
    antithetical to one's solemn oath to the Constitution and
    degrade our ability to recruit and retain our Nation's finest
    talent.
        I have been honored to serve our country in a number of
    ways--as an Air Force Intelligence Officer deployed to Iraq
    supporting close air support missions, to advising on military
    operations on three continents, to serving in the Executive
    Office of the President protecting American intellectual
    property and guarding against threats posed by foreign
    investments. I have seen a range of threats to our country's
    economic and national security. But, as importantly, I have
    seen the indispensability of American leadership.
        That leadership immeasurably rests on the service and
    sacrifices of those within the Department of the Air Force--
    from the airmen and guardians, to the civilians, to their loved
    ones who make their service possible. It would be an honor to
    help lead the Total Force. Thank you for your consideration,
    and I look forward to your questions.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. Now let me now
    recognize Dr. Ratner.

       STATEMENT OF DR. ELY RATNER, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
               DEFENSE FOR INDO-PACIFIC SECURITY AFFAIRS

        Dr. Ratner. Good morning. Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
    Inhofe, and distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an
    honor to appear before you this morning as President Biden's
    nominee for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific
    Affairs.
        I want to thank President Biden for nominating me for this
    position, and Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks for
    their confidence in me. I had the privilege of working for both
    Senator Biden and Vice President Biden, and I am grateful now
    for the opportunity to serve in the Biden-Harris
    administration. As a former Professional Staff Member on the
    Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is also a distinct
    privilege to return to the Senate today in this capacity.
        Most importantly, I want to thank my family, including my
    parents, Joseph and Esther, and my brother, Aaron, as well as
    my amazing wife, Jennifer, and our two boys, Ian and Finn, for
    their incredible love and support.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, my top priority will be
    positioning the Department of Defense to compete more
    effectively with China. 'I have spent the better part of the
    last two decades working on this challenge inside and outside
    of government, and strongly agree with the assessment in
    President Biden's Interim National Security Strategic Guidance
    that China is ``the only competitor capable of combining its
    economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to
    mount a sustained challenge to a stable and open international
    system.'' If confirmed, I would be honored to support Secretary
    Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks in their mission to
    prioritize China as the Department's number one pacing
    challenge.
        To that end, since January, I have served as the Director
    of the DOD China Task Force. Secretary Austin charged the Task
    Force with conducting an assessment of China-related activities
    and providing recommendations for the way forward. Based on
    those recommendations, the Secretary issued an internal
    directive on June 9, that initiated a series of efforts to
    better align the Department with the stated prioritization of
    China.
        During the course of the China Task Force, I consulted
    regularly with Congress and was encouraged by the bipartisan
    commitment to renewing American competitiveness and rising to
    the China challenge. I firmly believe that a strong bipartisan
    consensus on China is a strategic imperative for the United
    States. If confirmed, I would look forward to continued
    consultation and collaboration with members of this Committee,
    on both sides of the aisle.
        Even as we prepare to prevail in future conflicts, it 0 is
    critical to underscore, as Secretary Austin said recently, that
    ``the cornerstone of America's defense is still deterrence.''
    Military conflict with China is by no means inevitable. If
    confirmed, I would aim to support the development of new
    operational concepts, force posture, and emerging capabilities
    to prevent and deter such a conflict for future generations. In
    this regard, I appreciate the Committee's leadership on the
    Pacific Deterrence Initiative, and would look forward to
    working with you to continue implementing this important
    effort.
        The Indo-Pacific region rightly serves as the Department's
    priority theater. We must continue pursuing a free and open
    Indo-Pacific, while investing in our network of allies and
    partners throughout the region, including Taiwan. If confirmed,
    I would support the Administration's approach to North Korea,
    and affirm our alliance commitments to Japan and South Korea,
    including to maintain peace and stability on the Korean
    Peninsula.
        Our alliances with Australia, the Philippines, and
    Thailand, as well as our defense partnerships with India and
    Singapore, among many others, are also critically important. So
    too is our commitment to ASEAN and the region's multilateral
    institutions as we tackle the breadth of traditional and non-
    traditional security challenges in the Indo-Pacific, including
    extremism and climate change. 1 Meanwhile, we should continue
    pursuing defense relations with China to develop crisis
    communications and risk reduction mechanisms.
        If confirmed, I would also focus on the immediate objective
    of executing a safe, deliberate, and orderly retrograde from
    Afghanistan. We must also retain counterterrorism capabilities
    to disrupt any threats to the United States Homeland, support
    the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa program, and protect the
    progress achieved for Afghan women and girls. If confirmed, I
    would work with this Committee to advance our shared goals for
    the future of Afghanistan and the region.
        I want to conclude by thanking the members of this
    Committee for your bipartisan support for our servicemembers,
    their families, the civilian workforce, and our national
    defense. Thank you for considering my nomination and I look
    forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Ely Ratner follows:]

                      Prepared Statement by Dr. Ely Ratner

        Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and distinguished
    members of the Committee, it is an honor to appear before you
    this morning as President Biden's nominee for Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs.
        I want to thank President Biden for nominating me for this
    position, and Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks for
    their confidence in me. I had the privilege of working for both
    Senator Biden and Vice President Biden, and am grateful now for
    the opportunity to serve in the Biden-Harris Administration. As
    a former Professional Staff Member on the Senate Foreign
    Relations Committee, it is also a distinct privilege to return
    to the Senate today in this capacity.
        Most importantly, I want to thank my family, including my
    parents, Joseph and Esther, and my brother Aaron, as well as my
    amazing wife Jennifer and our two boys, Ian and Finn, for their
    incredible love and support.
        If confirmed, my top priority will be positioning the
    Department to compete more effectively with China. I have spent
    the better part of the last two decades working on this
    challenge inside and outside of government, and strongly agree
    with the assessment in President Biden's Interim National
    Security Strategic Guidance that China is ``the only competitor
    capable of combining its economic, diplomatic, military, and
    technological power to mount a sustained challenge to a stable
    and open international system.'' If confirmed, I would be
    honored to support Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks
    in their mission to prioritize China as the Department's number
    one pacing challenge.
        To that end, since January, I have served as the Director
    of the DOD China Task Force. Secretary Austin charged the Task
    Force with conducting an assessment of China-related activities
    at the Department and providing recommendations for the way
    forward. Based on those recommendations, the Secretary issued
    an internal directive on June 9 that initiated a series of
    efforts to better align the Department with the stated
    prioritization of China.
        During the course of the China Task Force, I consulted
    regularly with Congress and was encouraged by the bipartisan
    commitment to renewing American competitiveness and rising to
    the China challenge. I firmly believe that a strong bipartisan
    consensus on China is a strategic imperative for the United
    States. If confirmed, I would look forward to continued
    consultation and collaboration with members of this Committee.
        Even as we prepare to prevail in future conflicts, it is
    critical to underscore, as Secretary Austin said recently, that
    ``the cornerstone of America's defense is still deterrence.''
    Military conflict with China is by no means inevitable. If
    confirmed, I would aim to support the development of new
    operational concepts, force posture, and emerging capabilities
    to prevent and deter such a conflict for future generations. In
    this regard, I appreciate the Committee's leadership on the
    Pacific Deterrence Initiative and would look forward to working
    with you to continue implementing this important initiative.
        The Indo-Pacific region rightly serves as the Department's
    priority theater. We must continue pursuing a free and open
    Indo-Pacific, while investing in our network of allies and
    partners throughout the region, including Taiwan. If confirmed,
    I would support the Administration's approach to North Korea,
    and affirm our alliance commitments to Japan and the Republic
    of Korea, including to maintain peace and stability on the
    Korean Peninsula.
        Our alliances with Australia, the Philippines, and
    Thailand, as well as our defense partnerships with India and
    Singapore, among others, are also critically important. So too
    is our commitment to ASEAN and the region's multilateral
    institutions as we tackle the breadth of traditional and non-
    traditional security challenges in the Indo-Pacific, including
    extremism and climate change. Meanwhile, we should continue
    pursuing defense relations with China to develop crisis
    communications and risk reduction mechanisms.
        If confirmed, I would also focus on the immediate objective
    of executing a safe, deliberate, and orderly retrograde from
    Afghanistan. We must also retain counterterrorism capabilities
    to disrupt any threats to the United States Homeland, support
    the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa program, and protect the
    progress achieved for Afghan women and girls. If confirmed, I
    would work with this Committee to advance our shared goals for
    the future of Afghanistan and the region.
        I want to conclude by thanking the members of this
    Committee for your bipartisan support for our servicemembers,
    their families, the civilian workforce, and our national
    defense. Thank you for considering my nomination and I look
    forward to your questions.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you. Ms. Skelly, please.

    STATEMENT OF SHAWN SKELLY, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
                             FOR READINESS

        Ms. Skelly. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
    Inhofe, and Members of the Committee. It is an honor to appear
    before you today as the President's nominee for the position of
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness.
        I am here today through the love and support of more people
    than I could adequately account for--family, friends, mentors,
    and former colleagues--but above all I must thank my own
    family, Beth and Michael.
        The Department of Defense has been central to my
    professional life, starting at 17, when I received a Navy ROTC
    scholarship and the opportunity to pursue my young dreams of
    flying off of aircraft carriers, which I was so fortunate to be
    able to do. My understanding of service was first instilled by
    my father, a proud former enlisted Marine and New York City
    police officer, and it has only deepened in the nearly four
    decades since I first swore an oath to support and defend the
    Constitution. If confirmed, I would be honored to bring my
    career's experience of service, dedication to mission, and
    steadfast belief in the incredible capabilities of our
    uniformed servicemembers and civil servants who defend our
    Nation to my performance of the responsibilities of the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness.
        I am simultaneously humbled and inspired by the role that
    the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness plays in
    supporting the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Personnel and Readiness, shaping the strategic
    decision making of the Department through the continual
    assessment of its ability to meet the requirements articulated
    by the President and the Secretary in both the present day and
    the future, and helping to inform critical resourcing
    decisions. As a retired Naval Flight Officer, the importance of
    the Department's safety and Professional Military Education
    programs and the manner in which they support readiness of the
    total force are deeply ingrained in me, and if confirmed, I
    will ensure they receive the priority and focus they deserve.
        Again, I am honored to be here before you and I look
    forward to your questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Shawn Skelly follows:]

                     Prepared Statement by Ms. Shawn Skelly

        Good (morning/afternoon), Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
    Inhofe, and members of the Committee. It is an honor to appear
    before you today as the President's nominee for the position of
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness.
        I'm here today through the love and support of more people
    than I could adequately account for; family, friends, mentors,
    and former colleagues, but above all I must thank my own
    family, Beth and Michael.
        The Department of Defense has been central to my
    professional life, starting at 17 when I received a Navy ROTC
    scholarship and the opportunity to pursue my young dreams of
    flying off of aircraft carriers, which I was so fortunate to be
    able to do. My understanding of service was first instilled by
    my father, a proud former enlisted Marine and New York City
    police officer and it has only deepened in the nearly four
    decades since I first swore an oath to support and defend the
    Constitution. If I am honored with confirmation as the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness, I would rely on
    my career's experience of service, dedication to mission, and
    steadfast belief in the incredible capabilities of our
    uniformed servicemembers and civil servants who defend our
    Nation. If confirmed, I would be honored to bring my career's
    experience of service, dedication to mission, and steadfast
    belief in the incredible capabilities of our uniformed
    servicemembers and civil servants who defend our Nation to my
    performance of the responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary
    of Defense for Readiness.
        I am simultaneously humbled and inspired by the role that
    the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness plays in
    supporting the Secretary of Defense and Under Secretary of
    Defense for Personnel and Readiness, shaping the strategic
    decisionmaking of the Department through the continual
    assessment of its ability to meet the requirements articulated
    by the President and the Secretary in both the present day and
    the future, and helping to inform critical resourcing
    decisions. As a retired Naval Flight Officer, the importance of
    the Department's safety and Professional Military Education
    programs and the manner in which they support readiness of the
    Total Force are deeply ingrained in me, and if confirmed, I
    will ensure they receive the priority and focus they deserve.
        Again, I am honored to be here before you and I look
    forward to your questions. Thank you.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Ms. Skelly. Ms. Berger, please.

    STATEMENT OF MEREDITH BERGER, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE
            NAVY FOR ENERGY, INSTALLATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENT

        Ms. Berger. Thank you. Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
    Inhofe, and distinguished Members of the Committee, it is my
    honor to be before you today to be considered for the role of
    Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations, and
    Environment. I am humbled by the confidence President Biden,
    Vice President Harris, Secretary Austin, and Deputy Secretary
    Hicks have placed in me through this nomination, and I am
    grateful to my family, friends, and colleagues. They have shown
    me kindness, they have challenged my thinking, and they have
    given me opportunities to advance and contribute first and
    foremost in public service, and importantly in the private
    sector and civil society.
        I am honored to be considered for this position. I
    recognize the urgency and the dynamic nature of the critical
    responsibilities that fall under this office, and I am driven
    by the mission of supporting the great women and men who are
    the marines, sailors, civilians, and their families. They are
    the Department of the Navy, and they do the brave work of
    defending this nation.
        I grew up in Florida. I understood well and early the
    significance of the environment and our resources. They support
    how we live and where we operate. There is an interdependence
    there; we are part of an ecosystem.
        That became very clear to me working for the State of
    Florida when the Deepwater Horizon oil spill occurred in 2010.
    The Department of the Navy had the lead on the Federal
    response, and it was the five Gulf States that felt the
    impacts. This disaster caused us to think hard about the
    environmental, economic, national security, and safety
    implications of our energy choices. We realized that singular
    reliance on certain resources and practices can be a
    vulnerability.
        A decade later, the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack
    reinforces these considerations and heightens the urgency of
    information, cyber, and operational security.
        Our energy resources and our environment are critical
    infrastructure for our national security. These things shape
    where and how the Navy and Marine Corps live, train, and
    operate. These things are critical to our military readiness.
        We face threats, both natural and manmade, a competitive
    energy market, and a changing climate that impacts our
    installations and stresses our operational readiness. It is
    imperative that we act as cognizant operators in this
    ecosystem. We must focus on our resilience.
        If confirmed, I am eager to bring my experience across
    sectors, curiosity, collaborative nature, and perspective to
    the job, and I will work hard every day to ensure that we
    continue to have the greatest Navy and Marine Corps the world
    has ever known.
        Thank you for your time and consideration today, and I look
    forward to the conversation.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Meredith Berger follows:]

                   Prepared Statement by Ms. Meredith Berger

        Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and Distinguished
    Members of the Committee, it is my honor to be before you today
    to be considered for the role of Assistant Secretary of the
    Navy for Energy, Installations, and Environment
        I am humbled by the confidence President Biden, Vice
    President Harris, Secretary Austin, and Deputy Secretary Hicks
    have placed in me through this nomination.
        I am grateful to my family, friends, and colleagues. They
    have shown me kindness, challenged my thinking, and given me
    opportunities to advance and contribute first and foremost in
    public service, and importantly in the private sector and civil
    society.
        I am honored to be considered for this position. I
    recognize the urgency and the dynamic nature of the critical
    responsibilities that fall under this office.
        And I am driven by the mission of supporting the great
    women and men who are the marines, sailors, civilians, and
    families that are the Department of the Navy and who do the
    brave work of defending our Nation.
        I grew up in Florida.
        I understood well and early the significance of the
    environment and our resources. They support how we live and
    where we operate. There is an interdependence there; we are
    part of an ecosystem.
        That became very clear to me working for the State of
    Florida when the Deepwater Horizon oil spill occurred in 2010.
        The Department of the Navy had the lead on the Federal
    response; the five Gulf States felt the impacts.
        This disaster caused us to think hard about the
    environmental, economic, national security, and safety
    implications of our energy choices.
        We realized that singular reliance on certain resources and
    practices can be a vulnerability.
        A decade later, the Colonial pipeline ransomware attack
    reinforces these considerations and heightens the urgency of
    information, cyber, and operational security.
        Our energy resources and our environment are critical
    infrastructure for our national security--these things shape
    where and how the Navy and Marine Corps live, train, and
    operate. These things are critical to military readiness.
        We face threats--both natural and manmade, a competitive
    energy market, and a changing climate that impacts
    installations and stresses operational readiness. It is
    imperative that we are cognizant operators in this ecosystem.
    We must focus on our resilience.
        If confirmed, I am eager to bring my experience across
    sectors, curiosity, collaborative nature, and perspective to
    the job. And I will work hard to ensure that we continue to
    have the best Navy and Marine Corps the world has ever known.
        Thank you for your time and consideration today, and I look
    forward to the conversation.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Ms. Berger. Senator
    Inhofe must attend a critical meeting in Environmental and
    Public Works Committee, and as such I asked him to go first,
    and then I will resume.
        Senator Inhofe. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and I
    will return as soon as that mission is over.
        Dr. Ratner, Admiral Davidson, the previous Commander of
    INDOPACOM, testified, quote, ``The greatest danger the United
    States and our allies face in the region is the erosion of
    conventional deterrence of China.'' The current commander,
    Aquilino, also agreed with that. Do you agree with that?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Inhofe. Is there anything that comes to your mind
    that you want to do to correct that problem?
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, I think it is imperative that the
    Department move with greater focus and urgency to bolster
    deterrence in the Western Pacific.
        Senator Inhofe. Very good. Now, Ms. Berger, I want to
    devote most of the time to you, because of a unique situation
    that is taking place right now. Last week, the Department of
    Justice announced that two former Balfour Beatty employees pled
    guilty to major fraud against the United States and conspiracy
    to commit wire fraud. According to the latest charging
    documents, which have also been reported in the press, the
    Balfour Beatty Regional Vice 0 President is also involved. So
    at this time we do not know how far up this problem, this
    conspiracy, actually goes.
        This Committee led the charge with the reforms back in
    fiscal year 2020 NDAA. We were busy, all of us, busy during
    that time, and concerned about it. Quite frankly, confession is
    good for the soul, and I remember when I first heard about
    this. The first finding of inadequate housing and the problems
    that we had started with Tinker Air Force Base, and so I
    assumed it was problem unique to my state of Oklahoma, only to
    find this was widespread and it was underway. But this is
    something that is actually very, very significant, and affects
    thousands, not hundreds but thousands, of our people that are
    in inadequate housing. We jumped on it right away, had several
    meetings, but it is still ongoing.
        So, Ms. Berger, given the recent criminal charges showing
    that not all privatization housing companies have the best of
    interest in our servicemembers and their families, with that in
    mind how do you intend for this not to happen again under your
    watch, not only for privatized housing but for barracks and
    dorms as well. Keeping in mind we have a lot of good,
    privatized housing successes that are out there. We know who
    they are and we know where the deficiencies are. So what would
    be your first thought on that issue?
        Are you there?
        Ms. Berger. Yes. I did not hit my microphone to start.
        Senator Inhofe. Oh.
        Ms. Berger. Senator Inhofe, thank you for the attention
    that you have put towards our military families and their
    housing. First, our people are our greatest asset and we are
    entrusting our people to these housing structure through the
    agreements that we have with the privatized housing companies.
    In addition, those people's greatest assets are their families.
    So this is a big amount of trust that we are putting in the
    housing structures that we have.
        As you have noted, there are some good examples where this
    has been successful, but more importantly and more urgently,
    there are instances where this has failed, and it has failed
    our military members.
        First I would wait to see, and continue to see the judicial
    process play out and see what final determinations are made
    there, but additionally use the surveys, the housing on
    installation advisors and advocates who are there, and then
    also take the opportunity, if confirmed, myself, to be able to
    go meet with families, meet face-to-face with the housing
    company representatives, and ensure that we are holding them to
    a higher standard. If confirmed, I need to make sure that we
    are doing the best that we can for our military families, and
    that would be what I would do first and foremost.
        Senator Inhofe. Okay. That is very good. I cannot remember
    any particular issue that has drawn more attention or had more
    hearing than we have had on that. We made great progress and
    great testimonials, and I would suggest that before you start
    in that you get the transcripts of those meetings. In fact, I
    am going to ask that you will do that before taking duty. Can
    you handle that one?
        Ms. Berger. Yes, Senator. I would be very glad to review
    all of those.
        Senator Inhofe. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
    your help.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Inhofe. Dr. Ratner, I
    know you have concentrated over the last several weeks and
    months intensively on China, but my sense is the first crisis
    you will face is Afghanistan. Our forces will be out of there
    probably within less than 30 days. That will contribute to, I
    think, further aggression by the Taliban. So I know these are
    preliminary ideas that you are forming, but how will we be able
    to continue to support the Afghan Security Forces and
    government? How do we literally deliver the money and the
    resources they need and make sure that it is spent for its
    purpose?
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, thank you. It is an incredibly
    important issue. Obviously, if confirmed, I am going to support
    the President's agenda of pursuing a deliberate, safe, and
    orderly retrograde. But to your question about what happens
    after American forces are gone, it is just going to be
    incredibly important that we continue to support the Afghan
    Security Forces there, and I understand that, if confirmed, my
    office would be in charge of overseeing the delivery of some of
    that assistance, and would ensure that it would do so with
    great scrutiny, and maintain transparency with Congress in that
    regard.
        Moreover, as I understand it, the Administration is
    underway trying to develop, or working to develop an over-the-
    horizon counterterrorism capability, and if confirmed, would
    support those efforts as much as I could.
        Chairman Reed. Again, I think we are in a period of time
    where the Taliban sees, tactically and strategically, the
    advantage of not engaging U.S. forces and allowing us to leave.
    I think that perspective shifts dramatically after we leave,
    and their efforts against the Afghan government will increase.
    So again, we have to do, collectively, not just Executive but
    also Congress, we have to ensure we have SIV visas for those
    who served with us, and I would urge you to keep us informed,
    because this could be an hour-to-hour situation as we go
    forward. But thank you for your commitment to transparency and
    to keeping a close watch on this issue.
        Ms. Krass, we understand that the legal opinions that the
    General Counsel issues are usually confidential and privileged,
    but you committed, when you assumed the responsibilities as the
    CIA General Counsel, that you would share with us the legal
    framework, not the specific opinions but the legal framework.
    Will you make the same commitment with respect to Department of
    Defense?
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator, I will.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. It is very important
    for us to understand what the legal authority is, respecting
    the confidentiality of specific opinions, so thank you for
    that.
        Also, as you indicated in your testimony and that we have
    heard from Secretary Austin personally, he has ordered a review
    of extremist activity within the Department of Defense. We all,
    I think, understand how that contradicts the constitutional
    oath that servicemembers take. But how do you balance also the
    First Amendment rights of individual service men and women with
    respect to some of their views and some of their activity?
    Would you give us an idea of how we would approach that?
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator. If confirmed, I would absolutely
    look at any proposals. I know that Secretary Austin has set up
    the Countering Extremism Working Group, and one of the
    questions that they are looking at is how to refine the
    definition of extremism, which is an issue that needs to make
    sure that it is ideologically neutral and that First Amendment
    rights are protected, as well as good order and discipline
    being furthered, and so were I to be confirmed, I would study
    those issues and provide my best advice to the Secretary.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones, one of the great issues we are facing now
    in the Air Force, particularly facing it, is modernization
    versus balancing current requirements. Do you have a sense of
    how you would make that judgment or what factors you would
    consider?
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Senator, having worked in intelligence
    community for a long time we always have to understand the
    nature of the threat, and that goes to our understanding of our
    challenger's intent and capabilities. That gives us the best
    understanding of the threat that we will face. Meeting and
    addressing those threats then would allow us to assess where
    our capabilities allow us to best do so. Across time, however,
    understanding we have got current requirements but also need
    the best posture for what we are likely to face, especially
    against a tier one competitor.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. I think the emphasis on
    evaluating threats first is a very principled and thoughtful
    way to begin. That is usually the best approach.
        Thank you all. Now let me now recognize Senator Rounds.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First let me begin
    by saying thank you to all of you for your continued service to
    our country.
        Ms. Krass, most recently there has been a number of cyber
    incursions into some of our more critical infrastructure. There
    has been an attempt made to improve our cyber capabilities over
    a period of years. I know that in 2019, the National Defense
    Authorization Act, we specifically changed offensive cyber
    operations so that they would be considered as traditional
    military activity.
        If we do not control the cyber domain, just as if we do not
    control the domain or space or air, land, or sea, then our
    other domains are clearly at risk. Can you share with me your
    thoughts as to the importance of continuing to be able to allow
    our cyber warriors the ability to provide offensive
    capabilities in response to these cyberattacks that our
    critical infrastructure finds itself faced with?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I completely agree with you about the
    challenge that cyber presents to us, as a country and our
    critical infrastructure, and it is very important that the
    Department of Defense has the appropriate authorities to act.
    As you referred to, I read the clarifications that have been
    in, I think, two NDAAs, about what is traditional military
    activity, thereby meaning that as exempt from the definition of
    a covert action. Were I to be confirmed, I would want to study
    the issue further to see if any additional authorities are
    needed, but my understanding is that that was a very good way
    forward for the Department of Defense.
        Senator Rounds. Well, let me just ask, just briefly. Have
    you been able to review yet--and I am not sure that you have--
    with regard to the presidential directives? At one point, under
    a previous Administration, there was a Presidential Policy
    Directive 20, which was replaced by National Security Policy
    Memorandum 13. Are you familiar with the changes that were
    made, recognizing that this is an unclassified discussion?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I have not. In my current role outside
    of the government I have not had a chance to see that
    directive, but were I to be confirmed I would certainly want to
    take a look at it.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you. I think it is very important to
    note that the coordination, but still with a clear path forward
    to being able to provide immediate offensive cyber capabilities
    to our warfighting teams is critical, and most certainly you
    will have a role to play in making certain that they stay
    within the guidelines but are not having their hands tied.
        Ms. Krass. Yes. Senator, I agree. That would definitely be
    part of my role, were I to be confirmed.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you. Ms. Jones, I appreciated the
    opportunity to visit with you by phone, I believe last week. I
    am just curious. Most recently there has been not only a notice
    that was in the Air Force, we have now got a pilot shortage
    once again. Part of it is because during COVID it was difficult
    to get training on the schedule, but second of all because the
    airlines are beginning to hire again, and most certainly they
    will take a fair number from the Air Force's numbers. But in
    addition to that there has been some recent reports in the
    press about the challenges of actually getting the number of
    hours for these pilots that need the training.
        It is disconcerting that there appears to be a shortage of
    capable aircraft and training capabilities to actually bring in
    and appropriately train and maintain the capabilities of these
    Air Force pilots. I am not sure whether or not you have availed
    yourself to those most recent press reports, but I most
    certainly would like to hear your thoughts about the training
    regimen and whether or not you believe we do have some
    challenges with regard to maintaining a proper balance.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Senator, thank you for the question and
    thank you for your emphasis on this issue. If confirmed, this
    would be a top priority of mine. The Air Force has to maintain
    its readiness, and that requires a sufficient number of highly
    qualified pilots to execute those missions.
        Certainly, to your point, in terms of ensuring that there
    are adequate number of training hours, this is both a safety
    issue as well as a qualification issue, and again I share your
    concern. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing the status of the
    current Pilot Retention Working Group that I understand is
    reviewing initiatives to address ways in which we might be able
    to retain more of these pilots, reviewing the status of those
    initiatives, what is working well, and where we might be able
    to improve upon that. Separately, I also commit to you, if
    confirmed, reviewing the status of the training program and
    where we also may be able to make some improvements.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you. My time has expired. Thank you,
    Mr. Chairman.
        Senator King. [Presiding.] On behalf of the chairman,
    Senator Hirono.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you. A warm aloha to all of the 0
    nominees.
        I ask the following two initial questions of every nominee
    in any of the committee on which I sit, so I will ask all of
    you en masse.
        Since you became a legal adult, have any of you ever made
    unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or
    physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
        Ms. Krass. No.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. No.
        Dr. Ratner. No.
        Ms. Skelly. No.
        Ms. Berger. No.
        Senator Hirono. Have any of you ever faced discipline or
    entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
        Ms. Krass. No.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. No.
        Dr. Ratner. No.
        Ms. Skelly. No.
        Ms. Berger. No.
        Senator Hirono. For Ms. Krass, in April, Secretary Austin
    directed several immediate actions to counter extremism in the
    ranks. One tasked General Counsel's Office with reviewing and
    updating the definition of prohibited extremist activities
    among uniformed personnel. I believe 1 there is an
    acknowledgement that servicemembers are targeted for
    recruitment by extremist organizations, and so what constitutes
    prohibited extremist activities is an important aspect of what
    Secretary Austin has requested.
        So if confirmed, how would you approach this issue, given
    the sensitive First Amendment freedom of association issues
    involved and the need to maintain good order and discipline in
    the ranks?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I agree with Secretary Austin's focus
    on the extremism threat and his standing up of the working
    group. Were I to be confirmed, I would study carefully any
    proposals regarding a change to the definition of extremism to
    make sure that First Amendment rights are protect at the same
    time as we safeguard our Nation and instill good order and
    discipline.
        Senator Hirono. I am going to want to keep in touch with
    you as you proceed, because right now the current definition
    does not prohibit membership in extremist organizations. It is
    going to be a challenging thing for you to proceed, I would
    say.
        For Dr. Ratner, you obviously know a lot about what needs
    to happen in the Indo-Pacific area, and I am very glad that you
    mentioned the concerns we have with regard to Afghanistan. I
    have a particular concern, shared by Senators Collins and--
    there is another member, sorry. I should know this--Senator
    Shaheen, with regard to what our responsibilities should be
    regarding the women and girls in Afghanistan. We did send a
    letter asking the President to appoint an ambassador-at-large
    for global women's issue to be the point person for the
    Administration on what we can do to support the Afghan women
    and girls. So I hope this is an area that you will be also
    focused on.
        Then as you talked about the Indo-Pacific AOR, one area
    that you did not note in your remarks, but I am sure you are
    very familiar with, the Compacts of Free Association with
    Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall islands, and these are the
    FAS compacts. How would you prioritize our partnerships with
    these island nations to support our overall strategy in the
    Indo-Pacific? I am particularly interested in how we can focus
    on the lines of effort identified in retired Admiral Davidson's
    Pacific Deterrence Initiative, which you noted in your remarks,
    with regard to our FAS compacts.
        Dr. Ratner. Senator Hirono, thank you. Those are two really
    important questions. First of all, on the question of women and
    girls in Afghanistan, thank you for your leadership and for
    this Committee's leadership on that issue. Of course, I share
    those concerns. It is a top priority for the Biden
    administration, and if confirmed, will work closely with my
    interagency partners to ensure we can try to protect the gains
    that have been made. Of course, even as the military presence
    in Afghanistan is being wound down, the United States will
    continue supporting economic, political, and humanitarian
    support for Afghanistan. So that support will continue, and if
    confirmed, will remain a priority of mine.
        On your question of the compacts states, again, very
    important issue. As I understand it, the Administration is in
    the process of renegotiation that compact. That is a State
    Department-led effort. From the perspective of the Defense
    Department I would support that effort, from an interagency
    capacity. With specific question from a DOD perspective and the
    Pacific Deterrence Initiative, my view is that those partners
    could play an important role in advancing the priorities of the
    Pacific Deterrence Initiative, including our forward presence
    in the region, our efforts to improve our logistics there,
    exercises in training and infrastructure as well. So I would
    commit to you, Senator, that if confirmed, and when we begin
    again working on the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, that I
    include consideration of the compact states.
        Senator Hirono. I would just like to note that I think that
    we owe a lot more, we can be doing a lot more to support these
    island nations, particularly with regard to their economy.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator King. Thank you, Senator. On behalf of the
    chairman, Senator Tuberville.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Chairman King. Thank you all
    for being here today.
        Ms. Krass, bid protests have gotten ugly. How they are
    supposed to work, all companies should have the right to
    question the process, but protests cause delays to national
    security and hurt the taxpayer. Example, the DOD cloud
    computing project, JEDI, the fight has gotten so ugly that
    Deputy Secretary Hicks threated to kill it altogether. What
    should we do to get contractors to trust the DOD process?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I think this is a critically important
    issue that the American public has trust and confidence in the
    fairness of the acquisition process, and were I to be
    confirmed, one of my duties as General Counsel would be to
    ensure that that process is fair, and I commit to you that I
    would do so, if I am confirmed.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you.
        Ms. Jones, secure and reliable access to space is
    critically important to our national security and economy.
    China is at a forefront and contesting our supremacy in space
    and targeting our commercial suppliers. What can the DOD and
    the Air Force do to further protect intellectual property of
    this country's companies that support our national security and
    efforts?
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Senator, thank you for the question.
    Previously I served as the intelligence community's Senior
    Advisor for Trade Enforcement, and the focus there was the
    protection of American intellectual property. So I certainly
    share your concern for the need to protect American
    intellectual property, specifically these highly specialized
    areas and certainly as it relates to space.
        Senator, I would like to, in order to adequately answer
    your question, review the current efforts underway to ensure I
    am fully aware of those and where there might be some
    opportunities to improve upon those, and if confirmed, I commit
    to doing so and reporting back to you in short order.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Thank you.
        Dr. Ratner, you led the DOD's China Task Force, and I have
    got two questions. Do you believe U.S. cyber networks are
    secure from our adversaries, and what can the DOD do to further
    protect small and medium-sized contractors from cyberattacks,
    because the big boys can take care of themselves.
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, thank you for your question. I do
    think China's aggressive cyber activities continue to be a
    problem and one that the United States and the Department of
    Defense should be taking seriously and doing more on. I think
    an important part of that is getting our house in order inside
    the Department, working across components on these issues to
    better protect and defend our technology and working with the
    private sector as well, absolutely.
        Senator Tuberville. Yes. What can the small guy do, though?
    I mean, people in Alabama, we have 800 defense contractors, and
    it is rat race to try to keep them from getting hacked. They do
    not have the money the big boys have. What can we do to help
    them?
        Dr. Ratner. Well, Senator, I think we can work more closely
    with these partners. I think to Senator Rounds' question, we
    ought to also consider the full suite of capabilities we have,
    including offensive capabilities, to try to shift Beijing's
    cost-benefit calculus about these activities.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator King. On behalf of the chairman, Senator King.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I do note that
    it must be a humbling moment to be demoted from King to
    chairman, albeit briefly.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator King. I will live with it. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Kaine. Ms. Skelly, I want to ask you a question. I
    am the chair of the Readiness Subcommittee of this Committee,
    and Senator Sullivan is my ranking member, and we have kind of
    gone back and forth in those roles. Readiness, in the Committee
    standpoint, might be a little bit different in how we define it
    than within the Pentagon, but in the Committee, readiness is
    installations and acquisition, but also the readiness metrics
    that we use to determine how ready we are to perform a fight or
    a mission tomorrow if we need to.
        We recently had a Readiness Subcommittee hearing that I
    found, through some testimony, and it was pretty troubling. The
    hearing was about acquisition programs, and I know there are
    all kinds of acquisition officials in the Pentagon, and it was
    successes and failures, sort of a greatest hits and a greatest
    misses and what we can learn from both.
        One of our witnesses was Dr. Raymond O'Toole, who is the
    Acting Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, and this
    was an open hearing. Here was a bit of testimony that he
    offered that were sort of frightening, both to Senator Sullivan
    and me.
        ``Unfortunately, some programs do not properly plan for
    cybersecurity assessments. More critically due to poor system
    hardening against dynamic cyber threats driven by lack of
    workforce cyber capacity, talent, and tools within the program
    offices, virtually none of the programs assessed in fiscal year
    2020 were survivable against relevant cyber threats.''
        Senator Sullivan looked at me when that testimony came out
    and said, ``I hope no adversaries are watching this hearing.''
    Well, it was an open hearing. Of course, adversaries were
    seeing it. It has made us wonder whether, in our development of
    readiness metrics--so we have the metrics about, you know, what
    percentage of platoons would be ready to fight tomorrow--in our
    development of readiness metrics, do we need to better
    incorporate assessments of cyber vulnerabilities.
        Should you be confirmed--and these issues tend to kind of
    get siloed into this acquisition office or that service
    secretary's office--but should you be confirmed, could you work
    with us to help make sure that there are appropriate readiness
    metrics that incorporate cyber vulnerability as a key component
    to measuring whether we are ready to fight tomorrow or not?
        Ms. Skelly. Senator, thank you for the question. Certainly.
    I note that, I believe it is a recent GAO report, has raised
    the issue of the Department's readiness recovery framework
    reporting, where it is predominantly service, and their
    recommendation has been, I think their recommendation accepted
    by the Department at one point, but that it be viewed through
    the lens of domains, cyber being one of them.
        Some of the previous conversation this morning regards
    around China. Our readiness for the future with China, as Dr.
    Ratner has worked on, that is about potentially an all-up
    fight, in all domains, simultaneously, at the high end. As has
    been our history, we are pretty ready for the last war we had,
    because that is the one we know when we put billions and
    trillions of dollars into. The past two decades have not had us
    significant challenged with regard to cyber operationally in
    our weapons systems in that way. So personally, with some
    experience in the defense acquisition system and in making that
    system responsive to emerging threat, it is not surprising that
    we are in that state. However, that state is insufficient to
    the future that we are charged by the President and the
    Secretary and the Congress to plan for. It is certainly an area
    that, if I were to be confirmed, is one that I want to get into
    as soon as possible as to how we change our appreciation of
    readiness for the future challenge.
        Senator Kaine. Great. Ms. Skelly, thank you for that. I
    look forward to working with you on that matter.
        Ms. Kress, just a last point, not really a question. But
    your office is a very important office, in tandem with others,
    Legal Advisor at State Department, Counsel's Office in the
    White House, over authority for military action, authorized use
    of military force, 0 declarations of war. I am a real stickler
    about Article II powers being as broad as they should be, but
    Article I powers also being very broad. I generally believe
    that we should not be at war as a nation without a vote of
    Congress unless the President is engaging in imminent defense
    against either an attack or an imminent attack. There are
    differences of opinion that go back to 1787 on how these
    clauses in the Constitution are interpreted.
        But I have often not been happy, under Administrations of
    both parties, with the rationale and the information and legal
    justification we get from executives when they initiate
    military action without coming to Congress. There is lawyer-
    client privilege, other documents that are protected, and I get
    that, but I would just like your commitment--and I actually am
    going to applaud the Biden administration for starters, because
    Senator Young and I have a bill to repeal the 1991 and 2002
    Iraq AUMFs that said Iraq is an enemy. Now that Iraq is a
    security partner we want to repeal those AUMFs. The Biden
    administration has issued up a statement supporting the repeat.
    We are going to have a vote in Senate Foreign Relations next
    week about it. It would be the first authorization for war that
    Congress has repealed in decades, maybe ever. So I do give the
    Biden team credit for being willing to do that.
        But I just would look forward to having good 1
    communication with you--certainly the Committee would
    appreciate that as well--over legal authorities for initiation
    of military action. I just thought I would put you on notice
    that I will probably be calling you a lot on that.
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I look forward to those conversations.
    Thank you very much.
        Senator Kaine. We have a big task ahead of us to try to
    revise the 2001 AUMF too in a way that would preserve the
    authorities of the United States to take military action
    against non-state terrorist groups that threaten us, and 20
    years in it is time to do that, and I look forward to working
    with you on that.
        Ms. Krass. Senator, thank you. I agree.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Senator King. Thank you, Senator. On behalf of the
    chairman, Senator Cotton.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you, and thank you all for your
    appearance.
        Ms. Krass, in your written remarks you stated that you
    support the Biden administration's efforts to repeal the
    Authorization for Use of Military Force. I think it was the
    current authorizations for military force, not just the 2002
    AUMF. So that includes the 2001 AUMF?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I believe my written remarks were about
    the 2002, but I do support President Biden's commitment to
    replacing the existing 2001 and 2002 AUMFs with a more narrow
    and specific framework. But we need to make sure that there is
    sufficient authority to continue to protect the nation.
        Senator Cotton. Under what legal authority is the United
    States currently detaining 40 terrorists at Guantanamo Bay?
        Ms. Krass. Under the 2001 AUMFs.
        Senator Cotton. If we repeal the 2001 and 2002 Use of Force
    resolutions, under what authority would we continue to detain
    those persons?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I think that that is a very important
    legal question that would need to be considered carefully as
    the Administration talks to Congress about an appropriate
    replacement authority.
        Senator Cotton. Can you commit to us today that any
    replacement resolution would give authority to continue
    detaining those very dangerous terrorists at Guantanamo Bay?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I commit to working with Congress to
    make sure that appropriate authorities remain with respect to
    those detainees.
        Senator Cotton. Can you commit to compliance with the
    requirements of Section 1034 of the 2016 NDAA, that his
    committee must be notified 30 days before transferring any
    detainee from Guantanamo Bay to the continental United States?
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator, I commit to complying with the
    law.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you. Ms. Krass, the military has long
    been perceived as one of the most diverse institutions in our
    society, one of the places in our society where you are most
    likely to get ahead, based strictly on your performance and
    your merits, not on where you come from or what you look like,
    or who you are. Do you believe that the color of someone's skin
    or what ethnicity they might identify as should play any role
    in what job they perform or what rank they wear on their
    shoulders?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I believe that diversity does make our
    forces the best in the world, and I do think that all decisions
    should be made on merit.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you. Ms. Krass, I have some concerns
    about what I saw in the late Obama era, as the only Republican
    who sits on both Armed Services and the Intelligence Committee,
    while you were the General Counsel of the CIA. Many of those
    concerns cannot be discussed in this open forum. I will simply
    say there was a tendency towards highly bureaucratic and highly
    technical distinctions between intelligence activities under
    title 50 and military activities under title 10. I found those
    distinctions often to be tiresome and disruptive of efforts to
    do what our government should be doing for our people, which is
    to identify bad guys around the world and capture them or kill
    them.
        Can you talk to me a little bit about your understanding of
    the distinction between title 10 and title 50, and give us some
    assurance that as the General Counsel of the Department of
    Defense you will not help recreate these very tedious
    bureaucratic distinctions between so-called title 10 activities
    and title 50 activities?
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator. The title 50 framework authorizes
    covert action, and one of the exceptions from what a covert
    action, and therefore conducted under title 50 is traditional
    military activity. I know that there were two clarifications, I
    think, in the 2019 and 2020 NDAAs that particular activities of
    the Department of Defense are traditional military activities.
    Were I to be confirmed I would certainly work to further that
    understanding amongst the interagency.
        Senator Cotton. I am glad to hear that. Again, we cannot
    talk about this at great length, and I think you know what I am
    talking about, though--highly complex, tedious distinctions
    that only added cumbersome bureaucratic roadblocks to
    protecting the country from some pretty bad guys around the
    world. I might want to speak to you in a classified setting,
    before the Committee vote, before the Senate votes on the
    floor, because I do think it was unnecessary in the late Obama
    era. I think many of these distinctions were done primarily so
    the Department of Defense could conduct certain operations and
    therefore President Obama and then Vice President Biden could
    speak about them publicly for political benefit. I hope that
    those kinds of distinctions will not be recreated, especially
    at a time when our troop presence in Afghanistan will be zero,
    and in Iraq it is very small, and therefore we might need to
    depend even more on our intelligence agencies to help protect
    the country from some very bad guys around the world.
        Thank you, Ms. Krass. Thank you all again for your
    appearance, and I will turn it back to the acting chairman, who
    also knows what I am talking about, and I hope agrees with me,
    as he always does.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator King. I try to whenever possible, Senator.
        Mr. Ratner, this country is facing an intense moral
    obligation right now, and it is also a national security
    imperative, and that is the evacuation and protection of those
    people in Afghanistan who have served with us over the last 20
    years as translator, guides, and other personnel. I hope you
    will commit to me to giving this question your highest level of
    attention and urgency. The last figures I saw were that it
    takes 900 days to process a special visa application, and we
    will be out of Afghanistan in 90 days. There is grave danger to
    these individuals. I would like your commitment to, as I say,
    the highest level of attention and urgency.
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, I share your view that we have a moral
    obligation to support those who have been working with us in
    Afghanistan, and I commit to you to make it a top priority of
    mine and work with you and this Committee on day one.
        Senator King. I want you to be irritating within the
    counsels of the Defense Department on this issue. Can you
    manage that?
        Dr. Ratner. I will commit to be irritating, Senator.
        Senator King. Thank you. Second question, we have not had
    much discussion about India, but I was encouraged to see that
    India was engaged in the talks with other allies in the region.
    Give me just a short precis of your thoughts about India's
    potential role in the security arrangements in Asia.
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, I think India is an essential partner
    for the United States in the 21st century. The Department of
    Defense has made great progress across Republican and
    Democratic administrations in deepening our defense relations
    with India. There are a number of foundational agreements that
    have been signed over the last several years that, if
    confirmed, I would work hard to implement. Of course, India is
    now part of the Quad framework with Australia and Japan and the
    United States, as a foundation of the strength of our
    democracies in the region.
        Senator King. I think India's role could be incredibly
    important in our ongoing competition with China, and I urge you
    to pursue that opportunity, which you have already indicated.
        Ms. Krass, you are about to be a lawyer with one client,
    and I have been in that situation. The danger is telling your
    client what they want to hear. Give me your commitment that you
    will provide your best legal advice to the Department of
    Defense and to the Secretary regardless of the policy
    proclivities of the Secretary or the President, that your
    advice will be clear and unvarnished and delivered with the
    rule of law paramount.
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator, I give you that commitment.
    Absolutely, that is the way that I have always conducted
    myself.
        Senator King. You understand that it is human nature. I am
    not accusing anyone of malevolence, but it is human nature to
    want to sort of shade the advice to what the boss wants to
    hear. You understand that that is of danger and will actively
    resist it.
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator, I will.
        Senator King. Ms. Berger, I have a more specific question.
    In December of 2020, a memorandum was issued that basically
    puts a moratorium on new lease or general services occupancy
    agreements for the use of land and facilities. The Portsmouth
    Naval Air Station is on an island, and there is not enough room
    on that island for the demands that are being made on that
    facility, particularly in the upcoming years as a new dry dock
    is completed and we are talking about refueling and
    refurbishing our nuclear submarine fleet. I could give you a
    lot of figures, almost doubling the man hours required. They
    are already working three shifts in the limited manufacturing
    space.
        Would you please follow up on this memorandum and whether
    an exception can be provide so the men and women of Portsmouth
    Naval Ship Yard can do their job on behalf of the Navy and the
    country?
        Ms. Berger. Senator, the people who are doing the work to
    support our Navy are critically important, and yes, I would be
    glad to follow up on that with you, if confirmed.
        Senator King. I appreciate that. This is critical, and it
    is a general purpose memorandum for the whole country, but in
    this case it literally does not fit.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones, not much time left, but Senator Cotton and
    I did what amounted to a focus group with a group of pilots a
    year or two ago, and what we found was that the principal thing
    that is costing us pilots is that they want to fly, and they
    are not getting enough time in the air. I hope that that is
    something you can follow up with, and I would urge you to do
    something similar with younger pilots about what is it that you
    need? We expected to hear more about bonuses and those kinds of
    things. What we heard was, ``We want to fly airplanes and we
    are not getting enough time in the air.''
        So is that something that you would be interested and
    willing to follow up on?
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Senator, if confirmed, absolutely. We need
    to look at all options to ensure that we have got, again,
    sufficient number of highly trained pilots to execute the
    Department of the Air Force missions.
        Senator King. Thank you. Thank you all for your commitment
    and your willingness to serve your country, in many cases once
    again.
        On behalf of the chairman, Senator Tillis.
        Senator Tillis. Mr. Chairman, I will defer to Senator
    Hawley and follow him.
        Senator King. Senator Hawley.
        Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
    Senator Tillis. Congratulations to all the nominees 0 and thank
    you for being here.
        Dr. Ratner, I want to start with you if I could, and I want
    to start by commending you for the outstanding work that you
    have done to help our Nation meet the China challenge, not just
    in the last few months, although I think you have been doing
    great work then too, but for the last number of years. I think
    you are an outstanding nominee, and I really look forward to
    supporting your nomination. So thank you for all you have done.
        I want to drill down a little bit in some of your area of
    expertise here. I asked Secretary Austin and General Milley,
    when they were before this Committee just last week, if they
    agreed that the United States needs to maintain an ability to
    defeat a Chinese fait accompli against Taiwan. Secretary Austin
    said yes. General Milley said yes also, but then he said
    something that frankly surprised me, and I am just going to
    quote. This is from the transcript now. This is General Milley
    to me. He said, ``Senator, frankly, I am not sure what a
    Chinese fait accompli in Taiwan is,'' end quote.
        I wondered if you could, for the record here, tell us what
    a Chinese fait accompli in Taiwan looks like and why we should
    be concerned about it.
        Dr. Ratner. Senator Hawley, thank you for your support, and
    let me say thank you to you as well for your 1 personal
    leadership on this issue. My understanding of the fait accompli
    challenge across the Taiwan Strait is the potential for China
    to attempt to make a very quick offensive action against
    Taiwan, thereby requiring us to have forces in the region and
    ready to respond immediately.
        Senator Hawley. When we spoke in May you emphasized the
    need to maintain the ability to defeat that kind of an
    attempted quick strike. Just tell us why it is so important--
    and my colleagues are probably very tired of hearing me ask
    about this scenario, because I ask about it just about every
    single committee hearing. So maybe, for them and for us and for
    everybody, tell us why it is so important that we maintain the
    ability to defeat that kind of a quick strike invasion?
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, the People's Republic of China has yet
    to renounce the use of force against Taiwan, and it is
    increasingly using its aggression and coercion in the region,
    so I think this is a real concern. In the absence of the United
    States to impose sufficient costs and denial capability, I
    think there is a potential that they would use aggression
    against Taiwan to achieve their political aims.
        Senator Hawley. You and I talked a little bit about the
    difference between deterrence by denial and deterrence by cost
    imposition, and those things sound similar but they are
    actually quite different. Could you explain to us what the
    difference is between deterrence by denial and deterrence by
    cost imposition, and why we ought to be focused on deterrence
    by denial?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes, so Senator, it is really important
    question, and I do agree that deterrence by denial is the
    appropriate strategy for the region and for this particular
    challenge. The distinction is deterrence by punishment would
    suggest that if China were to use aggression against Taiwan
    that the United States response would be to impose costs on
    China in another region or in another domain. My personal view
    is that the absolute certain way to deter China from using
    aggression is to ensure that they are unable to achieve that
    goal.
        I should suggest also, at the time, that I am confident
    today that we have that ability to deter and defeat Chinese
    aggression, and Senator, if confirmed, I would look forward to
    working with this Committee to ensure we keep it that way.
        Senator Hawley. Very good, and it is important, isn't it,
    also for our allies and partners and our potential partners in
    the region, in the Indo-Pacific, for them to realize and
    understand that we have the ability today to defeat an
    attempted fait accompli, and we are committed to maintaining
    that ability going forward. They need to know that so that they
    can bank on our commitment to the region and so they can make
    their own choices about their own security. Is that fair to
    say?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes, Senator. I think that underscores the
    importance of the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, as well.
        Senator Hawley. Very good. Let me ask you about what we are
    doing with regard to Taiwan in terms of helping them adopt the
    asymmetric defense strategy that they need. Something you said
    to me when we talked was that it is very important that the
    United States send a very clear message about what sort of
    defense strategy we think that our allies and partners in the
    region need to adopt. They need to be clear on what we think is
    the right approach.
        Taiwan has introduced the overall defense concept several
    years ago that emphasized the need for them to adopt an
    asymmetric defense strategy. I understand they have made some
    progress on this, but there is still some way to go. Can you
    give us an assessment of where Taiwan is on this and what
    message we need to be sending to Taiwan, and any other partners
    in the region you want to talk about, in terms of their own
    defense capabilities in partnership with us?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes. Senator, another incredibly important
    issue. I will start by saying I think President Tsai is
    committed to taking Taiwan's military in the right direction,
    and I am encouraged by the steps she has been taking to try to
    develop a more mobile and resilient military, and that is an
    incredibly important part of the deterrent in the region. If
    confirmed, I would look forward to advancing that agenda.
        Senator Hawley. Very good. I see my time has expired here.
    I may have a few more questions for you for the record.
    Congratulations again. Thanks to all of the nominees. I look
    forward to supporting you, Dr. Ratner, and Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. [Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Hawley. I
    want to thank Senator King for stepping in and doing such a
    superb job as chair, and let me now recognize, via Webex,
    Senator Warren.
        Senator Warren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
    congratulations to all of you on your nominations.
        Ms. Berger, I want to spend some time this morning talking
    about military housing and climate change. Now these are going
    to be questions that I have asked the Air Force and the Army
    Secretary nominees. I will ask the Navy Secretary nominee as
    well. But since you are the person who has got primary
    responsibility for ensuring that our sailors will live in safe,
    clean housing, and make sure that our Navy is climate resilient
    and energy efficient, I want to ask you as well.
        We have all heard the stories from military families about
    the deplorable conditions of on-base privatized housing. The
    companies hired by the DOD escaped accountability by fudging
    their numbers and just sweeping complaints under the rug. My
    office still hears from military spouses that the problem is
    not getting any better and that landlords are not following the
    laws that Congress passed to protect tenants.
        So let me ask you, Ms. Berger, if confirmed, will you
    commit to using all the tools available to hold landlords and
    private companies accountable, to make sure that they build and
    maintain quality housing for sailors, and to ensure that they
    can no longer profit off substandard housing?
        Ms. Berger. Senator, thank you for your attention to this
    important issue, and yes, if confirmed, I will use all tools
    available to me to make sure that we are doing the best that we
    can for our sailors, our marines, and their families. This is
    an essential element of readiness, and ensuring that we are
    taking care of people, as you said, and putting them in quality
    housing, and safe housing, and ensuring that everyone is held
    to the standard that is available is critically important.
        I will note that the Navy and Marine Corps recently put
    into place all 18 of the Tenant Bill of Rights that are
    important enforcement mechanisms as well, to ensure that all of
    these standards are being held up, and also that there are
    opportunities to enforce them. So yes, Senator Warren, if
    confirmed, this would be a priority of mine.
        Senator Warren. I very much appreciate that. I want to see
    real change, and it is time. You know, some of these housing
    providers are not providing accessible housing to military
    families who have a physically disabled family member who needs
    accommodation. So do I have your commitment that you will
    immediately dig into this issue and work to make sure that all
    Navy families have access to reasonable accommodation in their
    housing, when they need it?
        Ms. Berger. Yes, Senator. If confirmed, I commit to
    ensuring that we look into this, and I will look forward to
    being in good touch with you on this important issue.
        Senator Warren. Good. Good. I am looking forward to too,
    because I am going to stay on this.
        So you have got quite a challenge ahead of you, as our Navy
    bases are obviously the military installations that are most
    susceptible to rising seas. For example, according to one
    scientific study, Naval Base Norfolk has some access roads that
    will be under water during high tides for 50 days out of the
    year, by 2037. That is just high tides, not storms.
        So will you commit to using all the tools and authorities
    at your disposal to make the Navy more climate resilient?
        Ms. Berger. Yes, Senator Warren. This issue is of critical
    importance. Our bases, our installations are often by the
    water, because it is where the Navy operates. But our
    installations are critical considerations in this composition
    as well, and so as we think about our installations being the
    places that we project our power from, it is where our
    submarines, our ships, our aircraft, our sailors, our marines
    are training. It is where they are going back to resupply and
    to refuel. It is where families are, and family readiness is
    important too.
        These installations and the ability to keep them resilient
    to climate is of critical importance, as you note, and if
    confirmed, I will use all of the tools and authorities
    available to me to ensure that we are guarding against this
    threat.
        Senator Warren. Good, and on the subject of climate change,
    there is no way to address the climate crisis without
    confronting DOD's role as the largest consumer of fossil fuel
    on the planet. Will you commit to using all the tools and
    authorities at your disposal to make the Navy reduce its carbon
    footprint, wherever possible, and to make it more energy
    resilient?
        Ms. Berger. Senator Warren, the Navy has a good history and
    a good track record of looking into this, and I share your
    concern that this is of importance. If confirmed, this is
    something that we are always balancing against readiness and
    the ability to be able to fight, but it is something that we
    can use to enhance our readiness and ability to fight. If
    confirmed, I will surely review and put to good use the
    authorities available to ensure that the Navy is continuing to
    progress on this important track.
        Senator Warren. Good, and I am glad to hear you describe
    this not as balancing one against the other but as truly
    enhancing. You know, it is critical that the Navy continue to
    double down on investments in microgrids and battery storage
    and appropriate infrastructure projects to improve resiliency
    on shore, and electric or hybrid electric engine technologies
    at sea.
        You know, you are right to describe these as military
    readiness issues. So I plan to hold you to these commitments,
    and I also plan to look forward to working with you to help
    make them happen.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Warren. Let me recognize
    Senator Tillis, please.
        Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations to
    all of you for being nominated in some very important roles.
        Ms. Krass, I want to ask you a little bit about, in
    responding to advance policy questions you stated, ``If pending
    legislative proposals to address sexual assault and harassment
    are enacted, ensuring that such reforms are executed seamlessly
    will be a challenge facing the next General Counsel.'' Could
    you explain to me, give me a little bit more meat on the
    bones----
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Tillis.--what the challenges would be?
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator. As you know, the Secretary has
    received preliminary recommendations from the Independent
    Review Commission on the accountability prong of the four
    prongs that that commission is looking at, and I know that
    there are legislative proposals as well that are under serious
    consideration. Depending on how that unfolds and what
    recommendations ultimately Secretary Austin makes to President
    Biden and then to this committee, and whatever ensues from a
    legislative front, a significant task that I would face, were I
    to be confirmed, would be to ensure that those measures are
    implemented effectively. If I am confirmed, I would do my best.
    You know, I think it will require very careful attention to
    make sure that we make meaningful progress on this matter.
        Senator Tillis. What is your understanding of the 0
    proposals that are coming from the 90-day independent review,
    and if you are familiar with the legislative proposals here,
    what kind of gaps do we need to work out between the
    commission's recommendations and some of the proposals that
    will be considered as a part of our NDAA mark-up?
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I have not yet had a chance to be
    briefed on the Independent Review Commission's proposals,
    because I am not yet confirmed. But were I to be confirmed,
    that would be the first thing I would want to do, to look at
    those proposals and evaluate those in connection with
    legislation, potential legislation that has already been
    proposed.
        Senator Tillis. The Military Justice Improvement and
    Increasing Prevention Act proposes to take disposition
    authority for felony offenses, really any offense, I think,
    with a sentence over 1 year, away from the UCMJ [Uniform Code
    of Military Justice], away from the commanders, and vest it in
    a group of lawyers. In your view, it seems to me there is a lot
    of work that needs to be done on military sexual assault, but
    the net that we are casting with some of the proposals right
    now go far beyond that. Barracks larceny would be something
    that would be taken out of the chain of command. Just
    intuitively, do you think that is a good idea or a reasonable
    proposal, coming from Congress? 1
        Ms. Krass. Senator, I know that last week Secretary Austin
    stated that he would study that issue of the broader versus the
    narrower scope, in terms of reforms to the UCMJ, and I
    similarly, if I were confirmed, would want to study that issue.
        Senator Tillis. Well, I do know that the timing problem
    with your confirmation may make it difficult for you to play a
    role in the DOD putting forth a recommendation before we have
    to set an NDAA mark-up and take up proposals. So this is less
    for you when you get in--Congratulations on the confirmation,
    now get to work--but we have got to make sure that the DOD is
    moving fairly quickly to get the commission recommendations
    before the President, and for the President to take a position
    on it, if it is going to have any impact on our proceedings in
    the next month.
        Ms. Berger, I have spent a lot of time on military housing.
    I have spent a lot of time down at Fort Bragg and Camp Lejeune.
    I am going to go back down there for town halls. I have been
    doing military family town halls down there, and it has
    improved the situation just by putting pressure on the military
    housing vendors. I think that the Bill of Rights is a great
    idea, but I also think that if you are confirmed, in order to
    take best care of our sailors and marines, we have to take a
    step back and see if the entire framework that we have in place
    for military housing makes sense. It is almost 25 years old.
    There are 80-some-odd contracts. It seems to me that if we only
    think about going after the housing providers, when I think
    there is a legitimate shared responsibility for a lack of focus
    by the garrison commanders, a lack of modernizing these
    contracts, can I get your commitment to maybe take a step back
    and not only look at putting out the fires that I am doing with
    the town halls but look at the underlying programs and figure
    out if there is way to modernize them, to make them more
    resilient and more responsive to military family needs?
        Ms. Berger. Senator, the military housing issue, as you
    noted, is an important one, and thank you for the work that you
    have done on it, to take good care of our sailors, marines, and
    their families. If confirmed, it would be important to me to
    make sure to get and actually visit with the people who are
    living in the houses, who are taking care, on the ground, on
    the installations, and also to do a careful review of how
    everything is operating, to your point, to ensure maximizing
    resilience and the care that we need to take for the families
    and the sailors and marines that are living in this house.
        So yes, if confirmed, I would be glad to do those things.
        Senator Tillis. Yes, and if confirmed, I would like to get
    a commitment from either you or a designate to participate in
    some of these town halls that we are doing. We will have a
    number of people there, and I think it is good, fresh feedback,
    and I think it would be helpful to have you or, like I said, a
    designate there when I do host the town hall sometime in
    August.
        Ms. Berger. Senator, thank you for the invitation. I would
    be glad to follow up with you and figure out the appropriate
    way to attend, if confirmed. Thank you.
        Senator Tillis. Thank you, and thank you all.
    Congratulations on your nominations. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Tillis. Now let me now
    recognize, via Webex, Senator Rosen.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you, Chairman Reed, of course Ranking
    Member Inhofe, for holding this hearing. I would also like to
    thank the nominees for testifying today, and Ms. Berger for
    meeting with me recently. Thank you.
        I would like to speak a little bit about the Air Force, so
    Ms. Ortiz Jones, the Air Force last year requested a 300,000-
    acre expansion of the Nevada Test and Training Range within the
    Desert National Wildlife Refuge, of course, in order to
    modernize the range. It also asked for primary jurisdiction
    over the 800,000 acres of land currently shared with the
    refuge.
        The fiscal year 2021 NDAA renewed the Air Force existing
    withdrawal of almost 3 million acres of public lands for 25
    years, and included a provision that Senator Cortez Masto and I
    authored that mandates an intergovernmental executive committee
    between the Air Force and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
    to help improve the administration of, and resolve conflicts,
    on jointly managed lands. I believe we must continue supporting
    the Air Force's modernization requirements to keep up with
    current and emerging threats while maintaining Nevada's natural
    and cultural resources, and this is one way to do so.
        So Ms. Ortiz Jones, as the Air Force pursues modernization
    of the Range, can you commit, if confirmed, to exchanging
    information and collaborating with local, state, and Tribal
    governments, along with the relevant environmental stakeholders
    on any proposals to withdraw Nevada's public lands?
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Senator, I think it is extremely important
    that the Department of the Air Force is a good partner, both
    with local stakeholders as well as those within the
    interagency. So if confirmed, you have my commitment to do just
    that.
        Senator Rosen. Will you also commit to working with me and
    the rest of the delegation on any future land withdrawal
    requests, and confirm that you will stand up the
    Intergovernmental Executive Committee and get its first meeting
    scheduled, as the Navy has already done so for its own proposed
    expansion in Fallon, Nevada?
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Senator, my understanding is that is
    mandated, and if confirmed, I will execute that in short order.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you. I look forward to being part of
    that.
        I am going to move on to our land withdrawal at Fallon
    Naval Air Station. So Ms. Berger, of course we had a great time
    to talk this week, and I want to turn to the proposed Naval Air
    Station Fallon land withdrawal. The Navy seeks to continue
    operations on its current 240,000 acres and take ownership of
    over 600,000 acres of Federal land and over 65,000 acres of
    non-Federal land, an action that would expand the training
    complex to about 900,000 acres.
        Federal land managers currently allow the public to have
    access to much of the proposed expansion area for grazing, for
    hunting, for mineral exploration, and for geothermal
    development. Due in large part to safety concerns, the Navy's
    proposal would curtail many of these activities. Recently, the
    Navy sent over a legislative proposal to this Committee, which
    unfortunately is almost identical to the request from last year
    and does not incorporate any of the suggested changes from the
    Nevada delegation.
        So Ms. Berger, as the Navy pursues modernization on the
    Range, can you commit, if confirmed, to exchanging information,
    collaborating with local, state, and Tribal governments, along
    with relevant stakeholders on any proposals to Nevada's public
    lands and work with me and the rest of the Federal delegation
    on any land withdrawal requests?
        Ms. Berger. Senator Rosen, thank you for the time to visit
    with you and for the conversation, and I understand the diverse
    interests that are at stake here and also the importance that
    Nevada provides to our aviators and our Special Forces who
    train in this critical area.
        If confirmed, it is important to look at the ability of
    these people to be able to train as they will fight and also to
    consider the diverse interests that you listed, and if
    confirmed, I will be glad to have an ongoing conversation,
    share information, and collaborate with you.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you. Quickly, I just want to mention,
    again, in 1959, the Navy dropped an inert ordnance outside
    Fallon's B-19 range, contaminated nearly 6,000 acres of the
    Walker River Paiute's Tribe reservation. Ms. Berger, if
    confirmed, will you commit to working with me and the Nevada
    delegation on assuring that the Tribe is fairly compensated for
    this?
        Ms. Berger. Senator, if confirmed, I will be glad to
    continue to speak with you on this issue and follow up and
    collaborate so that we can do the best that we can for the
    Tribes who are important stakeholders in this issue.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you very much. My time is up, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Rosen. Senator Kelly,
    please.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to follow up
    a little bit on Senator Hawley's questions with you, Dr.
    Ratner. As you know, the integration and synchronization of
    forces is key to winning complex, dynamic military operations,
    and, you know, China's ability to operate jointly, they are
    late to the game, I think, here, and they are probably trying
    to catch up.
        Is that an area that you looked at as you led the
    Department's China Task Force, their ability to operate
    jointly?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Kelly. Their command and control of their joint
    operations, would you be able to comment about where they were
    and where they are today, and then how that impacts--you know,
    what is the operational impact to us as they improve their
    joint ability?
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, it is a great question. As you know,
    the People's Liberation Army has been undergoing a very rapid,
    intense modernization that has included an effort to try to
    develop a more joint force that would be capability of
    offensive operations in the Western Pacific that certainly
    impact our interests, our alliances, and our presence there.
        Senator Kelly. Are they increasing the number of joint
    exercises that they do?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Kelly. What do you feel the impact on us is,
    specifically, at this point?
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, I think their increasing capability
    continues to threaten our interests, as does their aggressive
    behavior, and it is all the more reason why we need to be
    thinking about our posture, our operational concepts, and our
    capabilities in the region to bolster deterrence and maintain
    peace and stability there, as we have for decades.
        Senator Kelly. So one of our strengths is amplified, and a
    strength that we have, is our relationships with our allies.
    Considering their movement towards jointness within their own
    force, what should we be doing today to strengthen our
    alliances and partnerships to counter their increasing
    effectiveness?
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, our alliances and partnerships are
    absolutely fundamental to our strategy in the region. It is
    also one of our critical advantages over China. They do not
    have the kind of alliances and partnerships that we do. We are
    in constant contact, trying to deepen the interoperability of
    those relationships, trying to develop joint technologies as
    well as starting to talk about potential contingencies, and if
    confirmed, I would commit to try to strengthen those
    partnerships to the best capability possible.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you. I think that is key to our long-
    term success in the region.
        I want to switch to Ms. Ortiz Jones for a second. Ms.
    Jones, it is clear that space is going to be an increasingly
    important domain for the military in future conflicts, and
    already today we are seeing signs of increased orbital
    congestion. Yet our ability to coordinate effectively with
    other nations regarding activities in space, and particularly
    to have countries like Russia and China engage meaningfully in
    this coordination could be improved, from shared challenges,
    challenges that I have dealt with personally, like space
    debris. G-7 countries announced new commitments on this just
    this week, but to major security threats this coordination is
    badly needed.
        So, Ms. Jones, if confirmed, you will help oversee the
    Service's role on these issues. How will you work to improve
    coordination and cooperation with these nations while ensuring
    the integrity of U.S. missions?
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Senator Kelly, thank you for the question.
    One of my top priorities, if confirmed, would be to review the
    status of the efforts for the U.S. Space Force to reach full
    operational capability. A key part of that, as you mentioned,
    will be reviewing the status of our input to the shaping of
    norms and behaviors in space that are so key to addressing some
    of the behaviors, the dangerous behaviors that you just
    identified. So I would want to ensure that the Space Force is
    working in full coordination with our interagency partners to
    ensure Department of the Air Force equities are best
    represented in shaping those.
        Senator Kelly. I have heard specifically from leadership at
    the Space Force that often, especially with regards to Russia,
    even though we are trying to make our best effort to
    coordinate, not always received well from the other side, you
    know, often instead of direct contact where, you know, leaving
    messages, sending emails. These are significant events, often,
    that we are trying to prevent a conjunction between spacecraft,
    and these are high-value assets, not only for us but for other
    nations, specifically our allies. So I appreciate you being
    willing to look into this. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Kelly, and I recognize
    Senator Sullivan, and note that the vote is in 1 process and we
    have to vote. Thank you, sir.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to
    all the witnesses for your service to our country and your
    continued service here. Congratulations on your nominations.
        I want to begin by--there was a hearing many, many years
    ago, several decades ago, Armed Services Committee. The father
    of the U.S. Air Force, Billy Mitchell, stated that ``(blank)
    place,'' this place, ``was the most strategic place in the
    world. Anyone who controlled this place could control North
    America, Europe, and Asia.'' Do any of you know what place
    Billy Mitchell was talking about when he said this in front of
    the Congress of the United States? Take a guess.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Alaska.
        Senator Sullivan. There you go. Alaska. All right. So can I
    get a commitment from each of you to come to Alaska soon in
    your tenure and see why it is so strategic, particularly as we
    are reorienting towards the INDOPACOM region? Can I get a yes
    from everybody?
        Ms. Krass. Yes, Senator.
        Ms. Ortiz Jones. Yes.
        Dr. Ratner. Yes.
        Ms. Berger. Yes.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes.
        Senator Sullivan. Everybody? Did I get a yes? Okay, good.
        I want to follow up on that. You know, Ms. Skelly, I want
    to get your commitment, and Mr. Ratner, Dr. Ratner, with regard
    to JPARC. That is our training ranges up in Alaska. We just
    conducted--hopefully you saw it--the Northern Edge exercise.
    JPARC is a first-class, probably some of the best training
    areas in the world. Like I said, the Northern Edge exercise we
    just did had an entire MEU/ARG that participated, carrier
    strike group.
        Can I get your commitment to take a look at JPARC and see
    all the opportunities it has for training high-end, fifth-gen
    training that we need to be ready, you know, for the great
    power competition that, in many ways, is upon us?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes, Senator.
        Ms. Skelly. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you. Dr. Ratner, one thing that is
    often, I think, a little bit forgotten is, again, the Alaska
    base force is our kind of at the classic scenes of different
    COCOMs. You have a significant threat coming from EUCOM. Those
    forces are OPCON to PACON. I had Admiral Aquilino up in Alaska
    just a couple of weeks ago, and when you are looking at the
    different opportunities but also force posture in the region,
    can you commit to me to make sure you are keeping Alaska in
    mind? We are NORTHCOM, STRATCOM because of our missile defense,
    but again, we are going to have over 100 fifth-gen fighters, by
    the end of this year, based in Alaska. Oftentimes, even with
    our most sophisticated strategists, they kind of look at
    International Date Line, east or west, and they forget to go
    north. Alaska forces are much closer to Japan and Korea than
    many of our forces that are east of the International Date
    Line, even though we are west.
        Can I get your commitment to make sure that as you are
    looking at force posture you strongly consider Alaska and the
    forces there, not just what we have but for future forces?
        Dr. Ratner. Absolutely, Senator, and I still have the map
    you gave me, showing those flight times, so it is on my desk at
    the Pentagon.
        Senator Sullivan. Good. I appreciate that.
        You know, the outgoing INDOPACOM commander, in a hearing
    that made a fair amount of news just about 2 months ago, a
    question that I asked him, given the aggressiveness of Xi
    Jinping, Communist Chinese Party, you know how aggressive they
    have been with other countries--India, Australia, Hong Kong--I
    asked him what does that entail, from his perspective, with
    regard to Taiwan.
        I was just in Taiwan. I led a group of Senators, Senator
    Duckworth, who is on this Committee, very good meetings. But we
    were there to support a strong, traditional partner, as the
    Taiwan Relations Act mandates that we do, as a country. It came
    from this Senate body. Admiral Davidson said he thought within
    6 years the Chinese Communist Party would move to probably try
    to forcefully retake Taiwan. Do you agree with that timeline?
    It was kind of a shocking statement, and if called upon, I know
    it is a bit of a vague commitment that we have, one way or the
    other, are they, or if need be, if called upon, if we make that
    decision, are we ready to make sure that that kind of
    aggressive action would not succeed? Do you agree with that
    timeline?
        Dr. Ratner. Senator, it is a very important question. I
    agree with Admiral Davidson's sense of urgency. I do not think
    it is particularly useful to put a pin on a timeline. I think
    what we have to do is ensure that we are maintaining combat-
    credible deterrence going forward, whether that is 5 years from
    now, 10 years from now, 15 years from now. As I said to Senator
    Hawley, I think we have the capability today to deter and
    defeat Chinese aggression, and I think it is important that we
    maintain that going forward.
        Senator Sullivan. Good. I look forward to working with all
    of you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will have several additional
    questions for the record.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Sullivan. I
    want to thank the nominees for your excellent testimony, and
    more importantly, your willingness to serve the nation. With
    that I will adjourn the hearing. Thank you very much.
        [Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
                                    ------

        [Prepared questions submitted to Honorable Caroline D.
    Krass by Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers
    supplied follow:]
                            Questions and Responses
                                     duties
        Section 140 of title 10, U.S. Code, provides that the General
    Counsel of the Department of Defense (DOD General Counsel) is the chief
    legal officer of the Department.
        Question. What is your understanding of the breadth and scope of
    the DOD General Counsel's duties and responsibilities?
        Answer. The General Counsel serves as the chief legal officer of
    DOD, is the primary legal adviser to the Secretary of Defense and other
    senior DOD leaders, and performs such functions as the Secretary of
    Defense may prescribe. The General Counsel provides legal advice and
    counsel on the full scope of the Department's mission and
    responsibilities, which can range from contracting and acquisitions, to
    the provision of health care to servicemembers and their families, to
    the law of armed conflict, and military justice, to name just a few
    areas. If confirmed, I anticipate I will be responsible for overseeing
    and ensuring the provision of timely and accurate legal advice on
    myriad DOD activities.
        Question. What is your view of the responsibility and authority
    associated with the DOD General Counsel's designation as the chief
    legal officer of the Department of the Defense?
        Answer. The DOD General Counsel serves as the ``chief legal officer
    of the Department of Defense,'' in accordance with 10 U.S.C. Sec.  140.
    DOD Directive 5145.01 provides that the DOD General Counsel
    ``[o]versees, as appropriate, legal services performed within the DOD,
    including establishing professional responsibility standards and
    determining, or referring to the cognizant authority, DOD attorneys'
    adherence to these standards.'' The Directive further assigns the
    General Counsel the responsibility to ``Establish[] DOD policy on
    general legal issues, determine[] the DOD position on specific legal
    problems, and resolve[] disagreements within the DOD on such matters.''
    If confirmed, I will work to ensure consistent and well-reasoned legal
    advice and counsel are provided across the Department.
        Question. What is your view of the responsibility and authority
    vested in the DOD General Counsel by virtue of her service as the
    Director, Defense Legal Services Agency?
        Answer. DOD Directive 5145.04 provides that the Defense Legal
    Services Agency ``shall provide legal advice, services, and support to
    the Defense Agencies, DOD Field Activities, and, as assigned, other
    organizational entities within the DOD,'' and further provides that the
    Defense Legal Services Agency is ``under the authority, direction, and
    control of the General Counsel of the Department of Defense'' who also
    serves as its Director. As Director, the DOD General Counsel is
    responsible for the professional supervision of the Defense Legal
    Services Agency attorneys, including, in consultation with the DOD
    Component Head concerned, authority for evaluation of their
    performance, awards, promotions, professional development, and
    disciplinary or adverse actions. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
    consistent and well-reasoned legal advice and counsel is provided
    across the Department, including to the DOD Agencies and Field
    Activities by the Defense Legal Services Agency attorneys.
        Question. What is your view of the responsibility and authority
    vested in the DOD General Counsel by virtue of her service as a
    Designated Agency Ethics Official?
        Answer. I believe the role of the DOD Designated Agency Ethics
    Official is to ensure that the Department maintains a robust and
    effective ethics program that focuses not only on technical compliance
    with ethics laws and regulations, but also on the importance of
    assuring public confidence in our government. If confirmed, I will work
    closely with senior leaders to set a strong ``tone from the top'' to
    reinforce the expectation of ethical conduct by all DOD personnel and
    ensure the Department devotes the resources needed to administer an
    effective ethics program.
        Question. If confirmed, what additional duties and functions might
    you recommend the Secretary of the Defense prescribe for you,
    particularly in light of the lines of effort comprising the National
    Defense Strategy (NDS)?
        Answer. I have no additional duties or functions to recommend at
    this time. If confirmed, I will continually review the duties and
    functions of the DOD General Counsel, and consider how best to support
    the Secretary of Defense and the Department in carrying out the
    missions and functions of the Department under DOD strategic guidance,
    including the National Defense Strategy.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
    that your tenure as DOD General Counsel epitomizes the fundamental
    requirement for civilian control of the Armed Forces embedded in the
    U.S. Constitution and other laws?
        Answer. The Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization
    Act of 1986 enhanced civilian control of the Armed Forces and clearly
    delineates the operational and administrative chains of command and the
    responsibilities of DOD senior leadership. The requirement for civilian
    control of the military is clear. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
    the Department fully adheres to this law and any related legal
    provisions. I have been privileged to serve my country as a civilian
    official in support of our national security, most recently as the
    Central Intelligence Agency's General Counsel, and I understand and
    appreciate that civilian control of the military is a foundational
    aspect of our democracy; it is a key foundation for our exceptional
    military, as well as a critically important guarantor of our freedoms.
    If confirmed, my conduct and legal advice will promote the
    understanding of, and adherence to, civilian control and authority over
    the military.
        Question. Who is the client of the DOD General Counsel?
        Answer. The Department of Defense and its senior leaders, when
    acting in their official capacities, are the clients of the DOD General
    Counsel, and through them the American people.
        Question. If confirmed, what innovative ideas would you consider
    providing to the Secretary of Defense to improve the organization and
    operations of Office of the DOD General Counsel? To improve the
    delivery of legal services DOD-wide?
        Answer. I believe that it is important to be working within an
    institution before deciding what organizational and operational changes
    are needed. If confirmed, I will continually evaluate ways to improve
    the effectiveness and efficiency of the Office of General Counsel and
    the Defense Legal Services Agency.
                                 qualifications
        Question. What background and experience do you possess that
    qualify you for this position?
        Answer. If confirmed, I believe that my prior experience will serve
    me well in providing sound and clear legal advice to Secretary Austin
    and the Department's leadership team. As General Counsel of the Central
    Intelligence Agency (CIA), my responsibilities included ensuring
    compliance with all applicable domestic and international laws. I also
    spent over a decade at the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) at the
    Department of Justice, where I provided legal advice to the Department
    of Defense on a wide range of difficult legal issues. Those issues,
    some of which I also worked on at the National Security Council (NSC),
    included matters related to the interpretation of the UCMJ, the
    application of the Law of Armed Conflict, and domestic and
    international law principles governing detention and the use of force.
    For my work at OLC, I was honored to be awarded the Department of
    Defense Exceptional Civilian Service Award during the George W. Bush
    Administration and the Department of Defense Medal for Outstanding
    Public Service during the Obama Administration.
        Over the course of my career, including two tours at the NSC, I
    have developed productive and collegial relationships with lawyers
    throughout the national security community, including among the career
    civil service. I have also been a member of the interagency lawyers'
    group while at the NSC, CIA and Justice. Those relationships will
    heighten my effectiveness at assisting the men and women of the U.S.
    Armed Forces, together with the civilian DOD personnel, in protecting
    our Nation's security. In addition, I have been fortunate to work with
    many of the lawyers in the Department's Office of General Counsel and
    Chairman's Legal, and I have been impressed by their dedication to the
    rule of law.
        During my career, I have also worked closely with lawyers and other
    representatives of many of our Allies, including the Five Eyes and the
    West Point group, as well as the International Committee of the Red
    Cross. I believe that our national security is strengthened when the
    international legal community has a common understanding of each
    country's approach to legal issues in the national security realm.
        Question. What leadership and management experience do you possess
    that you would apply to your service as DOD General Counsel, if
    confirmed?
        Answer. Over the past three years, I have served as General Counsel
    of General Insurance at American International Group, leading and
    overseeing a global team of 250 legal professionals providing advice in
    over 80 countries through a time of transformational change in a turn-
    around environment.
        Previously, I served from 2014-2017 as the General Counsel of the
    CIA, leading and managing a team of approximately 200 attorneys and
    working to enhance professional development and growth opportunities in
    a time of constrained resources.
        I also led OLC at the Department of Justice as Acting Assistant
    Attorney General before joining the CIA.
        Question. Do you believe that there are actions you need to take to
    enhance your ability to perform the duties of the DOD General Counsel?
    If so, what are they?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am eager to meet with the Department's
    leadership to discuss their strategic priorities as well as to conduct
    deep-dives with my team in the Office of General Counsel on the myriad
    complex legal issues currently facing the Department. Although I have
    previously worked with many of the senior lawyers in the national
    security community, I would also reach out to the General Counsels of
    the Defense Agencies early in my tenure, as well as to other lawyers
    across the interagency.
                        major challenges and priorities
        Question. In your view, what are the major challenges that will
    confront the next DOD General Counsel?
        Answer. Although it is not possible to predict all of the major
    challenges that will confront the next DOD General Counsel, several are
    apparent now. Secretary Austin has outlined his top priorities for the
    Department, which provide an outline of the major challenges facing
    DOD. Initially, the General Counsel will need to advise on DOD's key
    role in supporting U.S. Government efforts in response to COVID-19. If
    pending legislative proposals to address sexual assault and harassment
    are enacted, ensuring that such reforms are executed seamlessly will be
    a significant challenge facing the next General Counsel. The next
    General Counsel will also need to advise on the legal issues related to
    the Department's efforts to combat extremism in the ranks. In addition,
    the next General Counsel will confront legal issues relating to DOD's
    response to emerging advanced, persistent threats from States such as
    Russia, Iran, and North Korea and threats from transnational and non-
    State actors, particularly in the realm of cyber and space. Finally,
    the next General Counsel will be required to advise on legal issues
    related to DOD's number one pacing challenge--China.
        Question. If confirmed, what plans do you have for addressing each
    of these challenges?
        Answer. The Department has experienced and capable attorneys who
    are experts in relevant areas of law, in the Office of the DOD General
    Counsel, the Defense Legal Services Agency, and in the wider DOD legal
    community. If confirmed, I would support those attorneys in their
    efforts to provide the best possible legal advice to decision-makers
    throughout the Department of Defense to address these significant
    challenges, and I will also endeavor to assist the Secretary of Defense
    by providing him with the legal advice needed to lead the Department.
        Question. If confirmed, what broad parameters would you establish
    as to the types of legal and policy issues on which you and the Office
    of the DOD General Counsel must be consulted?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will focus my efforts on the challenges
    outlined in the Secretary's priorities, and I will draw on the
    significant legal expertise and dedication of the Office of the DOD
    General Counsel, the Defense Legal Services Agency, and other lawyers
    serving in the Department of Defense. If confirmed, I will endeavor to
    ensure that the Office of the DOD General Counsel is a key player in
    providing legal advice regarding the development of strategies, plans,
    and activities within the Department beginning from early stages, and
    regardless of operational sensitivity. I would strive to accomplish
    this involvement in a cooperative manner as a matter of routine within
    the Department, particularly within the Office of the Secretary of
    Defense.
                            relations with congress
        Question. What are your views on the state of the DOD Office of the
    General Counsel's relationship with the Senate Armed Services Committee
    in particular, and with Congress in general?
        Answer. I believe Congress, and this Committee in particular, are
    critical partners with the Office of General Counsel. Maintaining a
    strong partnership with both Members and staff is essential to ensuring
    the necessary support for those in uniform and the Department overall.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
    productive and mutually beneficial relationship between this Committee
    and the DOD Office of the General Counsel?
        Answer. Communication is key. If confirmed, I am committed to
    building and maintaining open and regular lines of communication to
    ensure collaboration with committee Members and staff alike.
        Question. If confirmed, what factors would you consider in
    determining whether or not to recommend the invocation of Executive
    Privilege in regard to a request from the Senate Armed Services
    Committee for information under the cognizance of a component of the
    Department of Defense?
        Answer. As a general matter, I believe the Department should make
    every effort to produce to Congress the information it seeks. If I am
    confirmed, I commit to working closely with Congress to facilitate its
    oversight responsibilities and ensure that the Department is working
    appropriately to serve the American people
                                 legal opinions
        Question. Are the legal opinions of the Office of the DOD General
    Counsel binding on all Department of Defense attorneys?
        Answer. The legal opinions of the DOD General Counsel generally are
    binding throughout the Department of Defense. 10 U.S.C. Sec.  140 makes
    the DOD General Counsel the ``chief legal officer of the Department of
    Defense,'' and DOD Directive 5145.01 assigns the General Counsel the
    responsibility to ``Establish[] DOD policy on general legal issues,
    determine[] the DOD position on specific legal problems, and resolve[]
    disagreements within the DOD on such matters.'' If confirmed, I would
    fulfill those responsibilities, including issuing legal opinions that
    are binding on the Department of Defense. One exception to this rule
    applies to the lawyers in the Office of the DOD Inspector General. The
    General Counsel to the Inspector General is expressly exempted from the
    scope of 10 U.S.C. Sec.  140 by virtue of Section 907 of the National
    Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (5 U.S.C. App. Inspector
    General Act of 1978 Sec.  8(h)). I note also that title 10 prohibits
    any officer or employee of DOD from interfering with the ability of
    certain senior military lawyers to give independent legal advice to
    their respective principals.
        Question. If confirmed, are there specific matters on which your
    predecessor General Counsels have issued legal opinions that you would
    expect to reconsider and possibly revise? If so, which opinions, in
    which practice areas, do you believe might merit reconsideration?
        Answer. At this time, I am not aware of any legal opinions of the
    DOD General Counsel that I expect to reconsider and revise, if
    confirmed. However, if confirmed and such a need arises, I would review
    those opinions in consultation with the appropriate attorneys and
    subject matter experts within the Department.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that legal opinions of
    your office are available to all Department attorneys, including judge
    advocates? Would you consider implementation of a program similar to
    that through which the Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice,
    makes certain of its opinions available to the public?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will meet regularly with senior lawyers
    throughout the Department to keep them informed of relevant opinions
    and decisions of the DOD General Counsel and will circulate legal
    opinions generally to the attorneys in the Department, but in
    particular to those affected by them. If confirmed, I would consider
    whether any of the DOD General Counsel's written opinions should be
    made available to the public.
               relationship with the department of justice (doj)
        Question. What is your understanding of the relationship between
    the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice with respect to
    litigation involving the Department of Defense?
        Answer. By statute, the Department of Justice is responsible for
    representing the United States, its officers, and its agencies,
    including the Department of Defense, in litigation matters. In support
    of that responsibility, attorneys from the Department of Defense
    regularly work directly with lawyers at the Department of Justice in
    cases and other litigation-related matters in which DOD, or one or more
    of its components or officials, is a party or has an interest.
        Question. In your view, does the Department of Defense need more
    independence and litigation-focused resources--either to conduct its
    own litigation or to increase its capacity and capability to act--as it
    does currently--in a supporting role to DOJ?
        Answer. My understanding is that DOD's lawyers have exceptionally
    strong relationships with their counterparts at the Department of
    Justice and that the current arrangement serves DOD well. Accordingly,
    I am not aware of any changes that need to be made at this time.
        Question. What role do you expect to play, if confirmed, in the
    development and consideration (or reconsideration) of legal opinions by
    the Office of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice that directly
    affect the Department of Defense?
        Answer. If confirmed, I expect to work closely and regularly with
    the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) at the Department of Justice in a
    collegial and collaborative fashion on the most complicated legal
    issues that directly affect the Department of Defense.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to address an
    opinion issued by the Office of Legal Counsel with which you disagreed
    as a matter of proper interpretation of the law?
        Answer. If confirmed, should the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC)
    issue an opinion affecting the Department of Defense with which I
    disagreed as a matter of proper interpretation of the law, I would
    express my opinion to the head of OLC and, if necessary and
    appropriate, the Attorney General, and ask for reconsideration of the
    OLC opinion. If confirmed, I also expect to continue my close working
    relationship with OLC and that OLC would follow its prior practice of
    soliciting my input prior to the issuance of any legal opinion
    affecting DOD's interests.
                          alternate dispute resolution
        Question. Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) programs encourage the
    use of dispute resolution and conflict management processes and
    techniques to assist parties to a dispute in coming to an agreement,
    short of litigation.
        What is your view of the role of the DOD General Counsel in
    facilitating the provision of ADR services to components of the
    Department of Defense?
        Answer. As provided in DOD Instruction (DODI) 5145.5, it is the
    policy of DOD that each Component establish and implement ADR programs
    to resolve disputes at the earliest possible stage of the conflict and
    at the lowest possible organizational level. DODI 5145.5 further
    provides that the DOD General Counsel establishes policy and provides
    guidance on the administration of ADR and oversees ADR activities
    within DOD. Through the Deputy General Counsel (Legal Counsel), the DOD
    General Counsel monitors the implementation of policies and procedures
    pertaining to the use of ADR and serves as the DOD Dispute Resolution
    Specialist in accordance with title 5, U.S.C. and DOD Directive
    5145.01.
        Question. Are there particular types of disputes in the context of
    DOD activities, as to which you perceive ADR may be of particular
    utility?
        Answer. It is DOD policy that DOD Components shall use ADR
    techniques as an alternative to litigation or formal administrative
    proceedings when appropriate and that any dispute, regardless of
    subject matter, is a potential candidate for ADR. Based on my
    experience, I believe that ADR may be particularly useful in certain
    personnel and acquisition disputes.
                  independent legal advice by judge advocates
        Question. What is your view of the requirement for the Judge
    Advocates General of the Services, the Staff Judge Advocate to the
    Commandant of the Marine Corps, and the legal advisor to the Chairman
    of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide independent legal advice to the
    Secretaries of the Military Departments, the Chairman of the Joint
    Chiefs, and the Service Chiefs?
        Answer. I fully support the ability of the Judge Advocates General
    of the Military Departments, the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant
    of the Marine Corps, and the legal advisor to the Chairman of the Joint
    Chiefs of Staff to provide independent legal advice to the Department
    officials they advise. These officers are responsible for providing
    legal advice, along with the General Counsels of the Military
    Departments, to the senior leadership of their respective military
    departments and to the Chairman. Title 10 expressly directs that no
    officer or employee of the Department of Defense interfere with the
    ability of these counsel to give independent legal advice to the
    leaders they advise. See 10 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  156, 7037, 8046, 8088,
    and 9037.
        Question. What is your view of the responsibility of uniformed
    judge advocates to provide independent legal advice to military
    commanders?
        Answer. It is essential that Judge Advocates, operating under the
    supervision of their respective Judge Advocate General, be able to
    provide timely and effective day-to-day legal advice to military
    commanders in the field. As in all circumstances concerning the
    provision of legal advice, I believe that such advice should be
    informed by the views of the Department of Justice, the DOD General
    Counsel, the General Counsel of the Military Department concerned, and
    the Judge Advocate General concerned. As noted above, provisions of
    title 10 prohibit interfering with the ability of the Judge Advocates
    General in providing independent legal advice. If confirmed, I will
    work to foster open lines of communication with colleagues in uniform
    to ensure we best serve our respective leadership and the Department as
    a whole.
        Question. What is your understanding of the DOD General Counsel's
    responsibilities with regard to military justice and the Judge
    Advocates General?
        Answer. My understanding is that decisions in military justice
    cases are made independently by various personnel in the military
    justice system, including staff judge advocates, convening authorities,
    military judges, and court-martial members. Appellate review of cases
    arising under the Uniform Code of Military Justice sometimes falls
    under the authority of the Judge Advocates General, and sometimes
    military appellate courts (and potentially the United States Supreme
    Court), depending on the severity of the sentence. The General Counsel
    must protect the independence of those decision makers.
        One important role of the DOD General Counsel is to advise the
    Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and other
    officials in the Office of the Secretary of Defense on military justice
    matters. I understand that the Secretary of Defense becomes involved in
    military justice only in limited circumstances, and the General Counsel
    provides legal advice to the Secretary in those circumstances. The
    General Counsel, like the Secretary of Defense and other senior
    civilian and military officials in the Department, must avoid any
    action that may constitute or create the appearance of unlawful command
    influence.
        I understand that the DOD General Counsel plays a role in
    determining whether the Department will ask the Solicitor General of
    the United States to seek Supreme Court review of cases decided against
    the government by the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and
    sometimes assists the Office of the Solicitor General in preparing
    briefs for the Supreme Court in military justice cases. Additionally, I
    understand that the General Counsel establishes DOD policy on general
    legal issues, determines the DOD position on specific legal problems,
    and resolves disagreements within DOD on such matters. Accordingly, in
    some cases, the General Counsel will establish DOD's legal position
    that counsel for the government would advocate in military justice
    proceedings.
        I understand that the DOD General Counsel also plays a role in the
    development of military justice policy, including by reviewing
    recommendations of the Joint Service Committee on Military Justice for
    amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial and the Uniform Code of
    Military Justice. The General Counsel offers advice to appropriate
    policy makers concerning those recommendations. I also understand that,
    traditionally, the General Counsel has served as an informal DOD
    liaison to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. If
    confirmed, I anticipate that I will continue to fill those roles.
        Question. If confirmed, what relationship would you establish with
    the General Counsels of the Military Departments?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will strive to foster an open and
    collaborative relationship with the General Counsels of the Military
    Departments. I fully expect that, if confirmed, I will work closely
    with them and assist in their providing timely and accurate legal
    advice to the senior leadership of their respective military
    departments, and I would further expect they will similarly assist me
    in the provision of legal advice to the senior leadership of the
    Department of Defense. The DOD General Counsel serves as the chief
    legal officer of the Department, but must rely on and work closely with
    the Military Department General Counsels to best serve the Department
    and its leadership.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the
    coordination of legal issues of significance to multiple components of
    DOD with the Military Department General Counsels and the Service Judge
    Advocates General?
        Answer. It is my intention, if confirmed, to meet regularly with
    the Military Department General Counsels, the Judge Advocates General,
    Counsel to the Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps and the Legal
    Advisor the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Such meetings will
    serve to exchange information and views, and identify as early as
    possible issues of significance facing the multiple components of the
    Department. I will also encourage communication and collaboration, as
    appropriate, by counsel under my supervision with their Military
    Department, Military Service and Joint Staff colleagues.
                                detainee matters
        Question. What role do you expect to play, if confirmed, in
    addressing legal issues regarding detainees?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would play a primary role in advising the
    Secretary of Defense and those who fall under his command on legal
    issues regarding persons detained by the U.S. military.
        Question. Do you support the standards for detainee treatment
    specified in the revised Army Field Manual on Interrogations, FM 2-
    22.3, issued in September 2006, and in DOD Directive 2310.01E, The
    Department of Defense Detainee Program, dated August 19, 2014?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
    in the ongoing triennial review and revision of FM 2-22.3, Human
    Intelligence Collector Operations? (Intel)
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Intelligence and Security to ensure that the review of FM
    2-22.3, Human Intelligence Collector Operations is thorough and
    complete and that any proposed revisions are consistent with U.S. and
    international law. As part of that process, consistent with Section
    1045 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, I
    will ensure that the Army Field Manual complies with the legal
    obligations of the United States and that the practices for
    interrogation described therein do not involve the use or threat of
    force.
        Question. In your view, how will President Biden's ordered
    withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan affect the Department's
    authority to detain unlawful enemy combatants at Guantanamo?
        Answer. The President has stated that all United States Forces will
    be withdrawn from Afghanistan by September 11, 2021. The conflict with
    Al Qaeda and its associated forces continues, however, and its
    geographic scope extends beyond Afghanistan. If confirmed as General
    Counsel, I will work with the Secretary and the Departments of Justice
    and State to assess the legal basis for continued detention at
    Guantanamo Bay when that withdrawal is complete.
        Question. What role would you expect to play, if confirmed, under
    the procedures for Periodic Review Board applicable to detainees at
    Guantanamo?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would expect to provide legal advice to the
    Secretary of Defense on the status of Guantanamo detainees. In
    addition, the General Counsel appoints and supervises the legal advisor
    to the Periodic Review Board.
        Question. In your view, how has the establishment of a Chief
    Medical Officer to oversee the provision of medical care to individuals
    detained at Guantanamo, affected the standard of medical care provided
    to such detainees?
        Answer. It is my understanding that Congress established the
    position of Chief Medical Officer at Guantanamo, reporting to the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in order to ensure
    that medical care decisions are sufficiently independent of any non-
    clinical considerations. I am not personally familiar with the degree
    to which day-to-day medical care of detainees has been affected. If
    confirmed, I will support the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
    Affairs in ensuring that the Chief Medical Officer is able to perform
    his or her duties appropriately and in accordance with applicable law.
        Question. Section 2441 of title 18, United States Code, defines
    grave breaches of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, including
    torture and cruel and inhuman treatment.
        In your view, does section 2441 define these terms in a way that
    provides U.S. detainees in the custody of other nations, as well as
    foreign detainees in U.S. custody, appropriate protections from abusive
    treatment?
        Answer. Yes.
                              military commissions
        Question. In your view, does the Military Commissions Act of 2009
    provide appropriate legal standards and processes for the trial of
    alien unlawful enemy combatants?
        Answer. The Military Commissions Act of 2009 has provided
    appropriate standards and processes for the trial of alien unprivileged
    enemy belligerents. If confirmed, I would review whether these
    processes could be improved.
        Question. In your view, do military commissions constituted
    pursuant to the Military Commissions Act of 2009 provide an effective
    forum for trying violations of the law of armed conflict?
        Answer. Military commissions are an appropriate forum for trying
    offenses against the law of war and other offenses traditionally
    triable by military commission. If confirmed, I would review whether
    military commission processes could be improved.
        Question. What changes to the Military Commissions Act of 2009
    would you propose, if confirmed, to improve the efficiency and
    effectiveness of the military commissions system and process?
        Answer. If confirmed, I may consider, consistent with my
    responsibilities as chief legal officer for the Department of Defense,
    recommended amendments to the 2009 Military Commissions Act.
        Question. As regards military commissions, what is your
    understanding of the relationship between the DOD General Counsel and
    the legal advisor to the convening authority, the chief prosecutor, and
    the chief defense counsel for the military commissions?
        Answer. The DOD General Counsel, as the chief legal officer of the
    Department of Defense, is the primary legal advisor to the Secretary of
    Defense and other senior DOD leaders. By regulation, the Legal Advisor
    to the Convening Authority and the Chief Prosecutor are supervised by
    the Deputy General Counsel (Legal Counsel). The Chief Defense Counsel
    is supervised by the Deputy General Counsel (Personnel & Health
    Policy). Both the Deputy General Counsel (Legal Counsel) and the Deputy
    General Counsel (Personnel & Health Policy) report to the General
    Counsel. The Chief Prosecutor and the Chief Defense Counsel, who play
    important roles in the military commission process, must exercise
    independent legal judgment in accordance with the rules and regulations
    for military commissions promulgated by the Secretary.
               authorization for the use of military force (aumf)
        Question. In your view, in what circumstances should the President
    seek authorization from Congress before using military force?
        Answer. I respect the essential constitutional role of Congress in
    decisions to declare war, and I recognize that the War Powers
    Resolution prescribes that the President shall consult with Congress
    before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities ``in
    every possible instance.''
        In general, the President may order certain military action without
    the prior approval of Congress either (1) pursuant to an existing
    statutory authorization for use of military force that would apply to
    the specific circumstances for the contemplated military action, or (2)
    pursuant to his or her Article II authority to protect important
    national interests, subject to important constitutional and statutory
    limitations on the scope and duration of those military operations.
        Congress enacted the 2001 AUMF shortly after 9/11 to provide the
    President authority to take action against al-Q'aida, the Taliban, and
    their associated forces, and to detain enemy personnel captured during
    the course of the armed conflict. Congress enacted the 2002 AUMF in the
    run-up to the 2003 United States invasion of Iraq. It authorized the
    United States to defend against the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's
    regime and weapons of mass destruction program. Both the 2001 and 2002
    AUMFs remain in effect today.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the DOD General
    Counsel in interpreting the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs and in the application
    of these AUMFs to military activities?
        Answer. The DOD General Counsel is responsible for advising the
    Secretary of Defense and other personnel of the Department of Defense
    on the interpretation and application of the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs to
    military operations. The DOD General Counsel also participates in
    discussions and consultation with attorneys across U.S. departments and
    agencies to share views on the interpretation and application of the
    2001 and 2002 AUMFs to current or proposed military operations.
        Question. In your view, were Congress to rescind the 2001 AUMF,
    would the United States have the legal authority to continue to detain
    alleged members and supporters of Al Qaeda and the Taliban as enemy
    combatants? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. Whether the United States may continue lawfully to detain
    such individuals would depend on the specific facts and circumstances
    presented, including whether any new or replacement AUMF might apply
    and whether the United States remained in hostilities against those
    groups. Any U.S. detention under the law of armed conflict must comply
    with applicable domestic and international law, including the humane
    treatment provisions of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of
    1949.
        Question. In your view, how would U.S. and foreign partner military
    and detention operations be affected were Congress to rescind the 2002
    Authorization for the Use of Military Force? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. I understand that the United States does not currently rely
    on the 2002 AUMF as the sole domestic legal basis for any ongoing
    military operations, but the statute has been cited by administrations
    over at least the past decade as an ``additional authority'' that
    supports United States counterterrorism operations against the Islamic
    State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Iraq and, in certain circumstances,
    in Syria. On that understanding, repealing the 2002 AUMF likely would
    not have a significant impact on current U.S. military activities.
        Question. In your view, would it be appropriate for the United
    States to use military force against terrorist groups that have not
    engaged in hostilities directly against the United States, but merely
    shown an intent to do so? If so, under what circumstances?
        Answer. The United States always reserves the inherent right to act
    in self-defense, including against an imminent threat of armed attack.
    Determining whether an attack is imminent for purposes of a lawful
    resort to the use of force would depend on the specific facts and
    circumstances at the time.
        Question. Some commentators have recommended rescission of the 2001
    and 2002 AUMFs and the enactment of a ``replacement'' AUMF that would
    impose one or more temporal, geographic, or other limits (e.g., limits
    on targeted groups, limits on type of military force) on the
    President's authority to use military force.
        What do you consider to be the factors that would need to be
    weighed in any decision to enact a replacement AUMF?
        Answer. I support the Administration's stated desire to work with
    Congress to replace the current AUMFs with a narrow and specific
    framework that will address current threats to the United States,
    including continuing terrorist threats.
        Question. In your view, should the American public be provided a
    clear, unclassified explanation of the legal and policy frameworks
    under which military force can be used abroad generally, and in each
    specific case in which the President authorizes such a use of force?
        Answer. Yes, although operationally sensitive material might need
    to remain classified in certain circumstances.
        Question. How has the legal analysis of criteria applicable to the
    President's authority to authorize the use of military force pursuant
    to Article II of the United States Constitution changed over the past
    several Administrations?
        Answer. The President may direct certain military operations
    pursuant to Article II of the Constitution when that action serves
    sufficiently important national interests and the reasonably
    anticipated nature, scope, and duration of the operation would not rise
    to the level of ``war'' under the Constitution. This has been the
    longstanding view of both Democratic and Republican administrations
    across several decades, as reflected in a series of opinions drafted by
    the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel.
                  identification of potential extremist views
        Question. Press reports document the involvement of a small number
    of active duty military personnel, retired military officers, members
    of the National Guard, and military veterans in events at the U.S.
    Capitol on January 6.
        Are the Department's policies adequate to address, document, and
    track extremism in the military and in the DOD civilian workforce, in
    your view?
        Answer. It is my understanding that, since taking office in
    January, Secretary Austin has renewed DOD's efforts to address and
    eliminate extremist activities within the Department of Defense. In an
    April 9th memorandum, the Secretary directed a number of lines of
    effort and established the Countering Extremism Working Group and
    various sub-working groups to examine specific issues. I am informed
    that these efforts are currently underway. If confirmed, I will support
    these efforts, carefully review current Department policies and the
    recommendations of the working groups and provide my best legal advice
    to the Secretary of Defense and other senior leaders to develop
    effective, comprehensive, and legally appropriate policies to confront
    extremism.
        Question. What is your understanding of how the Department balances
    the need to identify and respond to potentially harmful extremist views
    held by servicemembers and civilian employees against individual
    privacy and respect for the rights of servicemembers and civilians to
    hold and express personal beliefs?
        Answer. It is my understanding that DOD policy seeks to preserve
    the right of expression for all DOD personnel to the maximum extent
    possible in accordance with the U.S. Constitution and consistent with
    good order and discipline and the national security. Although the vast
    majority of the men and women of the Department serve with honor and
    uphold its core values, I agree with the Secretary that the Department
    cannot tolerate actions of the few that go against the fundamental
    principles of the oath that servicemembers and civilian employees take
    to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
    enemies, foreign and domestic. If confirmed, I will carefully review
    current Department policies and the recommendations from ongoing
    reviews by the Countering Violent Extremism Working Group and its sub-
    working groups, and will provide my best legal advice to the Secretary
    of Defense and other senior leaders to develop effective,
    comprehensive, and legally appropriate policies to confront extremism.
        Question. Do you see a need for a change in this balance?
        Answer. As noted previously, the Countering Violent Extremism
    Working Group and its sub-working groups are examining how the
    Department addresses extremism. These efforts are continuing and have
    not reported out any recommendations of which I am aware. If confirmed,
    I look forward to working with the Secretary of Defense and Department
    leadership to review and provide my best legal advice on the
    recommendations presented.
        Question. In your view, do current Department of Defense policies
    limit the ability to include information about an individual's
    extremist views in official records that may assist in the
    identification of potential insider threats?
        Answer. I am aware that the Department is actively reviewing such
    issues to develop a policy that is effective, efficient, and legally
    appropriate, and that will allow for the identification of Department
    personnel and applicants who possess such views. I anticipate such
    policy would require careful and appropriate inclusion of information
    about extremist views in official records. If confirmed, I will work
    closely with my colleagues and provide my best legal advice in support
    of these ongoing efforts to address privacy and other issues that may
    arise in efforts to better identify potential insider threats.
        Question. In your view, do current Department procedures hinder the
    ability to share this type of information with other federal and state
    agencies charged with identifying and monitoring potential extremist
    activities?
        Answer. It is my understanding that such information sharing is one
    of the issues currently under review by the Department as part of the
    ongoing lines of effort directed by Secretary Austin. If confirmed, I
    will work closely with my colleagues and provide my best legal advice
    in support of these ongoing efforts to factor in privacy and other
    issues that are associated with sharing such information with other
    federal and state agencies to better identify potential insider
    threats.
                        general/flag officer nominations
        Question. Extant law and policy provide that adverse and reportable
    information pertaining to an officer must be evaluated by senior
    leaders in the Military Departments and in the Office of the Secretary
    of Defense prior to the nomination of such an officer for promotion to
    a general/flag officer grade or for appointment to a position of
    ``importance and responsibility.''
        In your view, what is the role of the DOD General Counsel in the
    officer promotion system generally, and more specifically in reviewing
    the nomination of officers for promotion to general and flag officer
    grades and positions?
        Answer. It is my understanding that all reports of promotion
    selection boards are reviewed by the Office of the DOD General Counsel
    prior to final action on the report by the Secretary of Defense or the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. This review
    comes after similar legal reviews have been conducted at the Military
    Service and Military Department levels. If the DOD General Counsel
    determines that a promotion selection board did not conform to law or
    policy, it would be the duty of the General Counsel to inform the
    Secretary of Defense or Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
    Readiness, as the case may be, of the irregularities and to recommend
    appropriate corrective action. I am also aware that the Office of the
    DOD General Counsel reviews the nomination package for each officer
    recommended for appointment to the grade of O-9 or O-10 while serving
    in a position of importance and responsibility, ensuring that any
    adverse or reportable information pertaining to an officer is
    accurately summarized. The Office of the DOD General Counsel also has a
    role in ensuring that officer promotion policies in DOD regulations
    accurately reflect the law in title 10.
        Question. Do you perceive a need for change in this role? Please
    explain your answer.
        Answer. I am not aware of any need to change the role the DOD
    General Counsel plays in the officer promotion system. If confirmed, I
    will assess whether that role should change.
        Question. In your view, are the current policies and procedures
    governing review of the records of officers whose selection for
    promotion or assignment requires Presidential or Secretary of Defense
    approval or Senate confirmation, sufficient to enable informed
    decisions by the Secretary of the Military Department concerned, the
    Secretary of Defense, the President, and the Senate? Please explain
    your answer.
        Answer. It is my understanding that the current policies and
    procedures, many of which are based on law, provide the Secretary of
    Defense, the President, and the Senate sufficient information on which
    to make informed decisions as to which officers should be promoted and/
    or assigned to positions of importance and responsibility. If
    confirmed, I will recommend changes to the current policies and
    procedures if I determine they are appropriate.
        Question. In your view, are these policies and procedures fair to
    the individual officers proceeding through the promotion or assignment
    processes?
        Answer. Yes, it is my understanding that these policies and
    procedures are fair. When adverse information pertaining to the officer
    is involved, I am aware that the officer's statement regarding such
    information is included in the appointment or nomination package. If
    confirmed, I will recommend changes to the policies and procedures if I
    determine they are appropriate.
        The Department of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) has reported
    that the number of allegations of ethical and other misconduct against
    senior Department officials has increased over the past several years.
        Question. Do you believe ethical violations and other misconduct
    among the general and flag officer corps and other Department senior
    officials are on the rise? If so, to what do you attribute this
    increase?
        Answer. Based on recent DOD Inspector General semi-annual reports
    to Congress, I understand that the number of substantiated cases
    against senior officials, as well as the substantiation rate, has
    recently decreased. As the Department of Defense Designated Agency
    Ethics Official, I will, if confirmed, carry out an effective ethics
    program to prevent, detect, and address ethical misconduct by DOD
    personnel.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
    in combatting any such increase?
        Answer. As the Department of Defense Designated Agency Ethics
    Official, I will, if confirmed, carry out an effective ethics program
    to educate and train personnel not only on the rules, but on the
    importance of maintaining the public's confidence. I will work closely
    with senior leaders to set a strong ``tone from the top'' to reinforce
    the expectation of ethical conduct by all DOD personnel.
        Question. What resources has DOD made available to provide its
    senior officials--both military and civilian--the training, legal
    advice, and assistance they need to adhere to legal and ethical
    standards, including travel regulations, and ensuring that government
    resources, including the official time of their military and civilian
    subordinates--are used only for official purposes? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. I understand that all new DOD personnel are required, by
    regulation, to receive initial ethics training within 90 days of
    joining the Department. The DOD Standards of Conduct Office has
    established procedures providing for Senate-confirmed Presidential
    appointees to be trained within seven days of appointment and other
    senior officials to be trained within 30 days of appointment. Ethics
    counselors throughout the Department train senior officials at least
    annually. The DOD Standards of Conduct Office maintains a robust public
    website with training material and topic-specific information. I am
    informed that the DOD Standards of Conduct Office experts participate
    in annual courses to train the almost 3,000 ethics counselors in the
    Department. Finally, I understand that the Standards of Conduct Office
    works closely with senior officials and their staffs to provide legal
    advice on ethics issues that may arise. As the Department of Defense
    Designated Agency Ethics Official, I will, if confirmed, advocate for
    sufficient resources to administer an effective ethics program.
          sexual assault and sexual harassment prevention and response
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the DOD General
    Counsel in addressing the sexual assault and sexual harassment in the
    Department of Defense?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the DOD General Counsel
    provides legal advice and assistance in support of the Department's
    efforts to prevent and respond to sexual assault and harassment. The
    DOD General Counsel works closely with the Judge Advocates General of
    the Military Departments and the Staff Judge Advocate to the Commandant
    of the Marine Corps to ensure an equitable and fair military justice
    system that promotes justice, good order and discipline, efficiency and
    effectiveness in the military establishment, thereby strengthening the
    national security of the United States.
        The General Counsel provides legal advice to the Secretary of
    Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Personnel and Readiness on proposed policies, program
    initiatives, and legislative proposals, and also advises on sexual
    assault and harassment-related changes impacting the military justice
    system.
        Question. What is your assessment of the efficacy of the
    Department's sexual assault prevention and response program?
        Answer. As the Secretary of Defense has made clear, more must be
    done to address sexual assault and harassment in the Department. If
    confirmed, I will support the efforts of the Secretary of Defense to
    combat sexual assault and harassment, which continues to be of
    significant concern. I will work with my colleagues in the Department
    to implement effective and lasting change to prevent and respond to
    sexual assault and harassment.
        Question. What is your assessment of the efficacy of the
    Department's initiatives focused on the prevention of sexual harassment
    and assaults in the armed forces?
        Answer. I understand the Department has undertaken initiatives in
    the area of prevention to include publishing a Prevention Plan of
    Action and establishing a Violence Prevention workforce. Recently, the
    Secretary of Defense directed a Department-wide data-driven assessment
    of sexual assault and harassment prevention and accountability
    measures. If confirmed, I will review those assessments to better
    assess the efficacy of the Department's initiatives.
        Question. An independent committee of civilian experts recently
    conducted a comprehensive assessment of the command climate and culture
    at Fort Hood, Texas. The Committee's report documents its finding that
    the Army's Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP)
    program at Fort Hood ``appeared to be compliant on the surface, but was
    hollow and lacking in leadership attention, day-to-day implementation,
    broad acceptance by the enlisted Soldiers, and full inculcation into
    the culture and character of the Fort Hood Community.''
        What is your understanding of the adequacy of Office of the
    Secretary of Defense oversight of Military Department and Service
    implementation of policies for the prevention of and response to sexual
    assaults and sexual harassment in the armed forces?
        Answer. I was disturbed by the findings of the Fort Hood
    Independent Committee Review report. Effective oversight by the Office
    of the Secretary of Defense of Military Department and Service
    implementation of policies for the prevention of and response to sexual
    assaults and sexual harassment in the armed forces is imperative. I
    know that Secretary Austin has committed to do everything in his power
    to make progress on this critically important issue and to ensure a
    safe, secure and productive environment for all personnel. If
    confirmed, I would provide my best advice to the Secretary regarding
    any improvements needed.
        Question. In your view, what is the role of the DOD General Counsel
    in providing such oversight?
        Answer. The General Counsel provides legal advice to various
    components in DOD with oversight responsibility for the sexual assault
    and harassment programs. If confirmed, I will examine the Office of
    General Counsel's role in the Department's oversight efforts.
        Question. What is your view of the adequacy of the human resources
    the Department has in place to investigate and prosecute allegations of
    sexual assault in the armed forces and of the training provided to such
    investigators and prosecutors?
        Answer. I believe it is critically important to have sufficient
    human resources in place to investigate and prosecute allegations of
    sexual assault in the armed forces and to adequately train such
    personnel. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments'
    General Counsels, Judge Advocates General, and the Staff Judge Advocate
    to the Commandant of the Marine Corps to ensure adequate resources are
    in place to conduct competent investigations and prosecutions of sexual
    assault allegations.
        Question. What is your view of the value of the Military
    Departments' Special Victims' Counsel and Victims' Legal Counsel
    programs? In your view, have these programs had an effect on the
    reporting and prosecution of allegations of sexual assault in the armed
    forces? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. My understanding of the Special Victims' Counsel and
    Victims Legal Counsel programs is that the victim has access to an
    attorney-client privileged relationship with his or her counsel that
    enables the victim to disclose details of their allegations, be
    informed of their rights, and understand what to expect from the
    military justice process. If confirmed, I will seek to better
    understand the effectiveness of these programs in terms of increased
    reporting and prosecution of allegations of sexual assault in the armed
    forces.
        Question. What is your view of the role of the chain of command in
    changing the military culture in which these sexual assaults and
    harassment occur?
        Answer. I believe the role of the chain of command is essential to
    changing military culture. The chain of command is comprised of leaders
    who are expected to set the example and the tone of a unit. Leaders who
    demonstrate decency, dignity and respect at every level of command
    foster positive command climates. Command climate is a leadership
    issue, and leaders must be held appropriately accountable in promoting
    a culture of dignity, respect and inclusion.
        Question. DOD reports on sexual assault and sexual harassment in
    the military generally, and at the Military Service Academies, more
    specifically, consistently document the correlation of incidents of
    sexual harassment and incidents of sexual assault.
        What is your view of the Department's program to prevent and
    respond to sexual harassment in the armed forces?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will closely examine this issue.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself,
    in addressing the problem of sexual assault and sexual harassment in
    the armed forces?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would support the Department with any
    legislative, policy, or regulatory efforts to address the problem of
    sexual assault and harassment proposed by the Department, and provide
    legal advice on implementation of policies to ensure compliance with
    applicable laws and regulations.
        Question. What actions has DOD taken to establish a comprehensive
    sexual harassment prevention and response policy for its civilian
    workforce?
        Answer. I understand that, in addition to its integrated violence
    prevention policy, in the last year the Department also issued its
    first comprehensive civilian employee anti-harassment policy, which
    provides procedures for training, education, and response to all forms
    of harassment.
        Question. In your view, does the Department's method for tracking
    the submission and monitoring the resolution of informal complaints of
    harassment or discrimination provide DOD leaders, supervisors, and
    managers, with an accurate picture of the systemic prevalence of these
    adverse behaviors in the civilian workforce?
        Answer. I understand that the Department is engaged in a variety of
    data collection efforts concerning workplace relations. If confirmed, I
    will support the Department's ongoing efforts to review these data
    collection tools to ensure leaders have relevant and accurate data
    concerning the environment and culture of the civilian workforce.
        Question. Does the Department's method for recording the outcomes
    of informal complaints of harassment or discrimination provide DOD
    leaders, supervisors, and managers, with a means of identifying repeat
    perpetrators in the civilian workforce?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the Department's efforts to
    provide civilian employees a healthy work environment free from
    harassment and discrimination and I will evaluate current methods for
    recording the outcomes of informal complaints and whether those methods
    assist in identifying repeat perpetrators.
        Question. Does the Department's method for responding to complaints
    of harassment or discrimination in the civilian workforce provide
    appropriate care and services for victims?
        Answer. I understand that the Department is committed to providing
    its civilian employees who believe they have been harassed or
    discriminated against in the workplace with protection, care, and
    information about available support resources, including services
    provided by DOD and public and private entities in the local area. If
    confirmed, I will support the Department's efforts to provide effective
    and compassionate care to civilian employees who experience workplace
    harassment and discrimination.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you play in shaping
    policies and processes for the prevention of harassment and
    discrimination in the DOD civilian workforce?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Office of General
    Counsel supports any legislative or regulatory efforts proposed by the
    Department to prevent harassment and discrimination in the civilian
    workforce, and that OGC provides legal advice on implementation of
    policies to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
                            whistleblower protection
        Question. Section 1034 of title 10, U.S. Code, prohibits taking or
    threatening to take an unfavorable personnel action against a member of
    the armed forces in retaliation for making a protected communication.
    Section 2302 of title 5, U.S. Code, provides similar protections to
    Federal civilian employees.
        If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself in
    ensuring that servicemembers and civilian employees of the Department
    of Defense who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross mismanagement
    are protected from reprisal?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the DOD Inspector
    General, who has responsibility for reprisal investigations, to support
    efforts to educate and inform senior civilian and military leaders
    regarding the importance of reporting fraud, waste, abuse, and gross
    mismanagement and protecting personnel who make such reports from
    reprisal.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure that
    senior civilian and military leaders understand the need to encourage
    servicemembers and civilians to report fraud, waste, abuse, and gross
    mismanagement--within or outside the chain of command or supervision--
    and to ensure that they can make such reports without fear of reprisal?
        Answer. As indicated above, if confirmed, I will work closely with
    the DOD Inspector General, who has responsibility for reprisal
    investigations to support efforts to educate and inform senior civilian
    and military leaders regarding the importance of reporting fraud,
    waste, abuse, and gross mismanagement and protecting personnel who make
    such reports from reprisal.
        Question. What role, if any, does the DOD General Counsel play in
    ensuring the legal sufficiency and consistent execution of DOD IG
    whistleblower investigations?
        Answer. The DOD Inspector General has his or her own legal counsel
    who advises the Inspector General with respect to the legal sufficiency
    of DOD IG investigations. Under 10 U.S.C. Sec.  1034, however, if a
    complainant is not satisfied with the disposition of a whistleblower
    investigation, he or she may submit the matter to the Secretary of
    Defense for review. It is under this authority the DOD General Counsel
    may perform a legal review of the investigation and thereby help to
    ensure consistency of application and interpretation of whistleblower
    protections across the Department of Defense.
        Question. What role does or should the DOD General Counsel play in
    ensuring consistency of application and interpretation of whistleblower
    protections across DOD and its components?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work to ensure consistent application
    and interpretation of whistleblower protections across DOD and its
    components when providing legal advice on these matters.
             support to the department of defense inspector general
        Question. What is the relationship between the DOD General Counsel
    and the DOD Inspector General?
        Answer. The position of General Counsel to the DOD IG is
    established by law in an amendment to the Inspector General Act. The
    General Counsel to the IG is appointed by the Inspector General of the
    Department of Defense and acts as the chief legal officer of the Office
    of the Inspector General; this position is not under the supervision of
    the General Counsel of the Department of Defense. It is my
    understanding that the DOD General Counsel does not review the legal
    sufficiency of Inspector General investigations, including
    whistleblower investigations, as that role is performed by the General
    Counsel to the IG. If confirmed, I will assist the Office of the
    Inspector General as requested and appropriate, and I will provide
    appropriate legal advice to the Department in conjunction with actions
    stemming from an investigation.
        Question. Is the DOD Inspector General bound by the legal opinions
    of the DOD General Counsel?
        Answer. Although legal opinions of the DOD General Counsel
    generally are binding throughout the Department of Defense under 10
    U.S.C. Sec.  140, the General Counsel to the Inspector General is
    expressly exempted from the scope of 10 U.S.C. Sec.  140 by virtue of
    Section 907 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
    Year (FY) 2009 (5 U.S.C. App. Inspector General Act of 1978 Sec.
    8(h)).
        Question. What role, if any, does the DOD General Counsel currently
    have in reviewing DOD IG reports of investigation and inspections? In
    your view, do you see a need for a change in this role?
        Answer. My understanding is that the DOD General Counsel reviews
    certain DOD IG reports of investigation and inspections prior to
    finalization and release but that the DOD General Counsel does not
    review the legal sufficiency of Inspector General investigations and
    recommendations. If confirmed, I will examine whether any changes are
    needed to this role.
        Question. Is DOD or component information otherwise protected by
    the attorney client privilege made available to the DOD Inspector
    General in the execution of his duties pursuant to the Inspector
    General Act of 1978, as amended? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. My understanding is that information otherwise protected by
    the attorney client privilege is made available to the DOD Inspector
    General.
                   civilian attorney recruiting and retention
        Question. In your view, does the Office of the General Counsel of
    the Department of Defense have a sufficient number of attorneys to
    perform its many missions? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. While I am not aware of any gaps in attorney staffing
    impacting mission performance, if confirmed, I will review staffing to
    ensure that the DOD Office of General Counsel can continue performing
    its many missions successfully.
        Question. What is your assessment of your ability, if confirmed, to
    hire and retain high quality attorneys in the Office of the DOD General
    Counsel, as well as to provide sufficient opportunity for their
    development and advancement?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am confident I will be able to hire and
    retain high quality attorneys. If I were to become aware of any
    barriers to hiring, advancing and retaining quality attorneys, I would
    work to address those barriers.
        Question. Do you believe that the DOD legal community needs
    additional incentives and talent management tools to recruit, develop,
    sustain, and retain a 21st century career civilian attorney workforce?
    If so, what sort of incentives and tools do you perceive would be
    helpful?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with senior leaders in the Office
    of General Counsel and Defense Legal Services Agency to determine if
    any additional incentives and talent management tools are needed to
    ensure a high quality career civilian attorney workforce in the coming
    years. If any incentives and tools are needed, I would work to obtain
    them.
        Question. Do you foresee that in the coming years, DOD's demand for
    civilian attorneys with certain technical-legal expertise (e.g., cyber,
    space, and intellectual property law) will increase, commensurate with
    the Department's evolving missions and the 2018 NDS? If so, in what
    technical-legal specialties would you expect DOD's requirements to
    increase, and why?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continuously assess the level of
    technical legal expertise in these areas to determine whether DOD's
    civilian attorneys possess the requisite skills to remain effective in
    these critically important subject areas, particularly as needs
    increase based on the Department's evolving missions.
        Question. The DOD General Counsel serves as the selecting official
    for all OSD career Senior Executive Service (SES) attorney positions.
        What do you view as the most important executive competencies of an
    SES attorney and how would you assess these in deciding whether to
    recommend a particular candidate for selection and appointment to an
    attorney's position in the career SES?
        Answer. First and foremost, SES attorneys must be exceptional
    lawyers with high levels of integrity. Being an exceptional attorney
    necessarily involves many of the competencies expected of SES members,
    and I would look for these competencies when assessing candidates
    through written submissions and interviews. In addition to having
    excellent problem-solving and technical skills, exceptional attorneys
    must be innovative and flexible thinkers who can work strategically
    with senior leaders to lawfully implement the Department's initiatives
    in a rapidly-changing landscape. They must encourage constructive
    discussion of differing views to arrive at the best possible legal
    advice. They must be masterful coalition builders with the ability to
    persuade others. Finally, they must understand DOD's mission, as well
    as internal and external factors that affect the organization in order
    to be effective in providing legal options for senior leader action.
                                  acquisition
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the DOD General
    Counsel in ensuring that the Department's acquisition programs are
    executed in accordance with applicable law and policy?
        Answer. The General Counsel, as chief legal officer, plays a vital
    role in ensuring that DOD carries out its acquisition programs
    consistent with applicable law and policy. Attorneys play meaningful
    roles throughout every acquisition to ensure that DOD acts in full
    accord with Congressional and Executive intent as expressed through law
    and policy. If confirmed, I will lead the many hardworking acquisition
    attorneys throughout the Department in making certain that procurements
    are conducted fairly and, wherever possible, transparently.
        Question. What are your views on the overall effects on DOD of
    defense acquisition reform to date?
        Answer. My understanding is that dividing the Office of the
    Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    into the Under Secretary for Research and Engineering and the Under
    Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment has allowed the successor
    organizations to focus their efforts on different areas within the
    technology life cycle and deliver more rapid, robust capabilities to
    the warfighter.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that DOD acquisition
    officials understand and leverage the flexibilities provided by
    Congress in the context of acquisition reform?
        Answer. If confirmed, my job as General Counsel would be to ensure
    that the flexibilities provided by Congress are utilized whenever they
    can benefit DOD. Training attorneys and other acquisition professionals
    on flexibilities provided legislatively will facilitate expanded use of
    alternative pathways in the Adaptive Acquisition Framework, which will
    in turn allow DOD to tailor their acquisition strategies to deliver
    better, faster solutions.
        Question. Do you perceive benefit to DOD in establishing major
    acquisition programs under Section 804 authority? What are the risks of
    doing so? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. In Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92), Congress gave the Department
    the authority to create a new type of acquisition pathway, the Middle
    Tier of Acquisition (MTA) that provides for rapid fielding or rapid
    prototyping of capabilities needed by the warfighter. The NDAA also
    amended 10 U.S.C. Sec.  2430(a)(2)(A) to exclude 804 MTA programs from
    the definition of a Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP), which
    results in the Department having flexibility to tailor an MTA program
    without the need to comply with the rigid statutory requirements
    applicable to MDAPs. The principal benefits of an MTA program are a
    function of this flexibility. There is risk that the provision of
    information to Congress outside the rigid MDAP statutory framework
    could fall short of what Congress needs to fulfill its oversight and
    authorization functions, because there would be no express statutory
    mandate for providing the information. If confirmed, I will work to
    mitigate that risk by providing information to Congress even where not
    statutorily required.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
    in promoting compliance by both DOD acquisition personnel and
    contractor personnel with procurement integrity and other ethics laws
    and policy?
        Answer. Fair and open procurements are critical to meeting the
    needs of our warfighters and safeguarding our national security. My
    role, if confirmed as General Counsel, will be to ensure that the
    acquisition workforce understands the importance of procurement
    integrity and the standards of conduct by maintaining a robust ethics
    and procurement integrity training program and encouraging leaders to
    set a strong ``tone from the top'' to reinforce the expectation of
    ethical conduct by all personnel.
        Question. In February 2019, the Congressionally-established
    Advisory Panel on Streamlining and Codifying Acquisition Regulations
    (the ``809 Panel'') submitted its final report, detailing 98
    recommendations to enhance DOD's ability to acquire and deliver
    warfighting capability in a cost-effective and timely manner, better to
    address the concerns raised by the current international security
    environment.
        Given the recommendations of the 809 panel, are there any
    additional acquisition reforms you would endorse for consideration by
    Congress?
        Answer. Although I am not fully versed in the details of the 809
    Panel report, if confirmed, I will be happy to review the detailed
    recommendations of the Panel to identify whether there are additional
    acquisition reforms for Congress to consider.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you assess and implement the
    Panel's recommendation to reorganize acquisition statutes, including
    statutory notes?
        Answer. I understand that the Office of the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment has established a working group
    to assess the 809 Panel's recommendations on the reorganization of the
    Title 10 U.S. Code acquisition statutes and accompanying statutory
    notes. If confirmed, I will continue to work with the working group to
    complete its efforts and to review the implementation plan for updating
    the Federal Acquisition Regulations, the DOD FAR Supplement, and DOD
    issuances.
                                 risk aversion
        Question. Many attempts at management reform in the Department of
    Defense, to include personnel reform and acquisition reform, involve
    allowing senior and local leadership to make maximum use of authorized
    flexibilities and exceptions to standard practices. It is generally
    believed that DOD's so-called ``risk averse culture'' stifles
    initiative and traps the Department in a set of antiquated and
    burdensome practices. At times, this culture of risk aversion has been
    attributed to the legal advice rendered by DOD and component attorneys.
        In your view, what role should the assessment of ``risk'' play in
    an attorney's provision of legal advice?
        Answer. In my view, an attorney's role is to provide DOD leaders
    with assessments of legal risks associated with proposed actions to
    enable senior leaders to make informed decisions. If a particular
    course of action is legally impermissible, it is the attorney's
    obligation to provide that advice. Attorneys should suggest, whenever
    possible, alternative courses of action that would allow achievement of
    policy goals, together with the attorney's assessment of the associated
    legal risk.
                           security clearance reform
        Question. ``Trusted Workforce 2.0'' represents a significant
    overhaul of the system for granting or denying security clearances for
    access to classified information. In January 2021, the Office of the
    Director of National Intelligence and the Office of Personnel
    Management published a proposed new doctrine intended ``to guide
    transformative efforts to reform the U.S. Government personnel security
    vetting processes [in order] to promote mobility, improve efficiencies
    and move towards an enhanced risk management approach.'' Another
    January 2021 memorandum brought all Department of Defense civilian,
    military and contractor clearance disputes under the umbrella of the
    Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (2021, the Office of the
    Director of National Intelligence and the Office of Personnel
    Management published a proposed new doctrine intended ``to guide
    transformative efforts to reform the U.S. Government personnel security
    vetting processes [in order] to promote mobility, improve efficiencies
    and move towards an enhanced risk management approach.'' Another
    January 2021 memorandum brought all Department of Defense civilian,
    military and contractor clearance disputes under the umbrella of the
    Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (2021, the Office of the
    Director of National Intelligence and the Office of Personnel
    Management published a proposed new doctrine intended ``to guide
    transformative efforts to reform the U.S. Government personnel security
    vetting processes [in order] to promote mobility, improve efficiencies
    and move towards an enhanced risk management approach.'' Another
    January 2021 memorandum brought all Department of Defense civilian,
    military and contractor clearance disputes under the umbrella of the
    Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (
        If confirmed, what role would you and the Office of the DOD General
    Counsel play in the implementation of ``Trusted Workforce 2.0''?
        Answer. I understand the ``Trusted Workforce 2.0'' is part of the
    Federal Personnel Vetting Core Doctrine, which is a general policy
    statement published by the Acting Director of the Office of Personnel
    Management as the Suitability and Credentialing Executive Agent and the
    Director of National Intelligence as the Security Executive Agent.
    Separately, a February 4, 2021, memorandum from President Biden
    established an interagency working group to, among other things,
    ``assess implementation of security clearance reforms and reciprocity
    proposals, additional reforms to eliminate bias, and ensure efficient
    timelines for completion of security clearance investigations.'' If
    confirmed, I would provide my best legal advice in support of DOD
    efforts to reform, align, and modernize the DOD personnel security
    vetting process.
        Question. What role would you play in the oversight of DOHA and its
    actions on appeals from the denial of a security clearance? In your
    view, what benefits attach to the assignment of all security clearance
    disputes to DOHA?
        Answer. I am committed to the goal of keeping the Nation safe while
    providing a fair, consistent, and transparent administrative process to
    the men and women who serve in important sensitive National security
    roles. If confirmed, I will oversee the Defense Office of Hearings and
    Appeals (DOHA). Through this direct line of supervision and oversight,
    I would ensure the independence, fairness, and consistency of DOHA
    decisions in the established administrative processes for which DOHA
    has responsibility. I will also, if confirmed, verify that the rights
    of individuals are being protected consistent with the Constitution,
    U.S. statutes, Executive Orders, regulations, and DOD policy. If
    confirmed, I will have to study further the implications of
    consolidating additional responsibilities in the Defense Office of
    Hearings and Appeals.
                             conflicts of interest
        Question. Servicemember and DOD civilian employee conflicts of
    interest have long been a concern.
        What is the general prevalence in the armed forces, and in the DOD
    civilian workforce, of violations of criminal laws and executive branch
    and DOD ethics regulations relating to conflicts of interest?
        Answer. I believe preventing potential conflicts of interest is
    paramount to maintaining the public's trust and confidence in the
    Department's operations. Based on annual data reported on the Office of
    Government Ethics website for Calendar Year 2019, I understand that
    there were only seven statutory violations and 366 regulatory
    violations in a Department of over 1.7 million full-time personnel.
    That represents far less than 1% of the total DOD workforce. As the
    Department of Defense Designated Agency Ethics Official, I will, if
    confirmed, carry out an effective ethics program to prevent and resolve
    conflicts of interest and the appearance of conflicts of interest.
        Question. What role do attorneys in the Office of the DOD General
    Counsel and in the Defense Legal Services Agency play in ensuring that
    DOD personnel--military and civilian--timely identify and disclose
    potential conflicts of interest and take all appropriate steps to avoid
    or mitigate them?
        Answer. I understand that experienced and capable attorneys who are
    experts in this area of the law help DOD personnel identify and prevent
    potential conflicts of interest through financial disclosure reviews
    and robust training programs. All senior personnel are required to file
    public financial disclosure forms within 30 days of arrival and
    annually thereafter. Likewise, non-senior personnel whose duties
    require them to participate in matters affecting the financial
    interests of outside entities are required to file confidential
    financial disclosure forms. I understand that ethics counselors
    promptly and thoroughly review these forms for potential conflicts of
    interest and provide appropriate legal advice. They also work with
    filers and their supervisors to implement any necessary actions to
    avoid conflicts of interest. As the Department of Defense Designated
    Agency Ethics Official, I will, if confirmed, carry out an effective
    ethics program to prevent and resolve conflicts of interest and the
    appearance of conflicts of interest.
        Question. In your view, what essential purpose is served by legal
    and policy restrictions on post-government employment of DOD
    personnel--both military and civilian?
        Answer. I believe the essential purpose served by legal and policy
    restrictions on post-Government employment of DOD personnel is to
    preserve the public's trust in the integrity of Department of Defense
    operations. As the Department of Defense Designated Agency Ethics
    Official, I will, if confirmed, carry out an effective ethics program
    to ensure that the public's trust in the Department is maintained.
        Question. Are the laws and regulations relating to the post-
    government employment of DOD personnel--military and civilian--
    adequate, coherent, and comprehensible, in your view?
        Answer. I believe it is important to have a congruent body of
    ethics laws applicable to all Government employees and under the
    authority of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to regulate. This
    ensures fairness and consistency throughout the Federal Government and
    among former federal employees, and avoids confusion that may lead to
    inadvertent violations. If confirmed, I will ensure all ethics laws are
    implemented effectively.
        Question. How might such body of laws and regulations be improved,
    in your view?
        Answer. I understand that the Government Accountability Office is
    currently studying the post-Government employment laws and regulations
    that apply to former DOD personnel, and that the current National
    Defense Authorization Act requires the Department to brief this
    Committee, as well as the House Armed Services Committee, on the
    implementation of these laws and regulations. If confirmed, and the
    Secretary of Defense designates me to participate, I look forward to
    speaking with the committees about these issues, and to participating
    in the briefing.
                           anti-deficiency act (ada)
        Question. What are your ideas for streamlining the investigative
    and review process attending a determination that an ADA violation has
    occurred?
        Answer. The timely, accurate and thorough investigation, review and
    reporting of Anti-Deficiency Act violations is essential to ensuring
    the transparency with which the Department stewards appropriated funds.
    I understand that DOD has robust policies and procedures to ensure the
    defense agencies and military departments can detect potential ADA
    violations; however, I believe all processes can benefit from ongoing
    reviews. If confirmed, I will work to support the Under Secretary of
    Defense (Comptroller) in improving the Department's current process for
    addressing Anti-Deficiency Act violations.
                          professional responsibility
        Question. What is the role of the General Counsel of the Department
    of Defense in ensuring that attorneys under her supervision adhere to
    Rules of Professional Conduct? If confirmed, how would you approach
    this critical supervisory duty with regard to the Office of the DOD
    General Counsel?
        Answer. The DOD General Counsel is responsible for the critically
    important duty of establishing professional responsibility standards
    for civilian attorneys under her supervision and for overseeing
    adherence to these standards, in accordance with DOD Directive 5145.01.
    If confirmed, I will review the rules and procedures currently in place
    to ensure legal services are provided with the highest degree of
    professionalism.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the DOD General
    Counsel with respect to adherence to the Rules of Professional Conduct
    by DOD component civilian attorneys not under the supervision of the
    DOD General Counsel and military judge advocates?
        Answer. My understanding is that the DOD General Counsel retains
    overall responsibility for the legal services performed by all DOD
    attorneys, civilian and military. That said, most matters of attorney
    professional responsibility are handled by the individual DOD
    Components through their respective General Counsel or Judge Advocates
    General.
        Question. The American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Pro
    Bono and Public Service asserts that ``[w]hen society confers the
    privilege to practice law on an individual, he or she accepts the
    responsibility to promote justice and to make justice equally
    accessible to all people. Thus, all lawyers should aspire to render
    some legal services without fee or expectation of fee for the good of
    the public.''
        If confirmed, would you favor the creation of a program to permit
    civilian attorneys in DOD OGC or in a DOD component to engage in pro
    bono work? If not, why not? If so, what would be the appropriate
    parameters of such a program, in your view?
        Answer. It is my understanding that a program to permit civilian
    attorneys in the DOD Office of General Counsel to participate in pro
    bono work currently exists in accordance with Section 2 of Executive
    Order 12988, on Civil Justice Reform. I also understand that through
    this program, DOD participates in the larger Federal Agency Pro Bono
    Program and the Office of General Counsel provides a Pro Bono Program
    Coordinator for DOD. In my judgment, DOD Office of General Counsel
    personnel participation in pro bono activities should be encouraged,
    consistent with the law. If confirmed, I am prepared to review the
    current DOD Office of General Counsel Pro Bono Policy to ensure it
    meets the current needs of DOD and the attorneys who wish to
    participate in providing pro bono services.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you expect a DOD or
    component civilian attorney or judge advocate to take should that
    attorney become aware of improper activities by an officer or employee
    of the Department who has sought, but failed to follow, the attorney's
    legal advice?
        Answer. As with any DOD servicemember or civilian employee, DOD
    attorneys have an obligation to report activities of DOD officials that
    are in violation of law, regulation, or DOD policy to the Inspector
    General or another appropriate authority. I understand that DOD has
    established reporting requirements for doing so.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were it brought
    to your attention that a certain appointment or designation was
    potentially in violation of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act and
    associated case law?
        Answer. If confirmed, and if it were brought to my attention that
    an appointment or designation was potentially in violation of the
    Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA) of 1998, as amended, I would take
    steps to ascertain the facts, inform the Department's leadership if I
    have concerns, and provide them with my best advice to resolve the
    situation.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were it brought
    to your attention that an individual pending nomination or confirmation
    by the Senate, to a Presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed office
    was potentially acting in contravention of the policies of the Senate
    Armed Services Committee regarding the presumption of confirmation?
        Answer. I share the Committee's concern that a nominee to a
    Presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed position should not do
    anything to presume confirmation. If confirmed, and if it was brought
    to my attention that a nominee was acting contrary to the policies of
    the Senate Armed Services Committee regarding the presumption of
    confirmation, I would take steps to determine the facts, inform the
    Department's leadership, including the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Legislative Affairs, of the issue, and provide them with my best
    advice to resolve the situation.
                annual department of defense legislative program
        Question. One of the responsibilities of the DOD General Counsel is
    to coordinate the Department's legislative program and to provide the
    Department's views on legislative proposals initiated from outside the
    Department.
        If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure that the
    Department's legislative proposals are submitted to the Armed Services
    Committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives in a timely
    manner, so as to ensure ample opportunity for consideration of such
    proposals by Congress and the public before markup of the annual NDAA?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Committee staff to set
    realistic deadlines for legislative proposal submissions. I will work
    within DOD and with OMB to ensure those deadlines are respected.
        Question. What actions would you take, if confirmed, to ensure
    Congress receives the Department's views on other proposed legislation
    in a timely manner?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues in Legislative
    Affairs and throughout the Department to ensure timely replies to
    informal requests for views on specific legislation.
    review of decisions of military department boards for the correction of
                  military records and discharge review boards
        Question. When will DOD implement and make available to
    servicemembers the process for conducting a final review of a request
    for a discharge upgrade, as required by section 1553a of title 10, U.S.
    Code?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department of Defense
    implemented the final review process through the Deputy Secretary of
    Defense's Memorandum, ``Department of Defense Implementing Section 523
    of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020,'' dated
    January 29, 2021. It designated the Secretary of the Air Force, under
    the oversight of the Under Secretary of the Defense for Personnel and
    Readiness, as the lead agent for the Department with responsibility for
    the formation, operation and management of the final review process of
    requests for an upgrade in the characterization of a discharge or
    dismissal as required by section 1553a of Title 10 of the U.S. Code.
    The January 29th Memorandum also provided procedures for
    servicemembers, and their legal representatives, to apply to the new
    review process, referred to as the Department of Defense Discharge
    Appeal Review Board, or DARB for short.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for the
    Office of the DOD General Counsel in the operation of this process?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the current Department of
    Defense Discharge Appeal Review Board (DARB) process and determine the
    appropriate role for the Office of the DOD General Counsel in its
    operation.
                            execute orders (exords)
        Question. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2020 requires the Secretary of
    Defense, upon request by the Chairman or Ranking Member, to provide the
    Armed Services Committees with access to, and the ability to review,
    EXORDs signed by the Secretary or the commander of a combatant command.
    The law allows for an exception to this requirement only in
    ``extraordinary circumstances necessary to protect operations security
    or the sensitivity of the execute order.''
        Will you commit to complying with this requirement, if confirmed?
        Answer. Section 1744 of the NDAA for FY 2020 requires the Secretary
    to provide access to the relevant execute orders absent extraordinary
    circumstances. If confirmed, I will provide my best legal advice
    regarding compliance with this law.
        Question. Under what ``extraordinary circumstances'' do you believe
    it would be appropriate for the Secretary of Defense to limit review of
    an EXORD by the Armed Services Committees?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to working to accommodate any
    request from this Committee, including requests for specific execute
    orders. Limiting review of an execute order would be appropriate when
    the Secretary concludes that it is required to protect operations
    security or the sensitivity of the execute order, or otherwise
    concludes that the execute order may be protected by executive
    privilege and refers the matter to the White House. If confirmed, I
    will provide the Secretary with legal advice regarding such
    determinations to limit review in order to help ensure that they meet
    the letter and intent of the law.
                      military malpractice claim framework
        Question. Section 731 of the NDAA for FY 2020 authorized the
    Secretary of Defense to allow, settle, and pay claims against the
    United States for personal injury or death incident to the service of a
    member of the uniformed services that was the result of medical
    malpractice caused by a Department of Defense health care provider.
        When can the Congress expect publication and implementation of the
    final DOD regulations governing the filing, adjudication, approval, and
    payment of such claims?
        Answer. I am informed that the draft interim final rule to
    implement section 731 of the NDAA for FY 2020 is currently with the
    Office of Management and Budget for review and interagency
    coordination. Decisions on claims can begin to be issued and payments
    made to claimants once the interim final rule is published. Once the
    interim final rule is published, public comments will be considered and
    a final rule issued within one year thereafter.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
    in overseeing the implementation of these regulations, once published,
    across affected DOD components?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to exercise oversight in the
    implementation of the regulations to ensure that they are implemented
    consistently and so that any necessary adjustments are made.
                     military health system reorganization
        Question. Section 702 of the NDAA for FY 2017, as clarified by
    sections 711 and 712 of the NDAA for FY 2019, transferred the
    Administration and management of military treatment facilities (MTFs)
    from the Military Services to the Defense Health Agency (DHA). Yet, the
    Department's implementation of this transfer has been delayed.
        If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself in
    promoting the rapid and efficient transfer to DHA of responsibility and
    authority for the Administration and management of Military Department
    MTFs?
        Answer. It is my understanding that both Congress and the Office of
    the Secretary of Defense have identified the transfer of military
    medical treatment facilities to the Defense Health Agency as a
    significant priority. If confirmed, I will support Office of the
    Secretary of Defense leadership, including the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the Assistant Secretary of
    Defense for Health Affairs, in ensuring the transfer of responsibility
    for military medical treatment facilities is done effectively and in
    accordance with all statutory requirements.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
    appropriate committees of Congress are able to receive testimony,
    briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
    communications) and other information from the Department.
        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 Gary C. Peters
                                  skillbridge
        1. Senator Peters. Ms. Krass, North Korea is a criminal syndicate
    with a flag--does the Department of Defense (DOD) have a role in
    combating their cybercrimes?
        Ms. Krass. Defending our Nation from increasingly sophisticated
    cyber threats from both nation state actors and cyber criminals is a
    whole-of-government mission. Building enduring partnerships among DOD
    Components, the Department of Justice (DOJ), other U.S. Government
    departments and agencies, and our allies and foreign partners is
    crucial for the United States to be able to disrupt the malicious cyber
    activities of our adversaries, including North Korea, and their agents
    and proxies.
        Moreover, as President Biden emphasizes in Executive Order 14028,
    ``Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity,'' May 12, 2021, ``cybersecurity
    requires more than government action. Protecting our Nation from
    malicious cyber actors requires the Federal Government to partner with
    the private sector.'' If confirmed, I look forward to working closely
    with the DOD Components, DOJ, other departments and agencies, and the
    private sector to counter this growing threat.
                                   __________
                   Questions Submitted by Senator Thom Tillis
                            military justice system
        2. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, in responding to advance policy
    questions, you stated, ``if pending legislative proposals to address
    sexual assault and harassment are enacted, ensuring that such reforms
    are executed seamlessly will be a challenging facing the next General
    Counsel.'' Can you explain what you meant by this?
        Ms. Krass. The DOD General Counsel plays a major role in the
    development of military justice policy. One significant aspect of this
    role is the General Counsel's oversight of the Joint Service Committee
    on Military Justice, which is tasked with proposing changes to the
    Manual for Courts-Martial to implement amendments to the Uniform Code
    of Military Justice (UCMJ). Upon the enactment of any UCMJ amendments
    affecting the handling of sexual assault and/or sexual harassment
    cases, the DOD General Counsel will be responsible for ensuring that
    necessary changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial are drafted with
    effective implementation in mind. The General Counsel's office also
    will need to ensure that revisions are forwarded to the Office of
    Management and Budget for the President's consideration before the
    effective date of such UCMJ amendments.

        3. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, what is your understanding of the
    role in the military justice system that would be assigned to the DOD
    General Counsel in the proposals generated by the Department's 90-day
    Independent Review Commission (IRC) on Sexual Assault in the Military?
        Ms. Krass. If confirmed, I will focus my attention on this
    important issue, which is a priority for Secretary Austin and President
    Biden. As a private citizen, I have not been briefed on the Independent
    Review Commission's (IRC's) recommendations on sexual assault in the
    military. I have also not yet discussed the IRC's recommendations with
    Secretary Austin or heard his views on any proposals that the IRC may
    have advanced thus far. Accordingly, I am unable at this time to offer
    any specific assessment of whether the IRC's proposals would impact the
    role of the DOD General Counsel in the military justice system.

        4. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass the Military Justice Improvement and
    Increasing Prevention Act proposes to take disposition authority for
    felony offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) away
    from commanders and vest it in a group of lawyers. In your view, can we
    ``prosecute our way out'' of the problem of military sexual assault?
        Ms. Krass. Prosecution of sexual offenses is an essential aspect of
    any sexual assault prevention and response system, including in the
    military. But prosecutions are not the sole aspect of an effective
    prevention and response system. The IRC is charged with making
    recommendations to improve prevention, culture, and victim support
    within the military, and I look forward to the opportunity to review
    such recommendations, if confirmed.

        5. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, in your view--what would be the
    effects of operating ``dual systems'' of military justice: placing
    responsibility for disposing of felonies with the lawyers and leaving
    ``military'' offenses (like absent without leave (AWOL) and disrespect)
    with commanders?
        Ms. Krass. If confirmed, I will look into this issue with care, as
    I have not previously studied the proposal in depth. I am committed to
    keeping an open mind on all proposals for military justice reform and
    to consulting with the IRC, lawyers within the Office of General
    Counsel, the Judge Advocates General, and other military justice
    experts when considering any proposed reforms to ensure that they are
    effective, meet the objectives for reform, and enable commanders to
    have tools they need to maintain good order and discipline.

        6. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, is there any data to support the
    assertion that giving disposition authority to lawyers will result in
    MORE prosecutions for sexual assault or in MORE sexual assault
    convictions?
        Ms. Krass. My understanding is that proposals for assigning
    independent prosecutors the authority to determine whether to refer
    charges for sexual assault are designed to address two issues: (1)
    improving confidence in the military justice system and dispelling any
    perception that commanders unfairly protect high-performers, and (2)
    ensuring that decisions to prosecute are based on the likelihood of
    conviction. I have not seen any studies suggesting that an outcome of
    giving disposition authority to independent prosecutors will result in
    increased prosecutions or convictions, but if confirmed, I will
    continue to study this issue.

        7. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, in your view, how would removing UCMJ
    authority from military commanders help to prevent sexual assault from
    happening in the first place?
        Ms. Krass. I do not believe prosecution alone can address all
    issues of climate and culture that are needed to reduce the likelihood
    of sexual assault occurring in the military. But increased success in
    prosecution of sexual offenses would likely positively impact
    deterrence.

        8. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, it has been asserted that taking
    disposition authority away from commanders would improve the timeliness
    and efficiency of legal processes and court-martial adjudications. What
    do you think about this claim? Would centralizing prosecutions speed up
    the process?
        Ms. Krass. Transferring prosecutorial discretion from commanders to
    judge advocates could improve somewhat the military justice system's
    timeliness and efficiency because a single authority would make the
    decisions that Article 34 of the UCMJ currently bifurcates between a
    staff judge advocate and a commander.

        9. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, is there any data of which you are
    aware to support the assertion that removing commanders from the system
    would lead to a more timely and efficient system of justice?
        Ms. Krass. As discussed in my answer to QFR 16, above, it is
    possible some improvement to the military justice system's timeliness
    and efficiency would result from a transfer of prosecutorial discretion
    to a judge advocate due to the consolidation of all Article 34
    functions in a single individual, but I am not familiar with any
    studies that have been conducted on this issue.

        10. Senator Tillis. Ms. Krass, in your responses to advance policy
    questions you spoke about the essential role of the military commander
    in changing military culture. Will taking commanders out of the
    military justice system help or hurt a commanders' ability to change
    military culture? Can you give me an example?
        Ms. Krass. If confirmed, I will work to better understand how any
    military justice reform will affect commanders and their role in
    setting military culture. Currently, most military commanders have no
    authority to refer any charges to a special or general court-martial.
    In addition, for penetrative sexual assaults, only commanders who are
    in the grade of at least O-6 and who are authorized to convene special
    courts-martial may initially dispose of such allegations and only
    general court-martial convening authorities may refer such cases to
    trial. Furthermore, special review procedures are in place when a
    general court-martial convening authority opts not to refer such
    charges for trial. Nevertheless, noncommissioned officers, platoon
    leaders, company commanders, battalion commanders, and regimental
    commanders--none of whom has the ability to refer penetrative sexual
    assault charges for trial by a general court-martial--currently play an
    enormously important role in establishing unit culture. Accordingly, I
    believe military leaders have the ability to change military culture
    independent of their ability to refer charges for trial by special or
    general courts-martial. I am committed to ensuring that any future
    military justice reform takes into consideration the significant role
    of commanders in establishing culture and enforcing good order and
    discipline.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Honorable Caroline D. Krass
    follows:]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Honorable Caroline D. Krass,
    which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
    nomination was referred, follows:]

                                     ______

        [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 Honorable
    Caroline D. Krass in connection with her nomination follows:]

                                     ______

        [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.]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Honorable Caroline D. Krass was reported
    to the Senate by Chairman Reed on June 22, 2021, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on July 22, 2021.]
                                     ______

        [Prepared questions submitted to Ms. Gina Ortiz Jones by
    Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]
                            Questions and Responses
                          duties and responsibilities
        Question. What is your understanding of the current duties and
    functions of the Under Secretary of the Air Force?
        Answer. The Under Secretary of the Air Force position is
    established within the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force by
    Title 10 United States Code Sec.  8015. The Under Secretary of the Air
    Force, subject to the direction and control of the Secretary of the Air
    Force, exercises the full authority of the Secretary (except as limited
    by law and regulation, or restrictions of Office of the Secretary of
    Defense or Secretary of the Air Force) in all affairs of the Department
    of the Air Force (DAF) and relationships and transactions with Congress
    and other governmental and non-governmental organizations and
    individuals. In addition to performing additional duties as assigned by
    the Secretary of the Air Force, the Under Secretary of the Air Force
    shall: co-chair the Air Force Council with the Vice Chief of Staff of
    the Air Force; serve as the advisor to the Secretary of the Air Force
    for senior personnel matters; serve as DAF Chief Management Officer
    with primary management responsibilities for DAF business operations;
    serve as the Senior Sustainability Official, responsible for overseeing
    the establishment of sustainability performance goals and objectives;
    approving the Department's sustainability plans; managing policy,
    strategy, international relations, and interagency relations that
    pertain to or impact on sustainability; and serving as the primary
    interface to the Office of the Secretary of Defense for sustainability
    matters; serve as the Secretary of the Air Force representative to
    Department of Defense's Senior Governance Councils (e.g., the Deputy's
    Management Action Group), as required; serve as a member of the Defense
    Human Resource Board; serve as a member of the Air Force Nuclear
    Oversight Board; serve as a member of the Special Access Program
    Oversight Committee; direct and oversee activities of the Office of the
    Administrative Assistant; direct and oversee activities of Deputy Under
    Secretary of the Air Force; direct and oversee activities of the
    Director, Air Force Small Business Programs; direct and oversee
    activities of the Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force. When the
    position of the Secretary of the Air Force is vacant, the Under
    Secretary of the Air Force is the acting Secretary of the Air Force.
        Question. What background and experience do you possess that render
    you highly qualified to perform these duties and responsibilities?
        Answer. I have been fortunate to serve in a number of positions,
    and at various levels, working to protect our economic and national
    security. I attended Boston University on a four-year Air Force ROTC
    Scholarship and earned a BA in East Asian Studies, and BA and MA in
    Economics. I also earned advanced degrees from the U.S. Army School of
    Advanced Military Studies and the University of Kansas Global &
    International Studies Program. The latter program was designed by U.S.
    Army Special Operations Command for Army Special Operations officers
    and select Interagency students.
        Following commissioning, I served as an intelligence officer
    assigned to Pope Air Force Base supporting close air support missions
    for the U.S. Army XVIII Airborne Corps. I deployed to Camp Victory Iraq
    with the 682nd Expeditionary Air Support Operations Center and worked
    closely with the Combined Air Operations Center at Al Udeid Air Base,
    Qatar as we executed close air support operations. This invaluable
    experience shaped my appreciation early on for jointness.
        I served under ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'' and that experience--
    specifically, the fear I felt every day as a cadet and officer that I
    could lose my opportunity to serve if it became known that I was a
    lesbian--showed me the importance of ensuring people ready and willing
    to serve our country should have the opportunity to do so to their full
    potential, absent the threat of discrimination or harassment of any
    sort. If confirmed, that would be a guiding principle for my service as
    the Under Secretary of the Air Force.
        My professional experiences include having worked for a major
    defense company as a counterterrorism and political-military
    intelligence analyst supporting U.S. Army operations in Central and
    South America, before joining the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) as
    a civil servant and inaugural member of U.S. Africa Command (USAFRICOM)
    assigned to Stuttgart, Germany. From supporting planning efforts
    related to the referendum for independence in southern Sudan, to
    serving in the Libya Crisis Intelligence Cell, to deploying to the
    continent for partner engagement and security cooperation activities,
    my time at USAFRICOM deepened my appreciation for Interagency
    contributions and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
    requirements at a combatant command, as well as the need to ensure
    military activities were clearly linked to well-defined U.S. diplomatic
    ends.
        Within the DIA Strategic Planning Office and as the Special Advisor
    to the DIA Deputy Director, I supported the development and execution
    of strategic budgetary planning documents for the Defense Intelligence
    Enterprise. As the Special Advisor, I also led innovative efforts that
    utilized data management tools to improve transparency and support
    talent management and succession planning for DIA senior executives.
        As the Intelligence Community's Senior Advisor for Trade
    Enforcement and detailed to the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center, I
    crafted intelligence requirements and worked with the Office of the
    Director of National Intelligence and across the Intelligence Community
    to support interagency efforts to protect American intellectual
    property and identify risks to the defense critical supply chain. My
    time as a Director for Investment at the Office of the U.S. Trade
    Representative leading the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S.
    portfolio deepened my appreciation for emerging technologies,
    specifically those with potential dual-uses, and the challenges and
    opportunities associated with protecting such technologies.
        I have been honored to lead a diverse set of regional and
    substantive portfolios at the intersection of our economic and national
    security, many of which touched upon Department of the Air Force
    equities. If confirmed, I look forward to bringing my broad set of
    professional experiences in service to helping to lead the Department
    of the Air Force.
        Question. Do you believe there are any steps you need to take to
    enhance your ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of the
    Under Secretary of the Air Force?
        Answer. No. There would be much to learn in office; however, I
    believe that, if confirmed, I am prepared to perform the duties of the
    Under Secretary of the Air Force.
        Question. In your view, what should be the role of the Under
    Secretary of the Air Force in bringing the United States Space Force to
    full operational capability?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work closely with the Secretary of
    the Air Force to evaluate the progress being made to stand up the U.S.
    Space Force and execute the direction from the Congress in that regard.
    If confirmed, I would be fully committed to making the U.S. Space Force
    a success starting with evaluating the plans and directions currently
    being implemented. Pending that review, and in accordance with the
    Secretary of the Air Force's guidance and priorities, I would work
    closely with the Vice Chief of Space Operations to bring the service to
    full operational capability.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
    that your tenure as Under Secretary of the Air Force epitomizes the
    fundamental requirement for civilian control of the Armed Forces
    embedded in the U.S. Constitution and other laws?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work closely with senior military
    leaders, especially the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force and the
    Vice Chief of Space Operations. If confirmed, I would view their inputs
    as invaluable, and accord them due weight when advising the Secretary
    of the Air Force who has sole statutory responsibility for the
    direction of the Department of the Air Force.
        Question. What additional duties and functions would you expect
    and/or recommend the Secretary of the Air Force to prescribe for you,
    if confirmed?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have any specific recommendations
    for the Secretary of the Air Force regarding additional duties and
    functions to be prescribed to the Under Secretary of the Air Force.
        Question. If confirmed to be the Under Secretary of the Air Force,
    what role would you establish for yourself in the overall supervision
    of the Assistant Secretaries of the Air Force and the Air Force General
    Counsel?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force to evaluate the effectiveness of the current level of supervision
    employed by the Under Secretary of the Air Force over the Assistant
    Secretaries of the Air Force and the Air Force General Counsel. Based
    on that evaluation, if confirmed, I would work with the Secretary of
    the Air Force to determine appropriate modifications moving forward in
    the interest of making the Department more efficient and effective.
        Question. If confirmed, what innovative ideas would you consider
    providing to the Secretary of the Air Force regarding the organization
    and operations of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have any specific recommendations
    for the Secretary of the Air Force regarding the organization and
    operations of the Department of the Air Force. If confirmed, I would
    work closely with the Secretary to evaluate the progress being made
    with respect to bringing the U.S. Space Force to full operational
    capability. Informed by that assessment, and if I am confirmed, I may
    have recommendations for the Secretary of the Air Force in this area.
    duties and responsibilities as air force chief management officer (cmo)
        Question. What is your understanding of the duties and
    responsibilities of the Under Secretary of the Air Force in the
    capacity of CMO of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. As I understand it, the CMO of the DAF is responsible for
    the business capabilities and processes of the Department. If
    confirmed, I plan to work with the DAF leadership to understand current
    efforts while continuing to identify additional opportunities for
    business efficacy.
        Question. Please provide an example of a situation in which you
    took action to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the business
    operations of a large organization and describe the outcomes of your
    actions.
        Answer. DIA employs more than 16,500 personnel worldwide. As the
    Special Advisor to the DIA Deputy Director, I led the development and
    execution of the Deputy Director's deliberative body that convened the
    Agency's principals to increase awareness of and transparency
    surrounding strategic decisions affecting DIA and the larger Defense
    Intelligence Enterprise. Based on the body's success, I was asked to
    lead an initiative to support the principals' senior executive
    succession planning efforts. I developed an approach to identify
    critical positions and key developmental assignments, as well as a
    corresponding data management and visualization tool that enabled the
    DIA Director, Deputy Director, and the agency principals for the first
    time to effectively see their pipeline of talent among DIA senior
    executives. With the data management and visualization tool, senior
    leaders could now understand the depth of their bench across the agency
    and within directorates. The data-driven approach and visual display
    highlighted the over/under-representation of certain professional
    experiences and demographics within directorates and specialized
    assignments. This transparency enabled a broader conversation about the
    unintended messages these realities may have been sending to the
    workforce about what was valued for promotion within the agency. The
    data-driven approach and visualization tool also allowed the principals
    to quickly identify racial and gender disparities amongst the senior
    executives, while also serving as a useful management tool to help
    monitor and address those disparities moving forward.
        Question. What additional resources and authorities do you perceive
    would better enable the Under Secretary of the Air Force/CMO to
    organize successfully the business operations of the Department of the
    Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to work with the DAF leadership to
    review the adequacy of current business operations, and use that review
    to determine what, if any, additional resources or authorities would be
    required to improve DAF business operations.
        Question. If confirmed, on which specific business operations would
    you focus your improvement efforts and why?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have access to DAF-internal
    information that would allow me to determine the state of current
    business operations, nor those requiring the most immediate attention.
    If confirmed, I will work with DAF leadership to review current
    business operations and work with the DAF staff to identify
    opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of support to
    the warfighter.
        Question. What performance goals and measures would you establish
    for evaluating increases in the overall efficiency and effectiveness of
    each business operation you cite?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have access to DAF-internal
    information regarding current goals and measures to assess their
    adequacy and how well the DAF is meeting those. If confirmed, I would
    work with DAF leaders to review those for adequacy and relevancy,
    specifically focused on understanding any underlying assumptions that
    may be informing the scope of those goals and measures. Moreover, I
    would work with DAF leaders to ensure our processes and timelines for
    reviewing progress toward any goals and measures were appropriately
    timed to inform key decision points for the DAF.
        Question. To the extent the Air Force performs functions--
    operational or institutional--that overlap with those of other
    Department of Defense (DOD) components, what would be your approach, if
    confirmed, to consolidating and reducing those redundancies?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force and the Under Secretaries of the Army and Navy to identify and to
    reduce unnecessary duplication, understanding there may be some
    operational benefits to overlapping capabilities given the importance
    of certain mission sets. In other instances, I would work to eliminate
    unnecessary duplication and redundancy and am open to initiatives that
    would help to accomplish that.
        Question. If confirmed as the Under Secretary of the Air Force, and
    given your role as the Air Force CMO, how would you interpret your
    relationship with the Deputy Secretary of Defense in his role as Chief
    Operating Officer of the Department of Defense under provisions of
    Title 31, U.S. Code, Section 1123?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Deputy Secretary
    of Defense, as well as the Secretary of the Air Force, to assist with
    setting and achieving the management and performance goals set for the
    Department of Defense and Department of the Air Force. In the course of
    managing the DAF and conveying progress to goals, as part of my
    relationship with the Deputy Secretary of the Air Force I would
    prioritize clearly communicating the key assumptions underlying
    analytical assessments and measurements, given the impact those may
    have other portfolios within the Department of Defense.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you work to improve the quality
    and quantity of Air Force management personnel and expertise?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the DAF leadership to review
    the current levels of DAF management personnel and expertise to
    understand where improvements might help the DAF better compete for
    diverse talent and help to create an inclusive work environment.
        Question. How would you make use of advanced business practices and
    technologies, and leverage the capabilities of Air Force laboratories
    and research universities and business and public administration
    schools to improve Air Force management capabilities, if confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to understand
    how the DAF currently leverages these critical resources and where
    there may be room to improve doing so. No organization ever has a
    monopoly on best practices, technologies, or capabilities, and I would
    prioritize regularly engaging with these entities understanding them to
    be critical mission enablers.
                   major challenges and priorities--ms. jones
        Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
    challenges you would face if confirmed as Under Secretary of the Air
    Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would consider the following to be the most
    significant challenges: modernizing DAF capabilities in the face of
    great power competition, namely with China, and to a lesser extent
    Russia; maintaining current mission capabilities while making necessary
    investments in future capabilities in the DAF's contributions to the
    nuclear triad; addressing personnel-related challenges that degrade
    readiness and affect recruiting and retention, specifically sexual
    harassment and assault, extremism, and suicide; and lastly, bringing
    the Space Force to full operational capability.
        Question. What plans do you have for addressing each of these
    challenges, if confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, my initial step would be to work with the
    Secretary of the Air Force to assess the current state of these
    challenges as it relates to the overall posture of the DAF. In addition
    to understanding the current state of these programs, I would work with
    the Secretary to review how the programs are currently being measured
    for efficiency and effectiveness. A comprehensive review of these
    programs and the Secretary's guidance and priorities would inform how I
    address these challenges moving forward. Lastly, I understand there are
    several efforts examining the personnel-related challenges noted,
    specifically extremism and sexual assault and harassment, and, if
    confirmed, I would work with the Secretary of the Air Force to execute
    resulting directions and guidance.
                         2018 national defense strategy
        Question. The 2018 NDS prioritized ``great power competition and
    conflict'' with China and Russia as the primary challenge with which
    the United States must contend, while also recognizing the need to
    deter and counter rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran and move to a
    more resource sustainable approach to counterterrorism. In addition to
    reviewing the NDS, Secretary of Defense Austin has announced that the
    Department will conduct a Global Posture Review to assess requirements
    for military capability.
        If confirmed, what role would you expect to play in that review?
        Answer. The Department of the Air Force will play a critical role
    in this review, and, if confirmed, I would prioritize my efforts to
    support the Secretary of the Air Force's ability to articulate how the
    evolving security environment impacts the organize, train, and equip
    function of the DAF. To that end, I would work with the Secretary to
    review the DAF's efforts toward implementing the strategy, specifically
    its development of new operational concepts and identification of new
    capabilities. Based on this review and evaluation, I will work with DAF
    leaders to conduct any necessary follow-on analyses to support the
    Secretary's ability to best inform the Secretary of Defense-led review
    of the strategy.
        Question. In your view, what, if any, changes should be considered
    in reshaping the 2018 NDS?
        Answer. The 2018 NDS accurately assesses the strategic environment;
    however, it insufficiently addresses the criticality of our allies and
    partners in addressing the challenges and opportunities this
    environment presents. If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders and
    Office of the Secretary of Defense counterparts to continually evaluate
    and modify the application of the NDS as circumstances evolve.
    Moreover, great power competition, specifically with China, demands an
    agility in our decision-making that could be aided by an NDS that
    involved deliberate prioritization to inform trade-offs and risk
    management.
                              air force readiness
        Question. How would you assess the current readiness of the Air
    Force--across the domains of materiel and equipment, personnel, and
    training--to execute its required missions?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have access to DAF-internal
    information to accurately assess the current readiness of the Air
    Force. I appreciate that the Department must continue to balance near-
    term readiness with the modernization required to deter and defeat
    competitors and potential peer adversaries. If confirmed, I commit to
    supporting the Secretary of the Air Force's efforts to ensure the Total
    Force is manned, trained, and equipped to provide the readiness needed
    to meet the growing global security challenges that face our Nation.
        Question. In your view, what are the priority missions for which
    current and future Air Force forces should be trained and ready in the
    context of day-to-day activities, as well as for contingencies?
        Answer. Current operations and great power competition require the
    DAF be trained and ready to accomplish the following: execute two-
    thirds of the nuclear triad and essential elements of the nuclear
    command and control network; provide critical missile attack warning;
    provide command, control, and communications upon which the Joint Force
    relies across all domains; support geographic combatant commands with
    global strike and tactical airpower; provide essential supporting
    capabilities to our allies and across the Joint Force such as global
    air mobility and position, navigation, and timing (PNT) services that
    are critical today and certainly will be in any contested environments.
        Question. Does the Air Force have the requisite analytic
    capabilities and tools to support you, if confirmed as the Under
    Secretary of the Air Force, in measuring its readiness to execute the
    broad range of potential Air Force missions envisioned by 2018 NDS and
    associated operational plans--from low-intensity, gray-zone conflicts
    to protracted high intensity fights? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I do not have an adequate basis to answer this question. If
    confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the Air Force to assess
    the analytic capacity and capability within the DAF to conduct this
    type of analysis and support decision making necessary to deal with
    current and emerging threats. It is essential that the Department has
    the tools, expertise, and skills in place, to conduct the high-quality
    analysis necessary to support sound decision making in this rapidly
    advancing environment.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize maintaining
    readiness in the near term, with modernizing the Air Force to ensure
    future readiness?
        Answer. I would follow the guidance of the Secretary of the Air
    Force and the direction implicit or explicit in statutory requirements.
    Near-peer competitors continue to invest in capabilities that aim to
    diminish our military superiority, and the DAF must invest and plan
    with these considerations in mind.
                                     budget
        Question. In its 2018 report, the National Defense Strategy
    Commission recommended that Congress increase the base defense budget
    at an average rate of three to five percent above inflation through the
    Future Years Defense Program. The President has released budget totals
    that indicate that the DOD budget for fiscal year 2022 will not
    increase from fiscal year 2021, but will be essentially flat.
        If confirmed, by what standards would you measure the adequacy of
    funding for the Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work to ensure the DAF is able to
    execute the missions it has been asked to accomplish, with acceptable
    risk to current and future operations. This requires balancing the need
    to fulfill current requirements with the need to invest in
    modernizations efforts that posture the DAF for success, particularly
    when faced with a near-peer competitor. If confirmed, I would also
    regularly review the adequacy of our investments in our personnel,
    their families, and their quality of life to ensure the Total Force is
    well cared for and ready to accomplish the mission.
                                  acquisition
        Question. As Under Secretary of the Air Force, what would be your
    role in the Air Force acquisition process--including in the processes
    of defining requirements, acquisition, and budgeting?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will fulfill my role in the acquisition
    process as assigned to me by the Secretary of the Air Force and as
    prescribed by 10 U.S.C. Sec.  9015. This will include executing all
    aspects of acquisition and budgeting as requested by the Secretary and
    in accordance with department policy. Additionally, I will work the
    Secretary of the Air Force, the Service Chiefs for the Air Force and
    the Space Force, and their staffs, to ensure acquisition, requirements,
    and budgets align. Finally, I will continue to serve on the Space Force
    Acquisition Council as required by 10 U.S.C. Sec.  9021.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    improve each of the three aspects of the Air Force acquisition
    process--requirements, acquisition, and budgeting?
        Answer. If confirmed, one of my immediate actions will be to team
    with the Assistant Secretaries for Financial Management; Acquisition,
    Technology, and Logistics; and Space Acquisition and Integration to
    review current processes to understand where they may be opportunities
    to improve within the three aspects of the DAF acquisition process to
    ensure the budget is allocated to deliver effective programs that meet
    requirements.
        Question. What actions would you propose to take, if any, to ensure
    that Air Force requirements are realistic, technically achievable, and
    prioritized?
        Answer. Appropriately scoped requirements are fundamental to
    delivering operational capabilities and making sound resource
    decisions. If confirmed, I would review the agile requirements process
    to determine potential modifications, if any, that may help ensure
    requirements are realistic, technically achievable, and prioritized.
        Question. What specific measures would you recommend to take to
    control ``requirements creep'' in the Air Force acquisition system?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure the Department continues to
    conduct configuration steering boards, required by statute, to prevent
    unnecessary changes to program requirements that could have an adverse
    impact on program cost or schedule. The Department cannot allow
    ``requirements creep'' to degrade its ability to deliver as much
    planned capability as possible, at the program baseline or better.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you utilize your authority as
    Under Secretary of the Air Force, to arrest the exponential escalation
    in cost that, in recent history, has marked the acquisition life-cycle
    of Military Service platforms and weapons systems?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force to review all options to address the exponential cost escalation
    seen across service platforms and weapons, to include potentially
    working to ensure the DAF can obtain and preserve government data
    rights to avoid vendor lock and provide opportunities for all
    contractors to compete for sustainment work in order to keep costs
    affordable.
        Question. In your view, in whom should accountability for large-
    scale acquisition failures and/or extraordinary cost overruns vest?
        Answer. Accountability should rest with the leaders who made the
    key decisions that caused the failure and overruns, irrespective of
    when those failures are exposed and where those individuals are at that
    time. If confirmed, I would work with acquisition executives before the
    point at which requirements, schedule, and cost are approved to ensure
    we have adequately accounted for potential risks that may need to be
    mitigated.
        Question. Are there other roles or responsibilities in the
    acquisition process that should be assigned to the Military Services
    rather than to OSD, in your view?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Air Force and Space Force
    acquisition executives to review current roles and responsibilities to
    understand where potential modifications, if any, may best serve the
    DAF and OSD.
        Question. In your view, what is the appropriate focus the Air Force
    should have on life cycle costs when executing acquisition programs?
        Answer. The Department of the Air Force must focus on developing
    and delivering new capabilities with an eye toward affordability of all
    elements: development, production, and sustainment. If confirmed, I
    would be open to all approaches to reduce sustainment costs-the
    majority of a program's life-cycle costs-in order to ensure the DAF is
    best postured to afford critical modernization efforts.
        Question. Were the Secretary of the Air Force to continue the
    assignment to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force of responsibility for
    those aspects of the function of research and development relating to
    test and evaluation for Air Force acquisition programs, how would you
    exercise oversight of the Chief's execution of this responsibility, if
    confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force to understand their priorities, as well as engage with DAF
    research, development, and test communities in order to exercise the
    appropriate oversight.
        Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it
    appropriate to procure weapon systems and equipment that have not been
    demonstrated through test and evaluation to be operationally effective,
    and operationally suitable?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with DAF acquisition
    professionals to determine when such a procurement was necessary to
    support an urgent and clear warfighter need.
        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 streamlined acquisition
    processes?
        Answer. The test and evaluation enterprise is the critical link
    that enables rapid acquisition to support the joint warfighter. Test
    and evaluation, both developmental and operational, ensures rigor,
    credibility, and relevance in expediting warfighting capabilities to
    the operational user. If confirmed, I will review existing partnerships
    between DAF testing and evaluation centers to determine how to further
    strengthen them.
        Question. To what extent should the Air Force exploit non-
    developmental or commercial off-the-shelf solutions to meet Air Force
    requirements?
        Would this put capabilities into the hands of airmen and guardians
    more quickly, in your view?
        Answer. Under the right circumstances, commercial off-the-shelf
    acquisitions can be an exceptional way to quickly and cost-efficiently
    bring solutions to the warfighter. If confirmed, I would work with
    acquisition executives to understand additional areas where such
    solutions make operational and financial sense.
                                     space
        Question. In your view, does the 2018 NDS accurately assess the
    strategic environment as it pertains to the domain of space?
        Answer. The 2018 NDS accurately assesses the current strategic
    environment, including as it applies to space, insofar as it identifies
    the emerging great power competition with China and Russia and
    highlights the criticality of our partners and allies.
        Question. In your view, what will ``great power competition'' look
    like in space and to what extent do you view China's and Russia's
    activities related to the space domain as a threat or challenge to U.S.
    national security interests?
        Answer. We can expect that China and Russia will continue to invest
    in capabilities critical to modern warfare, to include in the space
    domain. I believe it would be appropriate to assess that China and
    Russia's activities in space are an extension of their overall efforts
    to neutralize our strategic military advantages and reduce our combat
    effectiveness.
        Question. Are there other nation-states or other actors operating
    in space that you perceive as a risk to the United States or as cause
    for concern? If so, why?
        Answer. My general understanding is that Iran and North Korea are
    capable of holding U.S. space capabilities at some level of risk,
    albeit less advanced than that posed by China or Russia. The
    proliferation of commercial and private activity in space also
    highlights the importance of establishing space norms and standards so
    as to minimize the risk posed to U.S. space assets.
        Question. How would you assess the current readiness of the Space
    Force--across the domains of materiel and equipment, personnel, and
    training--to implement the NDS and U.S. strategic objectives as they
    relate to the space warfighting domain?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have an adequate basis to assess the
    current and prospective readiness of the Space Force. I understand the
    Space Force has made great strides toward reaching full operational
    capability. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Department of
    Defense leaders and Congress to focus on improving readiness across all
    facets (e.g., personnel, equipment, and training) to ensure the Space
    Force stands ready to support U.S. strategic objectives and the
    National Defense Strategy.
        Question. Is there anything you would do, if confirmed, to change
    the framework of the United States Space Force, as presently
    envisioned? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. At this point, I do not have any recommended changes to the
    framework of the U.S. Space Force. If confirmed, I will work with
    Secretary of the Air Force, Chief of Space Operations and others in the
    Department to bring this service to full operational capability.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your relationship with:
        The Commander, U.S. Space Command (USSPACECOM)
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the DAF is providing
    necessary institutional support and is adequately organizing, training,
    equipping and presenting forces to USSPACECOM to accomplish its
    assigned missions. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the
    Air Force and the Chief of Space Operations to execute those
    responsibilities and ensure our forces are meeting the USSPACECOM
    commander's requirements.
        Question. The Commander, U.S. Space Force
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Chief of Space
    Operations and the Vice Chief of Space Operations to organize, train,
    equip and present guardians and ensure Space Force equities are
    adequately accounted for when executing my duties as the DAF Chief
    Management Officer.
        Question. The Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force for Space
    Acquisition and Integration (SAF/SAI)
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with all of the Assistant
    Secretaries and DAF staff elements to ensure the Department operates
    effectively and efficiently. Subject to the duties prescribed by the
    Secretary of the Air Force, part of my role will be to enable close
    coordination, collaboration, and consistency across the staff, so that
    the Secretary of the Air Force can arrive at the best decisions on
    behalf of the Department.
        Question. The Director, National Reconnaissance Office
        Answer. If confirmed, both in my role as Under Secretary, and as a
    statutory member of the Space Force Acquisition Council, I will work
    with the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office to further
    strengthen the long-standing partnership between the DAF and the NRO.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to cultivate
    a warfighting ethos in the U.S. Space Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure suitable policy, guidance and
    resources are in place to support our Guardians' ability to attain a
    high level of proficiency in the new tactics, techniques, and
    procedures required to fight and win in the warfighting domain of
    space.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you and the Department of the Air
    Force, writ large, support the Chief of Space Operations in recruiting
    and retaining space warfighters who will form the new Space Force?
        Answer. Recruiting and retaining Guardians is a warfighting
    imperative and essential to bringing this service to full operational
    capability and ensuring its future success. If confirmed, I will ensure
    the Department's recruiting, retention, and training programs are
    casting a wide net for highly-qualified and diverse talent,
    highlighting the truly unique and exciting professional opportunities
    only afforded to Guardians, and are identifying innovative approaches
    to compete with private-sector opportunities.
        Question. What is your vision for the inclusion of the Reserve
    components as a part of the U.S. Space Force and as contributors to
    Joint Force space operations and activities?
        Answer. I see significant value in integrating the reserve
    components into the Space Force. If confirmed, I will work with DAF
    leaders to review Space Force requirements and evaluate how best to
    integrate Reserve Component capabilities to satisfy Space Force and
    Joint Force needs.
        Question. Were there to be a conflict in a space or related domain,
    what are your views on the importance of unity of command as compared
    to unity of effort between DOD and Intelligence Community assets, both
    in space and on the ground?
        Answer. Generally speaking, during any conflict, we should leverage
    all instruments of national power to reach resolution. Unity of command
    is critical to the success of military operations; however, unity of
    effort, especially between the DOD and Intelligence Community, ensures
    we can adequately assess the efficacy and effectiveness of our efforts
    in any conflict.
        Question. Do you support the creation of a Service Acquisition
    Executive for Space as required under section 957 of the Fiscal Year
    2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force to ensure this individual has the resources and support needed to
    be successful.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your role, and that of the
    Department of the Air Force, in ensuring the direction and management
    of Space acquisition?
        Answer. The Department must deliver space acquisitions both cheaper
    and faster to outpace our adversaries, and we must take advantage of
    the rapidly emerging and innovative commercial space capabilities, and
    collaborate closely with allies and other government partners. If
    confirmed, I will work across the Department and with the Office of the
    Secretary of Defense, Executive Branch, and Congress to optimize space
    acquisitions in all areas, including requirements, budget, and
    acquisition processes.
        Question. How would you ensure the full integration of acquisition
    programs across the national security space enterprise--to include the
    members of the Intelligence Community?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review the current level
    of integration among the acquisition programs across the national
    security space enterprise. If confirmed, I would prioritize this review
    to understand where greater integration may be achieved.
        Question. What specific actions would you take, if confirmed, to
    enhance existing Department of the Air Force acquisition policies and
    processes to move space operations projects to orbit faster and
    cheaper?
        Answer. In general, I am committed to ensuring DAF acquisition
    policies and processes are more cost-effective and can more rapidly and
    efficiently field capabilities. If confirmed, I will ensure space
    programs are tailored to the most efficient acquisition strategy
    possible, and support the Secretary of the Air Force's efforts to
    ensure DAF space capabilities are able to operate to meet evolving and
    pacing threats.
        Question. Do you support the National Security Space Launch (NSSL)
    competition Phase II program as it is currently being executed?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review the NSSL Phase II
    acquisition program as it is currently being executed. In general, I
    support increased competition among domestic launch services and
    appreciate the importance of effectively transitioning from non-allied
    space capabilities. If confirmed, I will review the Phase II program
    and related efforts to ensure the DAF can execute its national
    requirements.
        Question. How do you see the ``delivery on orbit as a service'' in
    relation to NSSL?
        Answer. I understand the criticality of assured access to space,
    and if confirmed, I would work to ensure the DAF has access to launch
    services necessary to meet our national requirements.
                               air force programs
        Question. What is your understanding and assessment of the
    research, development, and acquisition programs supporting Air Force
    modernization?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review the full extent of
    the DAF's research, development, and acquisition programs supporting
    Air Force modernization. If confirmed, I will prioritize this review to
    ensure each are adequately resourced to support DAF decision-making
    processes.
        The Air Force is on record as stating a need to purchase a minimum
    of 72 fighter aircraft per year to maintain requisite force structure.
        Question. In your opinion, what is the optimum mix of 4th and 5th
    generation aircraft required to meet the threat outlined in the NDS?
        Answer. I understand the Air Force is utilizing war games, as well
    as conducting analysis of our would-be competitors' capabilities in
    order to identify the appropriate mix of 4th and 5th generation
    aircraft. If confirmed, I will review this analysis with the Secretary
    of the Air Force, to ensure the mix of 4th and 5th generation fighters
    reflects relevant budget constraints and acceptable levels of risk
    across the DAF.
        Question. Given the importance of extending the range of U.S.
    aircraft, what do you believe to be the overall tanker requirement for
    the Air Force and at what rate and on what schedule must the Air Force
    procure the new KC-46 to meet that requirement?
        Answer. I do not have the basis to answer this question, as I have
    not had the opportunity to review operational plans and requirements
    for tanker support. If confirmed, I will review the overall fleet
    requirements, in light of DAF projected requirements and cognizant of
    the fact that the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2021 directs the Air Force to maintain 412 primary mission aircraft
    inventory tanker aircraft through 2025.
        Large-scale exercises such as Red Flag have illustrated that 5th
    generation fighters such as the F-22 and F-35 need to fly against
    multiple adversary aircraft to conduct much of their required training.
    The Air Force has taken a number of steps to address shortages in
    adversary air, including using contract air and requiring units in
    training to supply their own adversary air.
        Question. What are your views as to the appropriate balance of
    contract and organic adversary air capability?
        Answer. I do not have the information needed to answer this
    question. If confirmed, I would review the Air Force's current
    adversary air programs to determine whether they are sufficiently
    meeting training needs and determine where improvements may be
    warranted to meet operational requirements.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
    properly addresses the challenges associated with the availability of
    adversary air to ensure that its 5th generation fighters are properly
    trained and ready for combat?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review the Air Force's current plans
    to ensure its 5th generation fighter force is mission ready and
    determine where modifications may be warranted to meet operational
    requirements.
        Question. Given that the F-35 is the least costly fighter aircraft
    currently available for purchase, as well as the most capable, what is
    your view on increasing the F-35 procurement rate in order to meet the
    stated 72 fighter aircraft per year requirement?
        Answer. The F-35 is an extremely capable aircraft, and if
    confirmed, in consultation with the Secretary of the Air Force, I would
    need to review the findings of the on-going Tactical Air study, as well
    as related DAF-internal analyses, to order to provide the best-informed
    recommendation regarding procurement rates.
        Question. What is your assessment of the readiness of the Air Force
    heavy bomber fleet?
        Answer. I do not have the information needed to make this
    assessment. The heavy bomber fleet provides vital conventional strike
    and nuclear deterrence capabilities, and, if confirmed, I would review
    the readiness of the collective force and work to ensure
    recapitalization and modernization efforts adequately supported future
    requirements.
        Question. As to each of the airframes listed below, what
    improvements would you direct, if confirmed, to increase the mission
    readiness of each airframe?
        B-1, B-2, or B-52?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to be briefed on the current
    readiness of each airframe, so I am not in a position to identify
    necessary improvements that would enhance the readiness of the B-1, B-
    2, or B-52.
                                   munitions
        Question. Air Force munitions inventories--particularly for
    precision guided munitions and air-to-air missiles--have declined
    significantly due to high operational usage, insufficient procurement,
    poor program execution, and a requirements system that does not
    adequately account for the ongoing need to transfer munitions to our
    allies.
        If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the Air Force has
    sufficient inventories of munitions to meet the needs of combatant
    commanders?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the DAF has sufficient
    munitions inventories to achieve our national security objectives. I
    will review the current requirements system to ensure our partners and
    allies maintain sufficient munitions inventories to adequately support
    combatant command regional objectives.
        Question. What changes in budgeting and acquisition processes would
    you recommend to facilitate faster Air Force munitions replenishment
    rates?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review the current budget for
    munitions and work with acquisition executives to understand business
    approaches that would help expedite replenish rates and potentially
    help realize cost savings.
        Question. How should the Air Force adapt to self-imposed DOD
    restrictions on area attack and denial munitions, consistent with the
    Ottawa Agreements?
        Answer. I understand the Administration has initiated a policy
    review in this area. If confirmed, I will ensure the DAF supports this
    review consistent with the direction of the Secretary of Defense, and
    if confirmed, I will ensure that the Air Force continues to follow the
    DOD policy.
                              test and evaluation
        Question. Are you satisfied with the Air Force's test and
    evaluation capabilities, including the test and evaluation workforce
    and infrastructure?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to evaluate DAF test and
    evaluation capabilities. If confirmed I will review these capabilities
    and work with the Secretary of the Air Force to make any adjustments
    accordingly.
        Question. In which areas, if any, do you feel the Air Force should
    be developing new test and evaluation capabilities?
        Answer. Space, cybersecurity, hypersonic, directed energy, and
    autonomous systems are all areas where the DAF has opportunities to
    develop test and evaluation capabilities.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you accelerate the development of
    these new capabilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders, in conjunction
    with counterparts at OSD, to identify where partnerships with academia
    and research facilities, as well balanced investments, might help to
    accelerate the development of these new capabilities.
        Question. What are your views on the appropriate roles of OSD
    developmental and operational testing organizations with respect to
    testing of Air Force systems?
        Answer. OSD developmental and operational testing organizations
    fulfill a critical role in the testing of DAF systems. Through their
    support of test infrastructure and independent oversight, these
    organizations enable emerging technologies to ensure airmen and
    guardians receive the capabilities they need to meet national
    priorities. If confirmed, I would work with our testing and evaluation
    community to further strengthen this partnership.
                        air force military end strength
        Question. Is the Air Force's current end strength sufficient to
    meet national defense objectives?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review current Air Force
    end strength. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force to review Air Force and Space Force end-strength requirements to
    ensure the DAF is adequately balancing the trade-offs between meeting
    current operational requirements and future force requirements.
        Question. If not, what end strength do you believe is necessary to
    do so?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force in ensuring the Department has the right end strength to sustain
    a force structure able to adequately provide support the combatant
    commands. If confirmed, I will also work with the Secretary of the Air
    Force to review Air Force and Space Force end-strength requirements to
    ensure the DAF is adequately balancing the trade-offs between meeting
    current operational requirements and future force requirements.
        Question. How will the continued stand up of the Space Force, and
    the related transfer of Air Force personnel, impact Air Force and Space
    Force end strength requirements over the next 5 years, in your view?
        Answer. As the Space Force continues to mature, I understand their
    end strength will see modest growth in order to meet space
    requirements, with mission transfers from the other services largely
    supporting this growth. I also understand the Air Force will provide
    support services to Space Force personnel. This model appears to make
    operational and fiscal sense, and if confirmed, I would work to ensure
    the Space Force is adequately supported in these areas. If confirmed, I
    will work with the Secretary of the Air Force to review Air Force and
    Space Force end-strength requirements to ensure the DAF is adequately
    balancing the trade-offs between meeting current operational
    requirements and future force requirements.
        Question. What additional force shaping authorities and tools does
    the Air Force need, in your view?
        Answer. At this point, I am not aware of any additional force
    shaping authorities the Air Force requires. If confirmed, I will review
    existing authorities and tools to ensure the DAF is best postured to
    manage force strength.
                       air force recruiting and retention
        Currently, the Air Force is experiencing a 20-year high in
    personnel retention levels. This will challenge leaders to ensure that
    there is sufficient room for fresh talent to enlist or commission.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the Air Force can
    continue to bring in new talent, while managing high retention?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to ensure we
    are focused on the equally important tasks of maintaining high
    standards and meeting authorized end strength. Much of this depends on
    the strength of our recruiting, retention, and training programs, and,
    if confirmed, I would work to ensure the Air Force and Space Force's
    respective programs were adequate to meet each service's needs.
        Question. How would an individual's job performance factor in to
    your decisions to grant enlistment extensions or officer continuation?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to ensure an
    individual's job performance is a critical factor in any such
    decisions. If confirmed, I will continue to emphasize exceptional
    performance when making retention decisions, while also balancing our
    need to fill critical skill areas.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
    maintains sufficiently high recruitment and retention standards?
        Answer. The strength of the DAF relies on its ability to recruit
    and develop top talent. If confirmed, I will work to maintain high
    standards and strengthen our recruiting processes. As part of this, I
    would review the DAF's recruiting outreach into communities with lower
    than average Active Duty and veteran populations, understanding a key
    determinant of whether someone will serve is if they know someone who
    has served. I will also be committed to reviewing our standards to
    ensure we can identify and remedy potential artificial barriers to
    service.
        Question. What impact do current medical and other qualifications
    for enlistment in the Air Force have on restricting the number of
    individuals eligible for military service?
        Answer. Unfortunately, medical reasons, to include diet-related
    diseases, are a significant reason why most of those in the 17-24 age
    range are deemed ineligible for military service. These trends coupled
    with decreased birthrates strain the talent pool available for military
    service. If confirmed, I will work with the Department of Defense,
    other Services and with Congress on developing approaches to increase
    the number of young Americans qualified for military service, to
    include reviewing current medical standards to ensure continued
    applicability.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes to such qualifications, if
    any, would you recommend to increase the number of individuals eligible
    for Air Force service without degrading the quality of recruits?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the Department
    does not have artificial barriers to entrance while maintaining high
    standards for service. I will also work to assess both the propensity
    and qualifications for military service. I am committed to working with
    Congress to determine how the Department as a whole can increase
    interest and eligibility for service.
        Question. What factors do you consider to be key to the Air Force's
    future success in retaining the best qualified personnel for continued
    service in positions of greater responsibility and leadership in the
    Air Force?
        Answer. Quality-of-life considerations, job satisfaction, and unit
    leadership are key to the DAF's ability to retain the best-qualified
    airmen and guardians. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to
    improve upon each of these, and ensure we are taking adequate steps to
    address disproportionate retention challenges in certain specialties
    and/or demographics.
        Question. The Air Force reversed recently a decision to cancel
    Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) scholarships and eliminated
    necessary field training opportunities for hundreds of high-performing
    cadets. Included in this group of cadets were scholarship recipients
    pursuing technical majors at some of the nation's most elite
    universities.
        How do you view the effectiveness and utility of the various
    officer commissioning sources?
        Answer. The DAF's various officer-commissioning sources are
    important and necessary mechanisms to ensure our officer corps is
    diverse in terms of demographics, lived-experiences, and skillsets.
    These avenues strengthen the DAF's ability to attract and commission
    its next generation of leaders.
        Question. Do you believe the Air Force should prioritize available
    scholarship and training slots for cadets who pursue technical degrees
    or who attend selective universities?
        Answer. Recruiting and retaining technically competent airmen and
    guardians is essential to the Department's continued success. I do see
    value in the DAF prioritizing scholarships and training slots based on
    the needs across the Air and Space Forces. If confirmed, I will work to
    ensure airmen and guardians have the right knowledge, skills, and
    abilities to effectively execute their duties regardless of academic
    background and career field.
                                pilot retention
        Question. The Air Force has reported a shortage of approximately
    2,000 pilots last year, including a shortage of 950 fighter pilots.
        What impact, if any, has COVID-19 pandemic had on Air Force pilot
    retention?
        Answer. I understand that COVID had a slight positive effect on Air
    Force pilot retention, likely due to a reduction in airline hiring. It
    seems unlikely that this situation will endure, and I understand the
    Air Force expects a return to pre-COVID retention as airline hiring
    increases in the near term. In my view, this situation needs to be
    closely monitored and managed going forward.
        Question. What are the Air Force's current efforts to address this
    critical problem?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review DAF efforts to
    address pilot retention and pilot training throughput. If confirmed, I
    will review the DAF's efforts on both fronts to ensure resulting
    approaches are sustainable for the force.
        Question. How would you assess their effectiveness?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review DAF efforts to
    address pilot retention and pilot training throughput. I understand
    that the Air Force has developed targeted retention programs; however,
    retention is still well short of required manning levels. If confirmed,
    I will review retention and production initiatives to determine
    additional opportunities to improve pilot manning health.
        Question. What monetary and non-monetary incentives and initiatives
    implemented by the Air Force have yielded the most positive impacts on
    pilot retention?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review data on this, but
    I understand that a combination of quality-of-life improvements, higher
    payment options, and up-front bonus payment options have garnered the
    most positive impacts. If confirmed, I would be open to reviewing
    additional approaches, to include non-monetary options, to address
    pilot retention.
        Question. What additional authorities does the Air Force need from
    Congress to address this shortfall definitively?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review whether and to what extent
    additional authorities may be required to address the pilot shortfall.
        Question. In your view, was it prudent to disestablish the Air
    Mobility Command (AMC) ``flying-only'' career track? Please explain
    your answer.
        Answer. I do not have the information needed to answer this
    question. As I understand, there was little interest in the program,
    though it is unclear as to why that was the case. If confirmed, I will
    review how this program was structured to better understand if aspects
    of it may still be useful to addressing pilot retention challenges.
        Question. In your view, how will AMC's Resource Driven Allocation
    Project contribute to pilot readiness?
        Answer. I do not have an in-depth knowledge of this process beyond
    understanding that it assists Air Force units in predicting their
    operational pace. If confirmed, I will review this project to determine
    how it can best contribute to pilot readiness.
        Question. How has the Air Force increased pilot production capacity
    commensurate with the demands of the NDS?
        Answer. I have not seen data on this. If confirmed, I will review
    efforts to increase retention and pilot training throughput to
    understand the efficacy of these approaches.
        Question. As the Air Force prepares for competition with a peer-
    adversary, what steps is it taking to increase quality standards within
    and screening rates for flight school, and the pipeline beyond?
        Answer. I do not have information necessary to answer this
    question. I understand the Air Force continually looks for ways to
    train and develop its pilots, and if confirmed, I would review efforts
    to leverage technology and innovative procedures to enhance pilot
    training programs.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you implement the Air Force's
    Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) ``Get Well'' plan?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review this plan. I
    understand the ``RPA Get-Well Plan'' was created in 2015 to increase
    pipeline training capacity and operational unit manpower. I have been
    told that in 2016, those objectives were met by increasing MQ-9
    instructors, growing the RPA pilot inventory, and achieving better
    crew-to-combat ratios. If confirmed, I will ensure instructor manning
    and necessary contractor support will exist to continue sustainable
    student throughput.
                             military compensation
        Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy of military
    compensation and benefits?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review the adequacy of
    military compensation and benefits in order to provide an assessment.
    If confirmed, I look forward to a detailed review to better understand
    which, if any, areas may need revision to allow for a more targeted
    approach to improvement in the overall compensation package.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to control the
    rising cost of military personnel?
        Answer. I do not have information necessary to answer this
    question. If confirmed, I will review the current cost of DAF military
    personnel, what has led to growth across the board, as well as
    disproportionate growth in certain areas, and areas we may be able to
    achieve cost savings while maintaining our ability to attract and
    retain talent.
                          air force reserve components
        Question. In your view, what is the appropriate relationship
    between the Active Air Force and the Air Force Reserve and Air Force
    National Guard?
        Answer. In my view, the Active, Reserve, and Guard components have
    a synergistic relationship, with each component being necessary for
    mission success. If confirmed, I would need to review DAF-internal
    information to determine what, if any modifications, may be needed to
    optimize relationships within the Total Force to enhance mission
    readiness.
        Question. What do you believe to be the appropriate roles and
    missions of the Air Force Reserve Components?
        Answer. I have not been briefed in depth on the current roles and
    missions of the Air Force Reserve Components, so it would be premature
    to advise on their appropriateness. If confirmed, I will work with DAF
    and reserve component leaders to understand where we might be able to
    better capitalize on the expertise and skillsets resident in DAF
    reserve units.
        Question. If confirmed, what new objectives would you seek to
    achieve with respect to Air Force Reserve Component organization, force
    structure, and end strength?
        Answer. It would be premature for me to provide an assessment of
    new objectives with respect to the Air Force Reserve Components'
    organization, force structure, and end strength. If confirmed, I will
    work with the Secretary of the Air Force to assess the situation and
    existing plans, and work with component leaders to ensure the
    Department is fully leveraging the strategic depth and operational
    capacity within the reserve components.
                          military health care reforms
        Question. Do you support the purpose and implementation of section
    702 of the Fiscal Year 2017 NDAA, as clarified by sections 711 and 712
    of the fiscal year 2019 NDAA?
        Answer. Yes, and if confirmed, I will work with DAF and OSD leaders
    to ensure the Department is meeting these statutory requirements to
    effectively and efficiently transition the administration of military
    treatment facilities to the Defense Health Agency, ensuring there is no
    break in first-break in quality health care for our airman, guardians,
    and their families.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the rapid and
    efficient transfer of the administration and management of Air Force
    military treatment facilities to the Defense Health Agency?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with DAF and OSD leaders to
    review these timelines and identify ways to support the expedient
    transfer while ensuring all airmen, guardians, and their families
    continue to receive safe and accessible medical care.
                         non-deployable servicemembers
        Question. In your view, should airmen and guardians who are non-
    deployable for more than 12 consecutive months be subject either to
    separation from the service or referral to the Disability Evaluation
    System, as is current Department policy?
        Answer. I do not have sufficient data to provide a thorough
    assessment of the current policy or the efficacy of the Disability
    Evaluation System. If confirmed, I will support the Secretary of the
    Air Force in implementing the current policy, and evaluate how the
    policy impacts our members and their readiness.
        Question. Under what circumstances would the retention of a
    servicemember who has been non-deployable for more than 12 months be
    ``in the best interest of the service''?
        Answer. I do not have sufficient data to determine the efficacy of
    the current approach and whether modifications may be required. If
    confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the Air Force to review
    the current approach, and ensure any changes in criteria meet the
    spirit and intent of the provision while satisfying operational
    readiness requirements.
        Question. In your view, how should this policy be applied to
    servicemembers with HIV?
        Answer. I do not have sufficient information to answer this
    question. If confirmed, I will support the Department of Defense review
    of HIV-related policies that I understand is underway and ensure DAF
    perspectives are considered as part of that process. If confirmed, I
    will work with DAF leaders to implement any related changes in policy
    as a result of that review.
        Question. In your view, should an airman's or guardian's readiness
    to perform the required specific missions, functions, and tasks in the
    context of a particular deployment also be considered in determining
    whether that servicemember is deployable?
        Answer. Generally, yes, but there is not enough information to
    answer this hypothetical question. If confirmed, I would ensure airmen
    and guardians have the resources and training needed to deploy. I will
    also work with DAF leaders to develop non-deployment policies which are
    fairly and uniformly applied, and take into account that
    servicemember's individual circumstances as necessary.
        Question. What are your ideas for addressing the challenges of
    medical non-deployability in the reserve components?
        Answer. I do not have access to the non-deployability rate for the
    Air Force Reserve component, nor a strong appreciation for the factors
    contributing to that rate. If confirmed, I would work to understand
    both and to address systemic challenges that may exist.
        Question. Are there any specialties in the Air Force personnel
    system where airmen would never be expected to deploy?
        Answer. At this point, I am not aware of specialties within the Air
    Force where an airman would never be expected to deploy. If confirmed,
    I will work with DAF leaders to develop non-deployment policies which
    are fairly and uniformly applied, and take into account that
    servicemember's individual circumstances as necessary.
        Question. If so, should airmen in the specialties be separated if
    they can still perform their duties?
        Answer. Decisions related to retention should generally take into
    account an airman's ability to perform their duties and how loss of
    that airman's skillsets may affect readiness. If confirmed, I will work
    with DAF leaders to ensure we have policies that prioritize readiness
    and deployability.
        The new DOD transgender policy (DODI 1300.28) provided, ``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 Air Force standards and policies related to an
    airmen's or guardian's ability to deploy will be applied to transgender
    servicemembers undergoing gender transition procedures or treatment?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review DAF-internal
    standards and policies that govern an airman or guardian's ability to
    deploy. Therefore, it is premature for me to determine those which
    might apply to transgender servicemembers undergoing transition
    procedures or treatment. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders and
    medical professionals to assess what current standards may be
    applicable and to assess the need for additional standards.
        Question. As the Air Force implements the DOD policy, what level of
    commander will be responsible for balancing servicemember requests to
    transition gender while maintaining military readiness?
        Answer. I have not been briefed on DAF-internal deliberations that
    resulted in the current level of commander involvement in those
    decisions. If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to understand
    how well the current process is working and to what extent
    modifications may be needed. Additionally, I would review the resources
    afforded to any commander so that she/he can make an informed decision
    when presented with member requests to transition gender.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that commanders are
    permitted to deny or delay gender transition requests if it such a
    request would degrade unit readiness and deployability?
        Answer. I am not able to answer this question, because I do not
    understand the potential medical and mental health consequences of
    delaying a servicemember's transition. If confirmed, I would work with
    DAF leaders and medical professionals to balance readiness and
    deployability with the medical needs of affected airmen and guardians.
                               suicide prevention
        Question. The number of suicides in each of the Services continues
    to concern the Committee. It is believed that, over the course of a
    single week at the end of March 2020, two U.S. Air Force Academy First-
    Class cadets committed suicide.
        What is your assessment of the efficacy of suicide prevention
    programs at the U.S. Air Force Academy?
        Answer. I currently serve on the Air Force Academy Board of
    Visitors and understand that the Air Force Academy, like the Department
    of the Air Force writ large, continues to focus on this critical issue,
    and work to improve its processes and programs. Even one suicide is a
    critical reminder to remain diligent in suicide prevention efforts and
    to continue to look to the latest research to inform the Department's
    efforts. If confirmed, I will review the latest USAFA-internal
    assessments of its suicide prevention programs and work with USAFA
    leaders to understand where improvements may be made.
        Question. Has the Air Force conducted a comprehensive review of the
    two recent suspected Academy suicides to determine whether there are
    any common causal factors? Q118. If so, what did the Air Force find and
    how will those findings be applied to suicide prevention efforts going
    forward?
        Answer. I do not have any information regarding the two suspected
    suicides. If confirmed, I will ensure further review of these cases and
    apply any lessons-learned to the Department's suicide prevention
    efforts.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to maintain
    a strong focus on preventing suicides in the Active Air Force and Space
    Force, in the Reserve Components, and in Air Force and Space Force
    families across all Components?
        Answer. I am not able to answer this question, because I am not
    fully aware of all of the prevention resources available across the
    Total Force. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to review the
    state of those programs and potential modifications for those airman
    and guardians in specialties and/or assigned to locations with higher
    rates of attempted and/or reported suicides. If confirmed, I will work
    with DAF leaders to ensure commanders and supervisors are aware of the
    mental health and behavioral health resources available to the Total
    Force.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to enhance
    the reporting and tracking of suicide among family members and
    dependents of airmen and members of the Space Force across all
    Components?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will remain fully committed to preventing
    suicides across the Total Force, to include among family members and
    dependents. I have not had the opportunity to review how the Department
    reports and tracks suicides amongst family members and amongst the
    components. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leadership to evaluate
    and implement research-based prevention methods to ensure the Total
    Force and their families receive the support and resources they need.
                     sexual assault prevention and response
        Question. In your view, how adequate and effective are the
    policies, programs, and training been that the Air Force has put in
    place to prevent and respond to sexual assault?
        Answer. The lack of discernable impact on the incidents of sexual
    assault in the ranks suggests these efforts have not been adequate nor
    effective enough--to the detriment of Air Force and Space Force
    readiness. I will review the Independent Review Commission findings and
    recommendations once released, and, if confirmed, work with OSD and DAF
    leaders to implement directed and necessary changes to comply with any
    statutory changes.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to increase
    focus on the prevention of sexual assaults?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to understand
    the full scope of prevention efforts, those currently in development,
    and those not pursued and the reasons for not doing so. Prevention and
    accountability measures go hand in hand, and I believe strong,
    consistently enforced accountability measures aid in deterring these
    egregious acts. As such, if confirmed, I would be equally focused on
    prevention and accountability. I will review the Independent Review
    Commission findings and recommendations once released, and, if
    confirmed, work with OSD and DAF leaders to implement directed and
    necessary changes to comply with any statutory changes.
        Question. What is your assessment of the potential impact, if any,
    of proposals to remove from military commanders case disposition
    authority over felony violations of the Uniform Code of Military
    Justice, including sexual assaults?
        Answer. I have not seen DAF-internal data that articulates the
    potential impacts, if any, of such proposals, so I am not prepared to
    offer an assessment at this time. However, I understand sexual assault
    to be a threat to military readiness and failing to adequately address
    it itself erodes good order and discipline within units. If confirmed,
    I will be open to an alternative criminal process, as it is clear the
    status quo is not working.
        Question. What is your assessment of the Air Force's implementation
    of protections against retaliation--most notably social ostracism and
    reputation damage--for reporting sexual assault?
        Answer. I am not familiar with the Air Force's implementation of
    protections against retaliation for reporting sexual assault, so I
    unable to provide an assessment of its effectiveness. If confirmed, I
    would review the measures to ensure leaders are prioritizing the
    victim's privacy and taking steps to not inadvertently re-victimize the
    victim.
        Question. In your view, do military and civilian leaders in the
    Department of the Air Force have the training, authorities, and
    resources needed to hold subordinate commanders and supervisors
    accountable for the prevention of and response to sexual assault and
    retaliation? Q126. If not, what additional training, authorities, or
    resources do you believe are needed, and why?
        Answer. I have not been briefed in depth on the range of trainings,
    authorities, and resources available to military and civilian leaders
    to help them adequately hold subordinate commanders and supervisors
    accountable for the prevention of and response to sexual assault and
    retaliation. Therefore, it would be inappropriate for me to provide an
    opinion here. I will review the Independent Review Commission findings
    and recommendations once released, and, if confirmed, work with OSD and
    DAF leaders to implement directed and necessary changes to comply with
    any statutory changes, some of which may address training, resources,
    and authorities.
               sexual harassment in the air force and space force
        Question. What is your assessment of the effectiveness of military
    sexual harassment programs of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. Public reports indicate reported instances of and the
    assessed prevalence of sexual harassment within the DAF are not
    improving, and I am keenly aware of the threat sexual harassment poses
    to Air Force and Space Force readiness. I will review the Independent
    Review Commission findings and recommendations once released, and, if
    confirmed, work with OSD and DAF leaders to implement directed and
    necessary changes to comply with any statutory changes.
        Question. In your view, do methods for tracking the submission and
    monitoring the resolution of informal complaints of harassment or
    discrimination provide DOD and Air Force and Space Force leaders,
    supervisors, and managers an accurate picture of the systemic
    prevalence of these adverse behaviors in the force?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review the current
    process for tracking the submissions and monitoring the resolutions of
    informal complaints, so I am not prepared to speak to its adequacy.
    However, beyond the process and tool, airmen and guardians must trust
    the process' outcomes, in the form of improved prevention and/or
    accountability measures. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to
    identify ways to further strengthen airmen and guardians' confidence in
    the reporting process and help them see the value in reporting.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions will you take to improve the
    quality of investigations into allegations of sexual harassment in the
    force?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. If confirmed, I
    will review the current process and take appropriate steps to ensure
    all members within the DAF receive a thorough and fair investigation
    into allegations of sexual harassment.
        Question. Does the Air Force's method for recording the outcomes of
    informal complaints of harassment or discrimination provide DOD
    leaders, supervisors, and managers with a means of identifying repeat
    perpetrators in the military?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question, as I am not
    aware of how DAF records nor shares these outcomes. If confirmed, I
    will work with DAF leaders to strengthen information sharing practices
    so the Department has the most complete picture of potential repeat
    offenders possible.
                                   extremism
        Question. What is your view of the prevalence and effect of
    extremism in the Air Force?
        Answer. As a former Air Force officer, and having worked with
    airmen and Air Force civilians throughout my career, I believe the vast
    majority of airmen and guardians do their duty exceptionally well and
    uphold their oath to support and defend the Constitution. While I
    firmly believe that a very small minority hold these extremist views,
    these behaviors are corrosive and threaten good order and discipline,
    unit morale, and unit cohesion. If confirmed, I will ensure that the
    Department of the Air Force continues to work with OSD leaders to
    ensure we have policies, processes and training in place to address
    extremist behaviors, while preserving the rights of our airmen and
    guardians.
        Question. In your view, what beliefs and actions should constitute
    ``extremism?
        Answer. I understand that the Department of Defense continues to
    review and refine its definition of extremism and extremist behaviors
    in order to provide the force with clear and consistent guidance. This
    intersubjectivity is critical to identifying and addressing these
    extremist behaviors. If confirmed, I will support OSD efforts in this
    regard and work with DAF leaders to ensure our airmen and guardians can
    serve to their full potential, absent the threat of extremist
    behaviors.
        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. I agree with this statement; however, as a former Air Force
    officer, I recognize a leader's actions never stop setting the tone for
    an organization, regardless of whether those actions are during the
    duty day or after. Therefore, I believe that airmen and guardians
    should be held accountable when their extremist actions threaten good
    order and discipline or our national security.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to eliminate
    extremism within the Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Department of the Air
    Force continues to support the Secretary of Defense's comprehensive
    review of extremism within the Department of Defense. Pending the
    review's final recommendations, I will work closely with Air Force and
    Space Force leaders to ensure the Department has timely action plans in
    place to implement the necessary changes.
                        general officer (go) reductions
        Question. The Fiscal Year 2017 NDAA reduced the number of Air Force
    GO authorizations by about 12 percent.
        What progress has the Air Force made in reducing the number of GOs
    and restructuring the GO grade pyramid?
        Answer. I have not had an opportunity to review progress made by
    the DAF in meeting the required reductions and restructuring of GO
    grades. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to ensure the
    Department meets the requirements laid out in law and work to ensure we
    have the right number of GOs, along with the appropriate grade pyramid
    within both the Air Force and Space Force, to lead and execute our
    missions around the globe.
        Question. What is the impact of the establishment of the Space
    Force on the authorized number of Air Force GO positions?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review this fully;
    however, I understand that many of the Space Force GO billets came from
    the Air Force and the Department of Defense will seek to meet remaining
    Space Force GO requirements within the directed GO reductions across
    DOD. If confirmed, I will work with Secretary of the Air Force to
    monitor this situation closely.
        Question. How have Air Force GOs been affected by the layering of
    post-government employment constraints, including the enactment of
    section 1045 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2017--applicable only to DOD?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. However, if
    confirmed, I will certainly consider feedback from the affected
    population to determine any impacts on DAF readiness.
        Question. In your view, does the Air Force have in place sufficient
    training and resources to provide Air Force and Space Force GOs and
    equivalents with the training, advice, and assistance they need to
    avoid and address conflicts of interest, comply with travel
    regulations, and ensure that government resources--including employee
    time--are used only for official purposes? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. It is important all senior leaders in the Department be
    above reproach when it comes to matters of ethical conduct. If
    confirmed, I will ensure our GOs and SESs have the training, advice,
    and assistance they need to uphold the highest of ethical standards.
                 department of the air force civilian workforce
        Question. In your judgment, what is the biggest challenge facing
    the Air Force and Space Force in effectively and efficiently managing
    the civilian workforce?
        Answer. As a former civil servant, I know recruiting and retaining
    talent with advanced and highly specialized skills is a perennial
    challenge, and even more so when with the economy is strong. These
    challenges are compounded by increased furloughs and government
    shutdowns that strain the DOD civilian workforce's ability to recruit
    and retain top talent. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to
    develop appropriate incentives and professional growth opportunities to
    ensure we can continue to attract top talent into the civilian
    workforce, and work to ensure the civilian workforce is well-managed
    and resourced to meet mission needs.
        Question. How will the Air Force and Space Force sustain requisite
    capacity and capability during the impending workforce ``bath tub''--a
    descriptor used to illustrate graphically the impending loss of senior
    civilian workforce expertise due to the retirement of large numbers of
    baby boomers and the lack of experienced personnel to fill the
    resulting vacancies?
        Answer. I do not have the data needed to answer this question. If
    confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to quickly identify which
    fields and specialties are expected to be critically impacted and
    review the current talent pool in order to address potential gaps and
    mitigation options.
        Question. In your view, how can DOD and its Components better
    utilize telework, while maintaining supervisory and employee
    accountability for high quality performance and the appropriate use of
    official time?
        Answer. Adjustments due to the COVID experience have highlighted
    the utility and viability of enhancing telework options. Moreover, I
    think it has reframed workers' expectations about work-life balance. In
    confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to ensure we are fully
    utilizing telework, where it makes sense to meet mission needs, as an
    avenue to access the top talent while affording better work-life
    balance.
        Question. Has the Air Force's experience with the new Defense
    Performance Management and Appraisal Program (DPMAP) to date evidenced
    the increased supervisor-employee engagement and meaningful ``face-to-
    face'' counseling sessions at the core of the program's objectives?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. If confirmed, I
    look forward to working with DAF leaders to ensure the DPMAP is working
    as intended.
        Question. Has the Air Force's experience to date with DPMAP's 3-
    tiered rating structure resulted in the rationalization of employee
    ratings, such that a ``3'' rating of ``fully successful'' is now the
    mode? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. I believe
    honest and clear feedback is important and, if confirmed, I will remain
    committed to ensuring DPMAP is utilized as it is intended as a means
    for evaluating our civilian talent while providing necessary feedback.
                          air force senior executives
        Question. Given that competent and caring leadership is one of the
    most significant and relevant levers available to shape a high-
    performing Department of the Air Force civilian workforce, what factors
    and characteristics would be most important to you in selecting a
    candidate for appointment to the Senior Executive Service (SES) in the
    Department?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Senior Executive
    recruitment and selection processes to ensure the DAF is selecting
    Senior Executives best suited to lead teams and care for airmen and
    guardians. The Department's senior civilians must have the requisite
    technical expertise, demonstrate executive leadership qualities with a
    proven track record of success, be committed to serving, and
    demonstrate an ability to quickly adapt to a rapidly changing
    environment.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you go about ensuring that SES
    personnel under your authority are held accountable for both
    organizational performance and the rigorous performance management of
    their subordinate employees?
        Answer. SES members should be held accountable for organization,
    subordinate, and personal performance according to clear performance
    objectives. If confirmed, I will review SES performance management
    policies to ensure DAF expectations and goals are clearly articulated.
        Question. What role should mobility requirements play in the
    Department of the Air Force SES program, in your view?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. If confirmed, I
    will review current mobility requirements in the DAF SES program to
    determine how such requirements may affect the overall SES corps. In
    general, I tend to believe mobility requirements could play an
    important role in provide SESs with meaningful professional development
    opportunities.
        Question. Are you satisfied with the subject matter and rigor of
    SES professional development programs currently available across DOD?
        If not, what changes would you make to these programs, if
    confirmed?
        Answer. I have not reviewed the DAF's current professional
    development programs for Senior Executives, so I am unable to provide
    an assessment at this time. If confirmed, I will ensure these programs
    are focused on developing senior executives that can lead in a
    challenging and complex strategic environment.
             domestic violence and child abuse in military families
        Question. Recent press reports indicate that the number of
    incidents of domestic and child abuse in military families has
    increased. What is your understanding of the extent of this issue in
    the Air Force and Space Force, and if confirmed, what actions would you
    take to address it?
        Answer. As an Air Force veteran, I know that family and intimate
    partner violence are counter to the Air Force and Space Force core
    values and cannot be tolerated. If confirmed, I would work with the
    Family Advocacy Program and DAF leaders to understand what may be
    causing the rise in the number of incidents, and how best to prevent,
    screen for, report, and address such abuses. If confirmed, I will be
    committed to eliminating abuse in military families.
        Question. In your view, how effective are Air Force and Space Force
    programs in responding to and reducing incidents of domestic violence
    and child abuse?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. If confirmed, I
    would work with DAF leaders to discern the efficacy of these programs
    in responding to and reducing the incidents of domestic violence and
    child abuse. I would also work to ensure our data collection and
    information sharing efforts were adequate to discern relevant trends.
        Question. Do you believe that the Department of the Air Force's
    Family Advocacy Program strikes the right balance between healing
    families and holding individuals accountable for acts of domestic
    violence and child abuse? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I do not have sufficient information to address this
    question. If confirmed, I will work with Department leaders, the Family
    Advocacy Program, and the Judge Advocate General to determine how we
    might better prevent these acts of abuse and protect servicemembers and
    their families.
                            military quality of life
        Question. If confirmed, what qualify of life and morale, welfare,
    and recreation (MWR) programs would you consider to be a priority?
        Answer. As an Air Force veteran and having been assigned overseas
    as a civil servant, I know MWR programs go a long way toward improving
    the quality of life for military members and their families. If
    confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to understand which MWR
    programs are most in demand and where we may need to introduce new
    programs based on community needs and requests.
        Question. What metric would you apply in determining which MWR and
    quality of life programs should be sustained or enriched and which
    should be eliminated or reduced in scope as ineffective or outmoded?
        Answer. At this point, I am not aware of the current methodology to
    determine which programs should be sustained or enriched. If confirmed,
    I would review that methodology for adequacy and ensure community
    members were aware of their ability to shape MWR programs. In general,
    I would prioritize the voices of airmen, guardians, and their families
    in determining whether or not a program is meeting the resilience and
    MWR needs for our families.
                     military family readiness and support
        Question. What do you consider to be the most important family
    readiness issues for servicemembers and their families?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question at this point.
    If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to understand the most
    important family readiness issues, the DAF's current ability to address
    those, and ways to improve doing do so.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    ensure that military families are provided with accessible, high-
    quality childcare, at an appropriate cost?
        Answer. I understand that accessible, high-quality, and affordable
    childcare is a critical enabler of the Department's mission. If
    confirmed, I will work with Department leaders and families to
    understand what efforts are underway to meet the demand and how we
    might improve doing so.
                support for military families with special needs
        Question. What is your view of the overall effectiveness of the
    exceptional family member program (EFMP)?
        Answer. I do not have sufficient data to evaluate the EFMP. It is
    important military families receive the care they need or their
    exceptional family members, and if confirmed, I would be committed to
    ensure that is the case. If confirmed, I will prioritize this program
    and ensure commanders know the full suite of EFMP resources available
    to the Total Force.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you incentivize servicemember
    enrollment in EFMP?
        Answer. I have not seen the internal DAF data regarding EFMP
    enrollment and why incentives may be necessary. If confirmed, I will
    work with DAF leaders to review enrollment, understand potential
    barriers to enrollment, and identify ways to ensure the EFMP is fully
    utilized by those who need it.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you eliminate or reduce the
    bureaucratic administrative burdens currently experienced by EFMP
    participants, and ensure that EFMP services are consistent across
    services?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. If confirmed, I
    will work with DAF leaders to review enrollment, understand potential
    barriers to enrollment, and identify ways to ensure the EFMP is fully
    utilized by those who need it.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
    in ensuring that Military Housing Privatization Initiative partners and
    military commanders consider the needs of servicemembers with an
    exceptional family member in making assignments to privatized military
    housing?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. If confirmed, I
    would work with DAF leaders to understand the scope of the challenges
    and ensure such a critical consideration is appropriately factored into
    the process.
                               nuclear enterprise
        Question. Do you agree that modernizing each leg of the nuclear
    triad and the National Nuclear Security Administration weapons complex
    is a critical national security priority?
        Answer. Yes. Maintaining a credible deterrent is a top US national
    security priority. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of the
    Air Force to assess the status of the Department's current nuclear
    weapon systems and modernization programs to evaluate how the Air Force
    can best maintain such a deterrent.
        Question. Do you believe the current Air Force program of record is
    sufficient to support the full modernization of the Air Force legs of
    the nuclear triad?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to assess the current status
    of the programs of record. If confirmed, I would assess each of the
    Department of the Air Force's nuclear programs and work with the
    Secretary of the Air Force to ensure they are sufficiently resourced.
        Question. Do you support and intend to advocate for the funding,
    development, and fielding of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent?
    Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review the status of the
    GBSD program. Maintaining a secure, sustainable and effective nuclear
    deterrent is one of the Department of Defense's top priority missions.
    If confirmed, I will review the details and status of the GBSD
    acquisition program.
        Question. Do you support and intend to advocate for the funding,
    development, and fielding of the Long-Range Stand-Off Weapon? Please
    explain your answer.
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review the status of the
    LRSO program. Maintaining a secure, sustainable and effective nuclear
    deterrent is one of the Department of Defense's top priority missions.
    If confirmed, I will review the details and status of the LRSO weapon
    acquisition program.
        Question. What are your ideas for working across the Military
    Departments to mitigate the risk that all three legs of the nuclear
    triad will be ``aging out'' simultaneously at the end of the 2020s?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will assess each of the Department of the
    Air Force's current and planned nuclear modernization programs to
    ensure they are on schedule and resourced appropriately to meet the
    warfighter's needs and are aligned, where applicable, with the
    Department of the Navy.
        Question. In your view, is the Air Force continuing to maintain
    appropriate focus on implementing the corrective actions recommended by
    then-Secretary of Defense Hagel's Nuclear Enterprise Review?
        Answer. I have not been fully briefed on the Air Force's progress
    with respect to implementing the recommended corrective actions
    identified in this review. If confirmed, I would review those efforts
    and work with the Secretary of the Air Force to determine an
    appropriate way forward.
        Question. Do you believe ``Arming/Use of Force'' protocols for
    Security Forces adequately meets the spirit and intent of the Personnel
    Reliability Program?
        Answer. I have not had an opportunity to assess these protocols. If
    confirmed, I will assess the ``Arming/Use of Force'' protocols for
    Security Forces to determine if they meet the spirit and intent of the
    Personnel Reliability Program.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
    continues its efforts to improve the training, readiness, morale,
    welfare, and quality of life of the airmen charged to execute and
    support the Air Force's nuclear mission?
        Answer. In my opinion, any negative impacts to the training,
    readiness, morale, welfare and/or quality of life of airmen and their
    families directly affects the Air Force's ability to provide a safe,
    secure and effective deterrent to our Nation and our allies. If
    confirmed, I would review the existing efforts, make adjustments, if
    needed, and ensure sufficient resourcing and advocacy.
                                unmanned systems
        Question. What is your opinion on the manned and unmanned teaming
    envisioned by Skyborg and the Low-Cost Attritable Aircraft Technology
    (LCAAT) program?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review this program. In
    general, I support operational concepts that expand the reach and
    effects of our manned/unmanned capabilities. If confirmed, I look to
    reviewing this program and understanding its potential support to the
    Air Force future force design.
        Question. What program is responsible for developing and fielding a
    Skyborg-like capability?
        Answer. I do not have data to answer this question. If confirmed, I
    will review the DAF portfolio to determine which program is responsible
    for developing and fielding such capabilities.
        Question. What is the timeline for fielding these aircraft?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to review this program. If
    confirmed, I look to reviewing this program and understanding its
    potential support to the Air Force future force design.
        Question. Given the amount of intelligence, surveillance, and
    reconnaissance (ISR) required to meet combatant commander demands, do
    you believe it is appropriate to shut down the production lines for the
    current unmanned fleet of MQ-9s and divest almost 75 percent of the RQ-
    4s?
        Answer. I have not seen internal DAF data regarding ISR production
    timelines. Having served at a combatant command, I understand how
    dynamic ISR requirements can be. If confirmed, I will work with DAF
    leaders to understand the production timelines and corresponding
    efforts to ensure we are sufficiently satisfying ISR requirements.
        Question. Do you see utility in encouraging the Military Services
    to conduct more joint development in the area of aircraft and unmanned
    systems?
        Answer. I understand joint acquisition programs have the potential
    to offer benefits in limited instances. If confirmed, I will work with
    DAF leaders and service counterparts to determine the benefits to the
    DAF of additional joint development in the area of aircraft and
    unmanned systems.
                                     cyber
        Question. In your view, how well postured are the Air Force and
    Space Force to meet the goals outlined in the 2018 DOD Cyber Strategy?
        Answer. I do not have the data to answer this question. However, if
    confirmed, the DAF's contribution to joint- and service-retained cyber
    operations will be a priority, to include cybersecurity partnerships to
    safeguard defense industrial base and critical infrastructure
    platforms.
        Question. What actions would you take, if confirmed, to remediate
    any gaps between Air Force and Space Force capacity and capability and
    Cyber Strategy goals?
        Answer. To achieve our Cyber Strategy goals, the Department must be
    able to effectively compete in an increasingly dynamic environment. If
    confirmed, I will work to identify capability gaps and equip our airmen
    and guardians with the partners, skills, and capabilities to create
    decisive advantage across all domains, including cyberspace.
        Question. In your view, should the composition of the Cyber Mission
    Force be adjusted across the National Mission Teams, Combat Mission
    Teams, Cyber Protection Teams, and Cyber Support Teams, to address in a
    better way the requirements identified in the NDS and the goals set
    forth in the 2018 Cyber Strategy?
        Answer. I do not have the data to answer this question. If
    confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to understand how our cyber
    forces should be best postured to meet standing cyber requirements and
    address emerging cyber challenges as identified in our strategic
    guidance documents.
        Question. Are the size and capabilities of the Air Force Component
    of the Cyber Mission Force and Air Force cybersecurity service
    providers sufficient to meet current and future cyber and information
    warfare requirements?
        Answer. I do not have information to assess whether these
    capabilities are right-sized. If confirmed, I will work with DAF cyber
    leaders to ensure we are providing adequate capacity and capability to
    satisfy our cyber mission requirements.
        Question. In your view, should the Air Force expand acceptable
    professional qualifications for its cyber workforce to include non-
    traditional professional credentialing and schooling from so-called
    technology boot camps and massive online open courses (MOOCs) as an
    alternative to traditional education, provided candidates meet the
    necessary technical standards?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would need to understand how pursuing such
    opportunities contributes to DAF operational capabilities, expertise,
    and readiness before committing to such a path. In general, I would
    support exploring options to incorporate industry and commercial
    training to supplement service-provided baseline technical training, if
    doing so enhances mission readiness.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to enhance Air Force and
    Space Force information dominance capabilities?
        Answer. Information dominance underpins the Air Force and Space
    Force's ability to execute its core missions. The Department of the Air
    Force must consider the interconnectedness of systems, the need for
    actionable information at decision points, and barriers to the
    effective sharing of information with joint, allied, and coalition
    partners. Information dominance will especially be critical against
    near-peer competitor and in contested environments. If confirmed, I
    will strive to leverage partnerships and shared objectives to ensure
    the DAF has high-priority information systems that meet our national
    security priorities.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to improve military
    cybersecurity career pathways to meet the present and future needs of
    the Air Force and U.S. Cyber Command?
        Answer. As a starting point, I would engage with DAF cyber leaders
    to understand where they see opportunities to improve military
    cybersecurity pathways across the Total Force. If confirmed, I support
    identifying ways to broaden and deepen our cybersecurity expertise
    within the ranks, and partnerships with the private sector and academia
    may be opportunities to do so. Additionally, I would work to ensure we
    were better able to recruit and retain top cyber talent potentially
    through cybersecurity development opportunities, incentives, or some
    combination thereof.
        Question. Section 1657 of the Fiscal Year 2020 NDAA directed the
    appointment of an independent Principal Cyber Advisor (PCA) for each
    Military Department, 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 in the Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I expect the PCA will provide the Secretary
    of the Air Force and DAF service leaders with independent advice on all
    cyber matters across the full spectrum of DAF portfolios.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you plan to utilize the Air Force
    PCA as part of your leadership structure?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would follow the NDAA guidance which states
    the PCA will be an autonomous advisor to the SecAF, CSAF, and CSO on
    all cyber matters, as well as oversee and coordinate on the
    implementation of cyber policy and sustainment programs, and coordinate
    with OSD and other services' PCAs to reduce unnecessary duplication on
    cyber initiatives. The PCA will be responsible for the best utilization
    of our cyber operations workforce, capabilities, and enterprise IT
    framework.
        Question. What are Air Force's top three (3) Cyber Challenges, and
    how will you use the Principal Cyber Advisor to address them?
        Answer. I do not have sufficient data to make an assessment of the
    Air Force's top three cyber challenges. However, I see value in the PCA
    assessing the DAF's overall cyber readiness, evaluating our ability to
    protect legacy weapons systems from cyber attacks, and helping to
    prioritize DAF efforts to support joint and combined cyber operations.
    With the PCA's help, if confirmed, I intend to strengthen the
    Department's efforts to defend the DAF enterprise by ensuring the Total
    Force practices cyber vigilance to minimize vulnerabilities and assure
    mission success.
        Question. The Air Force merged the 24th and 25th Air Forces to
    better integrate cyber effects, ISR, electronic warfare operations, and
    information operations. In your view, has the merger yielded the
    expected benefits? Q184. What challenges has the Air Force experienced
    in the context of this merger and how would you address those
    challenges, if confirmed?
        Answer. I do not have enough information to assess if the merger
    and creation of 16th Air Force has yielded the expected outcomes
    established at the onset. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to
    understand the operational benefits and disadvantages, expected and
    unforeseen, based on this approach.
                            electronic warfare (ew)
        Question. What is your vision for the future of Air Force EW
    capabilities?
        Answer. Electronic warfare is a critical warfighting capability and
    an area that warrants further investment to ensure military superiority
    over our competitors. If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to
    understand where enhanced electronic warfare capabilities may maximize
    our combat power.
        Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy and efficacy of
    EW training that Air Force personnel receive in an Air Force
    environment in specific airframes?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have enough information to make this
    assessment. However, it is my understanding that advanced technology
    now makes a wider range of the Electromagnetic Spectrum usable for both
    the Air Force and its adversaries, so it is important for the
    Department to train for potential conflict in this environment. If
    confirmed, I would ensure that Air Force personnel receive appropriate
    and adequate training for electronic warfare.
        Question. In a joint environment with other Military Services?
        Answer. I do not have sufficient information about current Air
    Force electronic warfare capabilities in these conditions. However, my
    impression from open source reporting is that there is likely room for
    improvement here, as well.
                                    spectrum
        Question. Electromagnetic spectrum plays a critical role in many
    DOD missions. In what ways do the Air Force and Space Force rely on
    spectrum to support warfighter requirements?
        Answer. I have not been fully briefed on the ways the Air Force and
    Space Force rely on spectrum to support warfighter requirements, though
    I generally understand that reliance is extensive. If confirmed, I will
    advocate for the development, acquisition, and collaboration required
    to ensure that the Department's spectrum-dependent systems support
    strategic competition worldwide.
        Question. In your view, which warfighter spectrum requirements will
    be essential to competing with Russia and China on a future
    battlefield?
        Answer. I do not have enough information to makes this assessment.
    I will review current DAF spectrum requirements to assess their
    adequacy and make appropriate recommendations.
        Question. In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee in
    February 2020, Secretary of Defense Esper stated that DOD is willing to
    share spectrum with 5G networks in the ``Mid-Band'' (3 to 4.2
    gigahertz). What Air Force systems might be affected by this
    ``sharing'' and how could ``sharing'' affect homeland defense, in your
    view?
        Answer. I do not have enough information to answer this question;
    however, if confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to understand how
    such sharing could affect the efficacy and readiness of Air Force
    systems and homeland defense.
        Question. Were DOD required to ``vacate'' or leave the ``Mid-Band''
    spectrum instead of sharing, what are the potential operational and
    dollar costs to the Air Force and Space Force, in your view?
        Answer. I do not have enough information to answer this question;
    however, if confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to understand how
    vacating this spectrum would impose operational and monetary costs on
    the DAF and affect our ability to execute critical missions.
        Question. How long would a move to a different area of the spectrum
    take, in your view?
        Answer. I do not have the data to determine how long a move to a
    different area of the spectrum would take or any resultant operational
    capability gaps during and as a result of that transition. If
    confirmed, I will work with relevant stakeholders to ensure Department
    equities are protected, and any costs associated with spectrum sharing
    are accurately identified to decision makers.
                      science, technology, and innovation
        Question. How have the Air Force and Space Force prioritized
    limited research and development funding across its technology focus
    areas? Q194. Specifically, where are the Air Force and Space Force
    either increasing or decreasing focus and funding?
        Answer. I have not had an opportunity to review how the Air Force
    and Space Force prioritize their research and development funding
    across technology focus areas. However, as a nation, we should invest
    in capabilities with the highest chance of success against future
    adversary technologies. If confirmed, I will review the current
    investment strategy in technology focus areas to ensure we are
    adequately focused on key technologies for the future fight.
        Question. How would you improve efforts the Air Force and Space
    Force are making to identify new technologies developed commercially by
    the private sector and apply them to military and national security
    purposes?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review the Air Force and Space
    Force's current efforts in this regard to better understand their
    respective challenges and opportunities with doing so. In general, I am
    supportive of streamlining the process to identify and incorporate
    commercially developed technologies based on potential cost savings and
    getting much needed capabilities into the hands of the warfighters.
        Question. How would you work to increase investments in research
    infrastructure through Air Force MILCON investments to match growing
    investments in China in research infrastructure in domains such as
    quantum science, hypersonics, and advanced materials?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review Air Force MILCON investments
    to understand the current priority of projects and the status of
    research infrastructure projects therein. As the DAF invests in
    advanced technologies, it is important that we have adequate research
    infrastructures to support the timely development of sensitive
    capabilities. If confirmed, I would consider this a priority effort.
        A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report (Actions Needed to
    Enhance Use of Laboratory Initiated Research Authority--GAO-19-64) has
    noted that the Air Force Research Laboratory is not fully using
    authorities provided to it by Congress to support research innovation.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you lead the Air Force in
    responding to GAO's recommendation in this report?
        Answer. I do not have enough information to answer this question.
    If confirmed, I would work with DAF leaders to understand which
    authorities are and are not being fully utilized by the Air Force
    Research Laboratory to support research innovation, and why that is the
    case. Based on that review, I would be better positioned to recommend a
    way forward.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the limited Air
    Force science and technology budget is used for genuine science and
    technology technical challenges, and not to support more mature
    prototyping and development activities more appropriately addressed
    with other Air Force RDTE resources?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to review how
    the Air Force science and technology budget funds science and
    technology technical challenges, to ensure activities meet the
    requirements for why the monies were initially appropriated.
        Question. In your view, would the Air Force benefit from
    authorities that enable it to make use of expert foreign national
    talent in appropriate capacities and in appropriate settings to support
    modernization priorities and better compete with peer adversaries?
        Answer. I understand that the Department of the Air Force Science
    and Technology Strategy calls for enhanced recruitment of national and
    global talent to deepen and expand the scientific and technical
    enterprise. If confirmed, I will work with Department leaders to
    understand the challenges of recruiting foreign nationals, namely
    university students, and devise strategies to ensure that the
    Department of Air Force has access to the best talent, while protecting
    sensitive and classified information and technologies from competitors
    and potential adversaries who attempt to exploit such recruits.
        Question. What incentives should the Air Force provide to
    universities and researchers to develop domestic technical talent and
    counter opportunities for researchers in critical fields being offered
    by peer adversaries, including China?
        Answer. Developing and fostering partnerships with universities,
    both domestic and with allied partners, is critical to ensuring the
    Department creates and maintains technical talent and leading research
    programs for U.S. national security and economic advantage. If
    confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to identify appropriate
    incentives that help foster domestic programs and ensure we have a
    robust pipeline for technical talent.
                              indo-pacific region
        Question. What are the key areas in which the Air Force must
    improve to provide the necessary capabilities and capacity to the Joint
    Force to deter Chinese aggression and, if necessary, prevail in a
    potential conflict with China?
        Answer. I believe the key areas include connecting the Joint Force
    with joint all domain command and control, achieving space superiority,
    the ability to generate combat power and conduct logistics in contested
    environments.
        Question. How would you assess the threat to Air Force forces and
    facilities from Chinese missile forces?
        Answer. I do not presently have enough information to assess the
    threat, but my sense is that the threat is growing.
        Question. In your assessment, have Air Force investments, posture
    shifts and/or new operational concepts sufficiently addressed this
    threat?
        Answer. I do not have enough information to answer this question at
    this point. If confirmed, I will assess the adequacy of the efforts
    currently underway and work with the military leadership of the Air and
    Space Forces to make any necessary adjustments.
        Question. In your assessment, what are the priority investments the
    Air Force could make that would help implement the NDS and improve the
    military balance in the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. I believe priority investments for the Air Force in the
    Indo-Pacific include those that enable the Air Force to perform its key
    missions in a complex anti-access area denial threat environment.
        Question. What is your current assessment of the risk of
    operational failure in a conflict with China as a result of a critical
    logistics failure?
        Answer. I do not presently have enough information to assess the
    current risk. My sense is that the risk is significant. China is
    fielding capabilities to disrupt and attack logistics, and the
    geography and distances associated with operating in the Indo-Pacific
    pose significant logistical challenges. If confirmed, I look forward to
    more fully understanding the Department's current assessment of the
    risk posed by a critical logistics failure.
                                     europe
        Question. What are the key areas in which the Air Force must
    improve to provide the necessary capabilities and capacity to the Joint
    Force to deter Russian aggression and, if necessary, prevail in a
    potential conflict with Russia?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to assess the adequacy of
    Air and Space Force capabilities to support European combatant command
    and NATO operational needs. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders
    to assess the adequacy of existing and planned forces to support
    requirements in the region.
        Question. In your view, are there investments the Air Force should
    prioritize for the competition with Russia below the level of direct
    military conflict in order to counter Russian malign influence and
    hybrid warfare operations?
        Answer. In my view, countering Russia's hybrid tactics will require
    a comprehensive approach involving our allies and partners and
    interagency partners from across the U.S. government. The Department of
    the Air Force has a key role to play in this effort. If confirmed, I
    will work with DAF leaders to assess how our efforts are supporting a
    unity of effort among our interagency, our allies and partners, and the
    private sector in order to support a comprehensive approach.
                    operational energy and energy resilience
        Question. DOD defines operational energy as the energy required for
    training, moving, and sustaining military forces and weapons platforms
    for military operations, including the energy used by tactical power
    systems, generators, and weapons platforms. Today, DOD energy
    requirements are expected to increase geometrically due to
    technological advances in weapons systems and distributed operations
    over longer operating distances.
        If confirmed, how would you lead the Air Force in harnessing
    innovations in operational energy and linking them with emerging joint
    operational concepts in order to reduce contested logistics
    vulnerabilities for warfighters?
        Answer. If confirmed, advancing operational energy capability and
    resilience will be a high priority. The DOD fights as a Joint Force
    and, the Air Force, as the largest consumer of energy, must look
    seriously at ways to mitigate its logistical vulnerabilities to ensure
    that it can continue to project power. If confirmed, I would work with
    DAF leaders to review new and emerging concepts in aircraft and engine
    design as well as conventional and novel ways to power its forces.
        Question. In what specific areas, if any, do you believe the Air
    Force needs to improve the incorporation of energy considerations and
    alternative energy resources into the strategic planning processes?
        Answer. Having assured access to energy and water is critical to
    successful missions. If confirmed, I will work to enhance the energy
    resilience of the Department's installations and specifically to ensure
    they are incorporated in installation resilience plans.
        I will also advocate for increased analysis of aircraft and
    installation energy consumption data to shape the strategic planning
    process and to inform future investment decisions.
        Question. How can Air Force acquisition systems better address
    requirements related to the use of energy in military platforms to
    decrease risks to warfighters?
        Answer. The Department's acquisition process must look at energy
    requirements for military platforms from the very beginning, and if
    confirmed, I will support the incorporation of energy considerations
    throughout the requirements development process and the acquisition
    life cycle.
        Question. In your view, what steps can be taken to render energy
    supportability that reduces contested logistics vulnerabilities a key
    performance parameter in the requirements process, as compared to the
    ``check the box'' consideration it is today?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that strategic energy
    considerations are closely analyzed for the potential operational risks
    they may pose, especially in a contested environment. I will work to
    ensure proper emphasis is placed upon energy considerations across the
    DAF and informed by operational data and war games to ensure energy
    risks are adequately captured and addressed.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically how would you prioritize
    energy resilience and mission assurance for the Air Force, including
    acquiring and deploying sustainable and renewable energy assets to
    support mission critical functions and address known vulnerabilities?
        Answer. Having assured access to energy and water is critical to
    successful missions. If confirmed, I will work to enhance the energy
    resilience of the Department's installations and specifically to ensure
    sustainable and renewable assets are incorporated in installation
    resilience plans. I will also ensure appropriate emphasis is placed on
    the strategic implications of energy decisions through the use of
    campaign-level analysis of energy consumption, informed by realistic
    risk to supply chains to address current and future energy
    vulnerabilities.
                                  environment
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
    complies with environmental protection laws, regulations, and guidance
    from the Environmental Protection Agency?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department of the Air Force
    has the policies and resources necessary to comply with all applicable
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency laws, regulations, and guidance.
    This will be a top priority.
        Question. What are your ideas for improving collaboration with the
    Department of the Interior and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to find
    cooperative ways to ensure military readiness while protecting the
    environment on and around installations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the DAF continues to
    collaborate with the Department of Interior and the U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service. I would encourage the identification of mutually
    beneficial programs and projects that support the Department of the Air
    Force readiness mission and while also helping to achieve the U.S. Fish
    and Wildlife Service goal of species recovery on and around
    installations and ranges.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you further efforts to identify
    and remediate PFOS/PFOA contamination on Air Force installations,
    including reserve component locations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure the Department of the Air
    Force Environmental Cleanup Program is appropriately resourced to
    complete all necessary investigations in a timely fashion of potential
    PFAS releases at active installations, to include Reserve Component
    locations, through the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
    Compensation, and Liability Act.
        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 Air Force
    installations and in the context of performing military duties?
        Answer. If confirmed, the health and welfare of the Department's
    members and their families will consistently be a top priority, and I
    will ensure that reported health concerns are investigated and
    addressed as quickly as possible.
              readiness and resource impacts from extreme weather
        Question. In 2017, three hurricanes resulted in over $1.3 billion
    in damage to military installations across the U.S. In 2018, extreme
    weather events caused roughly $9 billion in damage at Tyndall Air Force
    Base, Camp Lejeune, and Offutt Air Force Base.
        How would you assess the readiness and resource impacts on the Air
    Force from past years' extreme weather events?
        Answer. Extreme weather events and effects pose continuing concerns
    to US national security. These can create instability and lead to
    conflict and unrest abroad while potentially endangering installations,
    stressing equipment and personnel, and negatively impacting readiness.
    The number and severity of extreme events in recent years is
    significant for both the Department of the Air Force and many
    communities across the nation. If confirmed I will work to ensure the
    Department maintains a focus on resiliency.
        Question. Based on these readiness and resource impacts, would you
    believe it useful to incorporate more resilient designs in Air Force
    infrastructure?
        Answer. Yes, if confirmed I will ensure the Department pursues
    initiatives that integrate common sense resilience practices into the
    infrastructure design, planning and execution processes.
        Question. How can the Air Force better use existing authorities on
    extreme weather mitigation granted by Congress in the last few NDAAs?
        Answer. I understand that severe weather and other climate change-
    related impacts can and will degrade the Department of the Air Force's
    ability to operate and train. If confirmed, I will work to develop a
    full understanding of the national security implications of extreme
    weather, utilizing an approach that includes use of authorities,
    impacts on operations, installations, infrastructure, and force
    development.
                           infrastructure challenges
        Question. Non-DOD funding mechanisms such as energy savings
    performance contracts, utility energy savings contracts, and power
    purchase agreements are excellent means by which the Air Force can
    improve infrastructure, increase resilience, reduced deferred
    maintenance, implement alternative energy resources, save taxpayer
    funds, and secure other benefits without upfront appropriated funds.
        If confirmed, what steps would you take to streamline this process
    and how long would it take you to resume entering into contracts of
    this sort for the benefit of Air Force installations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department utilizes all
    available authorities to both save money and strengthen energy
    resilience. I also will look for immediate opportunities to streamline
    the processes and expedite solutions working with the Department of the
    Army, Department of the Navy, OSD, and the Department of Energy.
                                     audit
        Question. What is the benefit to Air Force missions in achieving a
    clean audit opinion?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the appropriated funding
    Congress has provided to the DAF has not only improved DAF financial
    statements, it has enabled the DAF to improve cybersecurity in multiple
    systems, enhance business analytics capability by having more reliable,
    transparent data, and supported the use of robotics to allow teams to
    do more without increasing headcount. The audit also allows for
    improvements to equipment and inventory management driving business
    reform within the DAF.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions will you take or
    direct to help the Air Force achieve a clean audit opinion in the most
    efficient manner?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would support the ongoing effort to assess
    enterprise-wide solutions that will leverage modern technology and
    reduce manual processes. System modernization will improve automated
    integration, increase compliance, and enable implementation of more
    effective enterprise cybersecurity. If confirmed, I will prioritize
    having DAF functional communities better account for mission critical
    assets by performing timely inventories to support mission readiness. A
    clean set of books supports improved reliability and timeliness in
    providing critical financial information to decision makers and ensures
    the DAF is doing everything in its power to track and spend financial
    resources effectively and efficiently.
        Question. Do you support the Air Force investing significant
    resources including personnel, investments in IT modernization, and
    funding for audit activities and audit remediation activities in order
    to support the Air Force achieving a clean audit opinion in a timely
    fashion?
        Answer. Yes. It is critical that the Department of the Air Force
    utilize every dollar as efficiently and effectively as possible and
    make informed business decisions.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you hold Air Force leaders
    accountable and responsible to prioritize, support, and manage Air
    Force audit activities?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department's financial
    improvement and audit remediation goals are built into 100% of senior
    leaders' performance assessments, setting leadership's tone from the
    top regarding the importance and priority of obtaining clean, reliable
    financial records. If confirmed, I will assess how well the Department
    is meeting the milestones outlined in these assessments and provide
    feedback.
                   air force-related defense industrial base
        Question. How would you describe the state of the industrial base
    that supports Air Force programs? Q226. If confirmed, what actions
    would you take related to the industrial base?
        Answer. The Department of the Air Force relies on a dynamic, multi-
    layered, and complex global industrial base to reliably acquire and
    support weapon systems. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary of
    the Air Force and DAF leaders to continue to foster interactions with
    the industrial base with concepts such as digital design and
    engineering approaches.
        Question. How should Air Force acquisition leaders consider impacts
    on the industrial base when addressing requirements for
    recapitalization or modernization of major defense weapons systems and
    munitions?
        Answer. As I understand, Air Force program managers are required to
    consider the industrial base's ability to support a weapons system's
    lifecycle. If confirmed, I would work with DAF acquisition leaders to
    identify efforts, such as digital design and engineering approaches,
    that may yield chances to broaden the vendor base, shed antiquated
    designs, and provide new entrants an opportunity to deliver innovation
    and war winning capability.
        Question. How should the Air Force use its procurement investments
    to support the maintenance and growth of the domestic industrial base
    in sectors critical for Air Force readiness and modernization plans?
        Answer. I believe the Air Force should work to identify
    opportunities where acquisition programs can maintain and strengthen a
    nimble, responsive domestic industrial base. If confirmed, I will work
    with the Department of the Air Force acquisition leaders to consider
    impacts to the industrial base and its ability to meet the needs of the
    Air Force and Space Force.
        Question. How should the Air Force use its research and
    manufacturing investment activities to support the maintenance and
    growth of the domestic industrial base in sectors critical for Air
    Force readiness and modernization activities?
        Answer. I understand the Department of the Air Force is leveraging
    the Manufacturing Innovation Institutes as an effective way to support
    the maintenance and growth of the domestic industrial base by pulling
    in a large number of suppliers through public-private partnerships. If
    confirmed, I will work DAF leaders to review this effort and identify
    ways to best leverage partnership such as this one.
                  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.
        What is your assessment of the current climate regarding sexual
    harassment, gender discrimination, and other harassment in civilian
    workforce of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. I have not seen current DAF-internal survey responses.
    However, if confirmed, I will commit to working with the Secretary of
    the Air Force in preventing such harassment and gender discrimination
    from occurring and holding individuals accountable when they engage in
    such behavior will be a top priority. This is a leadership issue, and
    Department leaders must aggressively tackle these issues that threaten
    readiness and degrade the Department's ability to retain top civilian
    talent.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
    receive or become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment,
    discrimination, or other harassment from a civilian employee of the
    Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the appropriate offices and
    officials to understand the nature of the incident(s) and the full
    scope of the alleged activities to ensure a fair and just review and
    adjudication process for the accused and accuser.
        Question. Does the method for responding to complaints of
    harassment or discrimination in the civilian workforce of the
    Department of the Air Force provide appropriate care and services for
    victims?
        Answer. I do not have information about the current methods to
    respond to such complaints, nor how victims receive care and services.
    If confirmed, I will work to make sure victims, military or civilian,
    are fully aware of their legal rights, avenues for reporting, and
    services and care to which they are entitled. I will also partner with
    DAF leaders to make certain that those actions are appropriate and
    professional.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
    appropriate committees of Congress are able to receive testimony,
    briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
    communications) and other information from the Department.
        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 Rick Scott
                               civilian base use
        1. Senator Scott. Ms. Jones, the Homestead Air Reserve Base (HARB)
    is exploring options with Miami-Dade County to permit civil use at the
    base. A decision to enter into a Joint Use Agreement (JUA) with Miami-
    Dade would fall under your supervisory responsibility if confirmed as
    Under Secretary of the Air Force. Are you aware of the conclusion
    reached by the Air Force that aviation/cargo logistics operations at
    HARB would be inconsistent with the 2001 Second Supplement Record of
    Decision (ROD) for Disposal of Portions of the Former Homestead Air
    Force Base (AFB), Florida?
        Ms. Jones. I have not been briefed in detail on requests to permit
    civil use at HARB. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing any proposed
    actions, as well as relevant historical decisions, statutes, and
    interagency efforts and equities that may inform any future decision
    regarding HARB.

        2. Senator Scott. Ms. Jones, what are the steps the Air Force would
    follow in order to arrive at a decision as to whether the 2001 ruling
    is still the controlling decision, or is there a possibility of another
    outcome that would allow for aviation/cargo logistics operations at
    HARB?
        Ms. Jones. I have not been briefed in detail on requests to permit
    civil use at HARB. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing any proposed
    actions, as well as relevant historical decisions, statutes, and
    interagency efforts and equities that may inform any future decision
    regarding HARB.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Ms. Gina Ortiz Jones follows:]

                                    ------

        [The biographical sketch of Ms. Gina Ortiz Jones, which was
    transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

                                     ______

        [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 Ms. Gina Ortiz
    Jones in connection with her nomination follows:]

                                     ______

        [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.]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Ms. Gina Ortiz Jones was reported to the
    Senate by Chairman Reed on June 22, 2021, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on July 22, 2021.]
                                     ______

        [Prepared questions submitted to Dr. Ely S. Ratner by
    Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]
                            Questions and Responses
                 duties, qualifications, challenges, priorities
        Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
    the ASD(IPSA)?
        Answer. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific
    Security Affairs (ASD(IPSA)) serves as the principal advisor to the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD(P)) and the Secretary of
    Defense on international security strategy and policy on issues of DOD
    interest that relate to the nations and international organizations of
    the Indo-Pacific region, their governments and defense establishments,
    and for oversight of security cooperation programs, including Foreign
    Military Sales. As provided by DOD Directive 5111.17, the ASD(IPSA) is
    responsible for conducting and managing day-to-day defense relations
    with foreign governments; developing, coordinating, and overseeing the
    implementation of regional security and defense strategy and policy;
    representing the USD(P) and Secretary of Defense in interagency policy
    discussions; participating in planning, budgeting, and execution
    activities; and other duties USD(P) or the Secretary of Defense may
    prescribe.
        Question. What background, experience, and expertise do you possess
    that qualify you to serve as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Indo-Pacific Security Affairs (ASD(IPSA))?
        Answer. I was trained as an international security specialist, with
    a PhD from the University of California, Berkeley, during which time I
    also had the opportunity to live and study in the People's Republic of
    China. Since graduate school, I have traveled extensively throughout
    the region and worked on Indo-Pacific security issues at leading think
    tanks, including as an associate Political Scientist at the RAND
    Corporation, as a senior fellow for China studies at the Council on
    Foreign Relations, and as a senior fellow and executive at the Center
    for a New American Security. In this latter role, I led the major study
    on United States strategy in the Indo-Pacific region required by the
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, entitled
    ``Rising to the China Challenge: Renewing American Competitiveness in
    the Indo-Pacific.'' I have also had the honor of serving in government,
    including in the U.S. Senate in the office of then-Senator Joe Biden
    and as a Professional Staff Member on the Senate Foreign Relations
    Committee, at the State Department in the Office of Chinese and
    Mongolian Affairs in the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, and
    in the Office of the then-Vice President, where I served as the Deputy
    National Security Advisor to Vice President Biden and regularly
    participated in National Security Council Deputies Committee meetings
    on the full range of Indo-Pacific issues. Currently, I am serving as a
    Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense and the Director of the
    DOD China Task Force.
        Question. Specifically what leadership and management experience do
    you possess that you would apply to your service as ASD(IPSA), if
    confirmed?
        Answer. I have held leadership and management positions inside and
    outside of government. As the Executive Vice President and Director of
    Studies at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), I was the
    second-ranking member of a three-person executive team guiding the
    Center's strategic direction, managing staff and personnel issues, and
    overseeing financing and budgets. There I was directly responsible for
    managing the Center's research agenda, publications, and research
    staff, as well as the CNAS communications team. As then-Vice President
    Biden's Deputy National Security Advisor, I helped to manage the Vice
    President's national security staff and day-to-day operations, while
    regularly representing the Office of the Vice President in Deputies
    Committee meetings and staffing the Vice President for foreign leader
    meetings and calls, interagency meetings, foreign travel, and speeches.
    I am currently serving as Director of the DOD China Task Force,
    reporting directly to the Secretary and leading a team from across the
    Department in a four-month sprint to assess China-related activities at
    DOD and provide the Secretary with recommendations for top priorities
    going forward.
        Question. If confirmed, what additional duties and responsibilities
    would you recommend the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD(P))
    to prescribe for you, particularly in light of the pending modification
    of the National Defense Strategy and global force posture?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would expect to serve as the principal
    advisor to the USD(P) and the Secretary of Defense on international
    security strategy and policy on issues of DOD interest that relate to
    the Indo-Pacific region. In addition, I would consult with the USD(P)
    to determine in what ways I could best support the development and
    implementation of Department reviews, including the Global Posture
    Review and the National Defense Strategy. I would also consult with the
    USD(P) on how I could best support the implementation of China Task
    Force recommendations as directed by the Secretary of Defense.
        Question. In your view, what are the major challenges that will
    confront the next ASD(IPSA) and, if confirmed, what plans do you have
    for addressing these challenges?
        Answer. The major challenges that will confront the next ASD(IPSA)
    include: completing a safe and orderly retrograde and supporting long-
    term stability and counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan;
    advancing the United States Government's vision for a free and open
    Indo-Pacific region; accelerating efforts at DOD for competition with
    China, including the implementation of the China Task Force
    recommendations; strengthening capabilities to deter, defend against,
    and respond to North Korean threats; and building a strong, effective
    policy team in the office of the ASD(IPSA). If confirmed, in each
    instance, I would prioritize these challenges and assess current
    policies and approaches, engage in relevant DOD and interagency policy
    reviews, strengthen ties with allies and partners, work closely with
    Congress and counterparts in other departments, and support government-
    wide approaches to these challenges.
                        civilian control of the military
        Question. In its 2018 report, Providing for the Common Defense, the
    National Defense Strategy Commission observed, ``there is an imbalance
    in civil-military relations on critical issues . . . Civilian voices
    appear relatively muted on issues at the center of U.S. defense and
    national security policy.'' Do you agree with this assessment?
        Answer. It is essential to reestablish proper civil-military
    balance at the Department of Defense. I am aware of serious concerns
    regarding instances of imbalance in civil-military relations on
    critical issues at DOD. If confirmed, I will make it a priority to
    ensure we are correcting any imbalances in civil-military relations.
        Question. If confirmed, what concrete steps would you take to
    correct this imbalance in civil-military relations?
        Answer. Correcting imbalances in civil-military relations will
    require leadership, a healthy workforce, and strong initiative in the
    Office of the Secretary of Defense. If confirmed, I will fully carry
    out the responsibilities of the ASD(IPSA), including conducting and
    managing day-to-day defense relations with foreign governments;
    developing, coordinating, and overseeing the implementation of regional
    security and defense strategy and policy; representing the USD(P) and
    Secretary of Defense in interagency policy discussions; and
    participating in planning, budgeting, and execution activities. I will
    also work hard to build strong collaborative relationships with my
    military counterparts, and advocate for the appropriate staffing levels
    for the office of the ASD(IPSA) to perform the required civilian
    oversight of the military.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you use your position to
    contribute to the discussion, debate, and resolution of core U.S.
    defense and national security issues?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will fully carry out the responsibilities
    of the ASD(IPSA), including conducting and managing day-to-day defense
    relations with foreign governments; developing, coordinating, and
    overseeing the implementation of regional security and defense strategy
    and policy; representing the USD(P) and Secretary of Defense in
    interagency policy discussions; and participating in planning,
    budgeting, and execution activities. I will also play an active role in
    major Department of Defense reviews and in the interagency process.
        Question. The National Defense Strategy Commission report notes,
    ``allocating priority--and allocating forces--across theaters of
    warfare is not solely a military matter. It is an inherently political-
    military task, decision authority for which is the proper competency
    and responsibility of America's civilian leaders.'' What is your view
    of the role of DOD civilian leadership, as compared to the role of the
    military, in the formulation of strategy and contingency planning in
    the Indo-Pacific area of responsibility?
        Answer. For the Indo-Pacific area of responsibility, the ASD(IPSA)
    is charged with developing, coordinating, and overseeing the
    implementation of regional security and defense strategy and policy in
    the region. This includes providing policy guidance, objectives, and
    end-states for strategy and contingency plans. The Department's
    military leadership also plays a critical role in strategy development
    and contingency planning, providing operational expertise and military
    advice. Together, a balanced civil-military relationship is essential
    to leveraging both sets of capabilities.
        Question. In your view, how important is it to have robust civilian
    oversight of the development and implementation of defense strategy as
    well as reviewing campaign and contingency plans? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. Civilian control of the military is an essential feature of
    our democracy, and it is vital to have robust civilian oversight of the
    development and implementation of defense strategy, as well as
    reviewing campaign and contingency plans. I am encouraged that
    President Biden and Secretary Austin share that view. For the Indo-
    Pacific area of responsibility, the ASD(IPSA) is charged with
    developing, coordinating, and overseeing the implementation of regional
    security and defense strategy and policy in the region. This includes
    providing policy guidance, objectives, and end-states for campaign and
    contingency plans. If confirmed, I would remain committed to fulfilling
    these critical civilian policymaking responsibilities.
        Question. In your view, would an increase in the number of
    personnel assigned to the Office of the ASD(IPSA) enhance civilian
    control of the military? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I understand that OSD Policy's civilian workforce has
    shrunk as a result of mandatory headquarters cuts over the past decade,
    although I have not had the opportunity to assess the personnel
    requirements in the Office of the ASD(IPSA). If confirmed, I will make
    it a priority to review current staffing levels and, if necessary, seek
    additional personnel to ensure the Office of the ASD(IPSA) can
    effectively perform its civilian policymaking and oversight
    responsibilities.
                            relations with congress
        Question. What are your views on the state of the relationship
    between the Office of the ASD(IPSA) and the Senate Armed Services
    Committee in particular, and with Congress in general?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to assess the state of the
    relationship between the Office of the ASD(IPSA) and the Senate Armed
    Services Committee in particular, and with Congress in general. If
    confirmed, I will make it a priority to engage regularly in furthering
    these critical relationships.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
    productive and mutually beneficial relationship between Congress and
    your office?
        Answer. The Senate Armed Services Committee and the Congress
    provide important oversight for U.S. policies, programs, and activities
    in the Indo-Pacific. If confirmed, I will work with the ASD for
    Legislative Affairs to engage the Committee and Congress regularly to
    ensure a transparent and effective relationship on all issues within
    the purview of the ASD(IPSA), in addition to providing testimony,
    briefings, reports, and other information to help the Committee fulfill
    its oversight and legislative responsibilities.
                           national defense strategy
        Question. The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) outlines that
    the United States faces a rising China, an aggressive Russia, and the
    continued threat from rogue regimes and global terrorism. Do you
    believe that the 2018 NDS accurately assesses the current strategic
    environment, including the most critical and enduring threats to the
    national security of the United States and its allies generally, and
    more specifically in the Indo-Pacific region?
        Answer. I believe that the 2018 NDS accurately characterizes the
    strategic environment faced by the United States and its allies, and
    highlights concerning developments in the Indo-Pacific region. I agree
    with the Secretary of Defense that China represents the top pacing
    challenge for the Department, particularly given its accelerating
    military modernization and aggressive activities. Further, our national
    security interests in the region remain challenged by North Korea's
    destabilizing activities. More broadly, Russia and Iran continue to
    constitute enduring and advanced national security challenges. Given
    these threats, the Department must work to check the continued erosion
    of U.S. military advantages in relation to its primary strategic
    competitors.
        Question. In your opinion, what developments since 2018 need to be
    addressed as part of a new NDS?
        Answer. In its development of a new NDS, the Department will need
    to consider a number of emerging threats and geopolitical challenges,
    namely our expanding strategic competition with China, a rapidly
    evolving technological landscape, and critical transnational threats,
    including COVID-19 and climate change. In the Indo-Pacific region, the
    new NDS must consider the decisions and trade-offs faced by the
    Department as it addresses escalating Chinese aggression and extensive
    military modernization.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes or adjustments would you
    recommend for the Department of Defense's (DOD) implementation of the
    NDS?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would recommend that strategy
    implementation, oversight, and accountability be included as a critical
    component of the NDS. Further, I believe that NDS implementation should
    consider how Departmental efforts can be synchronized with those of
    other departments and agencies and our allies and partners, so that we
    can more effectively leverage all elements of U.S. national power for
    strategic competition.
        Question. What is your understanding of the Department of Defense's
    processes for strategic assessment, analysis, decision making, and
    reporting for the development and implementation of the NDS?
        Answer. I understand the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy
    Secretary have put in place robust assessment and analytical processes
    to support the development and implementation of the NDS.
        Question. If confirmed, what recommendations would you make, if
    any, to improve the Department's processes for strategic assessment,
    analysis, policy formulation, and decision making?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would strongly advocate and support efforts
    in the Department to rebuild and strengthen the Department's core
    analytic capabilities and capacities that support strategic
    assessments, policy formulation, analysis, concept development, and
    capability investments; and critically, I would work to ensure linkages
    to the policy-making process. The challenges that DOD faces--
    particularly related to pacing with China--must be informed by rigorous
    analytic work, especially at the joint and Department-wide level. The
    Department needs to strengthen its quantitative analysis capabilities
    with modeling and simulation, experimentation, and exercises--informed
    by enterprise-wide improvements in data collection and knowledge
    management. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues across the
    Department to advocate to strengthen DOD's core analytic capabilities.
        Question. In your opinion, should the NDS be budget-driven or
    budget-informed and what do you see as the key differences in those two
    approaches?
        Answer. The NDS should be budget-informed rather than budget-
    driven. A budget-driven strategy puts spending priorities ahead of
    strategic interests and national security imperatives, whereas a
    budget-informed strategy takes spending constraints into account while
    focusing on securing our strategic interests and national security
    needs. Reconciling our national military priorities with the expected
    level of DOD resourcing is critical, but we must begin with and retain
    a clear-eyed focus on the capability investments, internal reforms, and
    strategy necessary to deter our strategic competitors.
        Question. In your view, how does the Joint Warfighting Concept
    currently under development relate to the NDS?
        Answer. In its formulation of the next NDS, the Department should
    carefully consider the trends of future warfare as described in the
    Joint Warfighting Concept. The Joint Warfighting Concept is critical
    for understanding how the future force may be employed during a
    conflict and for informing joint warfighting development priorities,
    such as command and control, fires, logistics, and information
    advantage. In doing so, the Department can more effectively outline the
    strategic and political objectives that we expect the Joint Force to
    achieve in the NDS.
        Question. In your opinion, should there be what are the differences
    in the Joint Operational Concept as it addresses the threat from Russia
    and the Joint Operational Concept as it addresses the threat from
    China?
        Answer. I believe that it is important that the Joint Warfighting
    Concept and its supporting concepts recognize and address the
    differentiated threats from Russia and China, and align with a theory
    of victory for achieving our strategic and political objectives for
    potential conflicts in each theater. A Joint Warfighting Concept
    describes how our future force may be employed during a conflict and
    informs force development priorities, and should be grounded in
    analysis of the specific operational challenges unique to each
    adversary and theater. That said, there is substantial common ground in
    our approach to each threat, and I understand that resilience in our
    basic systems provides warfighting options across all domains and
    against all opponents.
        Question. Do you believe it is also important for the Department to
    develop a Joint Concept for Competition? If so, why, and what kind of
    role would you envision for the U.S. Armed Forces in that concept?
        Answer. I believe the Joint Force would benefit from a Concept for
    Competition that provides a framework for military activities
    throughout the competitive space, sets priorities, and delineates roles
    and responsibilities for the Department. Our adversaries have studied
    our military strengths and way of war and seek to challenge us outside
    the traditional scope of our Joint Force. We must acknowledge that
    preparing and posturing for armed conflict, alone, are insufficient to
    meet the Department's comprehensive national security responsibilities.
    A Joint Concept for Competition could seek to establish a common
    understanding and lexicon across the Department for strategic
    competition to further align the effort. It would also offer the Joint
    Force a framework for aligning its competitive strategies in
    synchronization with and in support of those of interagency and
    international partners.
                                 force posture
        Question. In February, President Biden tasked Secretary Austin to
    conduct a Global Force Posture review of the Department's military
    footprint, resources, strategy, and missions.
        If confirmed, what would be your role in the Global Force Posture
    Review?
        Answer. I understand that the ASD(IPSA) has been closely involved
    in providing regional, allied, and partner perspectives in the Global
    Posture Review. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing and
    deepening that close collaboration.
        Question. In your view, is the current United States force posture
    in the Indo-Pacific region sufficient to support our security strategy
    in the region?
        Answer. A more resilient and distributed force posture in the Indo-
    Pacific region is essential to maintaining the United States military's
    ability to deter and, if necessary, deny adversary aggression against
    the United States, U.S. Forces, allies, and partners. If confirmed, I
    will work with civilian leadership, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, the
    Military Departments and Services, and other U.S. departments and
    agencies to ensure that our Indo-Pacific region posture is optimized to
    deter aggression, reassure allies and partners, and prevail in
    conflict.
        Question. How would you restructure United States security posture
    in the Indo-Pacific best to compete with China, reassure allies and
    partners, and deter Chinese aggression? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. China's military modernization poses significant challenges
    to our traditional posture and operations. If confirmed, I will work
    with U.S. stakeholders and with partners and allies as we seek to
    optimize toward a more resilient and distributed posture in the region.
    The ongoing Global Posture Review will provide critical insights for
    how best to posture our forces in support of our strategic objectives.
        Question. What is your understanding and assessment of the relative
    cost and benefits of the permanent versus rotational forces forward
    stationed in the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. The proper balance between permanently stationed and
    rotational forces varies from region to region and Service to Service
    depending on a number of factors, including relationships with the host
    nation, access to advanced training, and host nation cost-sharing. If
    confirmed, I will review force stationing decisions based on the
    specifics of each case and the dynamic security environment. I am
    committed to ensuring a more resilient and distributed posture in the
    Indo-Pacific region.
        Question. In your opinion, what should be the highest priority
    military capabilities and capacities in the Indo-Pacific that would
    most directly contribute to deterrence of aggressive behavior that
    could lead to miscalculation and potential conflict?
        Answer. Investments in specific military capabilities and
    capacities for the Indo-Pacific region that directly contribute to
    deterrence should be intelligence-informed, linked to joint operational
    concepts, and supported by analysis of the range of operational
    problems presented by the adversary across the spectrum of conflict. In
    my opinion, the mix of relevant capabilities and capacities would
    include, but not be limited to, long-range strike, multi-domain
    intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), undersea warfare,
    autonomous systems, resilient communications, and a more distributed
    and resilient forward force posture.
        Question. What do you view as the gaps between these highest
    priority capabilities and capacities and what exists today?
        Answer. In my view, the high priority capabilities, such as long-
    range strike, multi-domain ISR, undersea warfare, autonomous systems,
    resilient communications, and a more distributed and resilient forward
    force posture, are reflected in the President's recent budget
    submission, which is the Administration's first step toward resourcing
    these gaps. Further development of the Joint Warfighting Concept and
    associated experimentation should yield additional insights into high
    priority capabilities and potential gaps.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to bridge these
    gaps?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will be a strong advocate within DOD for
    investments in military capabilities and capacities that are directly
    relevant to deterring aggression in the Indo-Pacific region. I would
    also advocate for accelerated development of new operational concepts
    tied to mission-level experimentation.
        Question. In your assessment, does DOD need to invest in a wider
    range of primary bases as well as alternate operating locations
    throughout the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. I believe that a combat-credible forward posture is
    necessary to the U.S. military's ability to deter, and, if necessary,
    deny a fait accompli scenario. I believe DOD must take a comprehensive
    approach to addressing this challenge, including forward-basing and
    forward-postured U.S. Forces, as well as new operational concepts,
    modernized and high-end ready forces, and capable allies and partners
    proficient in their warfighting roles in such scenarios.
        Question. Do you support the Defense Policy Review Initiative
    (DPRI), including the realignment of some United States Marines from
    Okinawa to Guam and the build-up of facilities at other locations, such
    as Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan?
        Answer. I support the continued implementation of the realignment
    plan known as the Defense Policy Review Initiative (DPRI), as it is the
    bilaterally determined way forward. The realignment of Marine Corps
    Forces on Okinawa and the main islands of Japan, including the
    establishment of a strong presence on the United States territory of
    Guam, is fundamental to the Department's effort to achieve an improved
    Indo-Pacific defense posture. If confirmed, I will remain regularly
    engaged with OSD leadership, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, the Military
    Departments and Services, the Department of State, and our Allies as we
    proactively adapt and adjust U.S. access and joint presence to the
    realities of great power competition. I will ensure our partners and
    allies understand and are assured by any necessary adjustments.
        Question. In your opinion, why is force structure and force posture
    west of the International Date Line important to the deterrence of
    China, especially in a scenario involving conflict in the first or
    second island chains?
        Answer. A combat-credible forward posture is essential to the U.S.
    military's ability to deter and, if necessary, deny adversary
    aggression in a timely manner. It is a tangible expression of our
    commitment, willingness, and ability to defend our interests. Moreover,
    a distributed and resilient forward posture must be combined with new
    warfighting concepts; modernized, highly capable, and ready forces; and
    capable allied and partner forces to deter any adversary
    miscalculation, or to respond if necessary.
        Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy of U.S.
    integrated air and missile defense capabilities and capacities
    currently deployed and stationed in the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. The quantity and sophistication of adversary air and
    missile threats in the Indo-Pacific region continues to grow, posing a
    substantial challenge to U.S. Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD)
    capabilities throughout the region. Given the importance of IAMD for
    ensuring that the United States can continue to project joint military
    forces in the Indo-Pacific region, if confirmed I fully intend to
    support Departmental efforts to ensure that our approach to IAMD is
    well integrated and addresses both current and future operational
    needs.
        Question. Contested logistics is an emerging area of focus and
    potential significant limitation to the ability of the United States
    military to project power into the Indo-Pacific. Several studies over
    the past few years have resulted in more than 50 recommendations for
    improvement--recommendations that GAO recently noted have not been
    implemented. What areas regarding contested logistics do you feel need
    the most attention and would have the greatest impact on deterring
    China?
        Answer. I agree that contested logistics represents a critical
    challenge for the Department in the Indo-Pacific region. If confirmed,
    I intend to work closely with colleagues in OSD, the Joint Staff and
    the Military Services to support the development of the Joint
    Warfighting Concept, which I understand includes the development of
    supporting concepts to ensure effective and resilient key joint
    warfighting functions such as logistics. More robust, resilient, and
    distributed logistics would contribute to deterrence in the region.
        Question. What is your assessment of United States Force posture in
    Guam?
        Answer. Under current realignment plans, the Department of Defense
    is consolidating Guam's position as a joint strategic hub for our
    forces operating in the Western Pacific. If confirmed, I will ensure
    that we consider what further capabilities may be appropriate for our
    forces in Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
        Question. In your opinion, what are the benefits of participation
    of European partners in military operations and exercises in the Indo-
    Pacific region, especially in the maritime domain?
        Answer. European participation in Indo-Pacific exercises and
    operations demonstrates and strengthens interoperability with United
    States Forces, as well as interoperability with the forces of our Indo-
    Pacific allies and partners. It also reassures our Indo-Pacific allies
    and partners by signaling Europe's willingness and ability to deploy
    globally to defend the rules-based international order and ensure a
    free and open Indo-Pacific. This is particularly important as the
    People's Republic of China's (PRC) increasingly assertive and coercive
    behavior in the South China Sea and elsewhere threatens to undermine
    the rules-based international order.
        Question. What, if any, areas of cooperation between the U.S.
    military and regional partners and allies would you recommend be
    enhanced?
        Answer. I am encouraged that our key regional allies (Japan,
    Republic of Korea, and Australia) are placing increasing emphasis on
    new domains such as cyber, space, and electromagnetic operations, as
    well as continuing to be strong partners in a broad range of areas
    including missile defense support to U.S. Force posture. With a number
    of other allies and partners throughout the region, we should continue
    working together to support shared goals related to maritime security,
    counterterrorism, and non-proliferation. If confirmed, I would assess
    and support the continuation of these efforts.
                         pacific deterrence initiative
        Question. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
    Year (FY) 20 authorized $2.2 billion for the Pacific Deterrence
    Initiative (PDI), to support the stability and security of the region
    and deter Chinese aggression. The current Commander, United States
    Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) has indicated that China is the
    ``pacing threat'' in the Indo-Pacific and that ``the [PDI] is the
    foundational approach to advancing capabilities and capacity in
    lethality, force design and posture, logistics, exercises, and
    experimentation, while strengthening our allies and partnerships for an
    integrated joint force west of the International Date Line.''
        Do you agree that PDI is a useful tool to improve U.S. posture in
    the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. The PDI is an important tool to highlight the substantial
    investments that DOD is making to maintain a credible conventional
    deterrent in the Indo-Pacific region, including through improvements to
    U.S. Force posture.
        Question. In your view, what strategic objectives, lines of effort,
    and specific areas of investment should be prioritized for funding
    under the PDI?
        Answer. The elements of the PDI laid out in the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 serve as important priorities:
    modernization of U.S. presence, including advanced capabilities;
    improved logistics and maintenance; exercises and experimentation;
    infrastructure resiliency; and building allied and partner
    capabilities.
        Question. Do you believe that continued, dedicated funding for PDI
    is required to support implementation of the NDS in the Indo-Pacific?
    Please explain your answer.
        Answer. Robust funding for DOD priorities in the Indo-Pacific
    region is an essential element of maintaining a strong deterrent. My
    understanding is that the President's Budget request for Fiscal Year
    2022 incorporates funding for specific programs that DOD has
    prioritized as important to developing the robust capability required
    to maintain regional deterrence.
        Question. The European Deterrence Initiative (EDI) has
    significantly improved United States Force posture and capabilities in
    the European theater. What do you see as the biggest challenges to
    implementing PDI in the Indo-Pacific theater to achieve similar
    improvements?
        Answer. The scale and scope of China's military modernization
    challenge longstanding DOD assumptions and operating concepts. The
    United States will need to modernize our capabilities and posture, as
    well as our operational concepts, planning, and integration with allies
    and partners to enhance deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working closely with Congress to advance
    these goals, including as part of PDI.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to overcome these
    challenges?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to supporting the Secretary's
    efforts to prioritize DOD activities and investments in the Indo-
    Pacific, including by working closely with Congress on PDI to ensure
    the United States maintains a robust deterrent posture in the region.
                             strategic competition
        Question. The NDS references ``expanding the competitive space.''
    In recent years, China has successfully demonstrated the ability to
    compete with the United States below the threshold of armed conflict
    through a variety of military and non-military approaches.
        What is your interpretation of the meaning of ``expanding the
    competitive space'' and how does it impact United States competition
    with China?
        Answer. My understanding is that ``expanding the competitive
    space'' means leveraging all elements of its United States power,
    including economic, diplomatic, intelligence, cultural, and military
    tools, in a whole-of-government effort to address the multi-domain
    challenges posed by China. China's strategy for competition with the
    United States entails efforts to increase its ``comprehensive''
    national power and international influence at the United States'
    expense. While the Department of Defense plays a critical role in
    addressing this challenge, it should not do so alone. I agree with the
    NDS that ``effectively expanding the competitive space requires
    combined actions with the U.S. interagency to employ all dimensions of
    national power.'' Accordingly, I believe that competition with China
    will also require substantial non-military leadership and interagency
    coordination to advance our interests in the Indo-Pacific region.
        Question. What are the most critical capabilities the Joint Force
    needs to compete effectively below the threshold of armed conflict?
        Answer. Although the Department largely supports U.S. interagency
    partners in addressing challenges that fall below the threshold of
    armed conflict, the Joint Force offers a number of critical
    capabilities that enhance our ability to compete in this space. First,
    the Joint Force offers an unparalleled conventional military capability
    that deters adversary aggression toward U.S. security partners. Second,
    it can demonstrate the strength of our commitments and develop
    invaluable military-to-military relationships through continued
    engagement with allies and partners. Third, the Joint Force can provide
    critical information and intelligence to expose malign activities.
    Finally, Joint Force operations, particularly freedom of navigation
    operations and joint activities with security partners, offer
    opportunities for shaping the information environment, enhancing our
    regional influence and legitimacy, and bolstering partner resilience to
    adversary destabilization and coercion.
        The NDS also states that ``effectively expanding the competitive
    space requires combined actions with the U.S. interagency to employ all
    dimensions of national power. We will assist the efforts of the
    Departments of State, Treasury, Justice, Energy, Homeland Security,
    Commerce, USAID, as well as the Intelligence Community, law
    enforcement, and others to identify and build partnerships to address
    areas of economic, technological, and informational vulnerabilities.''
        Question. In your view, has the interagency been effective in a
    whole-of-government effort to expand the competitive space,
    particularly with respect to China? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. Given that China and other actors are increasingly
    synchronizing their military and non-military efforts to achieve
    strategic objectives, I believe that it is essential that non-DOD
    departments and agencies are sufficiently resourced and aligned to
    address these challenges. If confirmed, I will continually advocate for
    and advance deeper coordination with other departments and agencies as
    we pursue a whole-of-government effort to compete with China.
        Question. If confirmed, what recommendations, if any, would you
    have to better employ all dimensions of national power to ``expand the
    competitive space'' as regards China?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would recommend that our whole-of-
    government efforts prioritize cooperation with and support to our Indo-
    Pacific region allies and partners, including expanded bilateral and
    multilateral diplomatic engagement, increased economic and
    technological partnerships, and joint military exercises and
    operations. I believe that improving partner resilience to Chinese
    military and economic coercion is essential for deterring Chinese
    aggression throughout the Indo-Pacific region, and that enhanced
    coordination on military and non-military efforts will serve as a force
    multiplier for strategic competition with China.
                             information operations
        Question. During the COVID-19 pandemic, China has embarked on a
    misinformation campaign to sow confusion over the origins of the virus
    and malign the response of the United States and other nations. This
    appears to have been done not only to shield China from blame for the
    initial outbreak, but also to undermine democratic nations and
    institutions.
        What is your assessment of the ability of DOD to conduct effective
    military operations in the information environment to defend U.S.
    interests against malign influence activities carried out by state and
    non-state actors?
        Answer. The Department has an important role to play in the
    information environment--in support of and in coordination with a
    whole-of-government approach--to defend U.S. interests against malign
    influence activities. If confirmed, I would work with the interagency
    and my counterparts throughout the Department to improve the speed,
    agility, efficiency, and effectiveness, of DOD information operations.
    I would also support the USD(P) in tasks required in Section 1631 of
    the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 concerning
    the USD(P)'s role as the Secretary's Principal Information Operations
    Advisor.
        Question. Are DOD efforts in this regard appropriately integrated
    with other U.S. Government organizations and activities?
        Answer. DOD is one part of a whole-of-government approach to the
    challenge of misinformation and foreign malign influence activities,
    and other civilian departments and agencies have critical roles and
    responsibilities, which demand close interagency coordination. Our
    respective efforts can complement each other to defend the United
    States against foreign malign influence. If confirmed, I would ensure
    that DOD efforts are appropriately integrated with other U.S.
    Government organizations and activities, including elevating the role
    of diplomacy, as described in the Interim National Security Strategic
    Guidance.
        Many of the geographic combatant commanders, including the
    Commander, INDOPACOM, have expressed a need for improved support by the
    intelligence community in exposing malign influence and coercion
    activities by our adversaries, including China.
        Question. Do you believe this is a valid requirement and, if so,
    how do you believe the intelligence community can better support the
    requirements of the Commander, INDOPACOM?
        Answer. Strong support by the intelligence community in exposing
    malign influence and coercion activities by our adversaries, including
    China, is vital. The intelligence community plays an essential role in
    collection and analysis on malign behavior, as well as providing
    information in a timely manner and at the appropriate levels of
    classification. If confirmed, I would support these efforts.
              strengthening alliances and attracting new partners
        Question. In your view, how can DOD more effectively cultivate
    multilateral cooperation in the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. Networking security and promoting linkages between like-
    minded partners across the region are critical to building a more
    resilient Indo-Pacific security architecture. As DOD modernizes United
    States alliances and partnerships in the region, it should also
    strengthen avenues of cooperation between existing multilateral
    groupings--such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
    and the Quadrilateral Dialogue--that are central to sustaining a rules-
    based regional order. If confirmed, I will work to ensure DOD leverages
    the full breadth of its security networks to enhance the complexity of
    multilateral training and exercises; foster interoperability; and build
    resilience and rules of the road in new domains, such as space, cyber,
    and artificial intelligence.
        Question. What is your assessment of the Quadrilateral Security
    Dialogue between the United States, Japan, Australia, and India?
        Answer. The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) is emerging as
    one of the most consequential multilateral groupings in the Indo-
    Pacific region. The increased pace and scope of Quad consultations,
    including the historic Head of State Summit in March, reflect strategic
    convergence between Australia, India, Japan, and the United States.
    This partnership is an increasingly important element of the U.S.
    regional security network, which also includes bilateral alliances and
    strong support for ASEAN's centrality in the region.
        Question. What military lines of effort can be strengthened through
    the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue to benefit deterrence in the Indo-
    Pacom region and what do you view as the challenges to doing so?
        Answer. The Quad partnership emerged in the immediate aftermath of
    the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami to address recovery efforts and chart a
    new way forward for regional democracies. Similarly, in the wake of the
    COVID-19 pandemic, there are opportunities for the Quad countries to
    deepen cooperation in areas of mutual interest, including maritime
    security, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, counter
    terrorism, and emerging technology.
        Question. In your view, what are our strategic objectives in
    building the capacities of partner nations in the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. DOD continues to support capacity-building to build a
    network of capable, interoperable allies and partners committed to
    upholding a rules-based international order. Partner capacity-building
    efforts are critical to ensuring that Indo-Pacific partners are able to
    protect their own sovereignty and territorial integrity; work
    collectively to address transnational threats such as violent
    extremism, illegal fishing, and humanitarian disasters; and support key
    international principles, such as freedom of navigation and overflight.
        Question. How would you prioritize the types of programs or
    activities that should receive support under these security assistance
    authorities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review our current focus areas to
    ensure they are aligned with our strategic priorities. I would also
    ensure that DOD continues to work closely with the Department of State
    such that our programs are complementary in building needed
    capabilities for U.S. partners.
        Question. What is your assessment of the Maritime Security
    Initiative (MSI)?
        Answer. MSI is an important program that strengthens maritime
    security in the Indo-Pacific region through a focus on enhanced
    information-sharing, interoperability, and multinational maritime
    cooperation. If confirmed, I will fully support the Department's
    commitment to strengthening this critical program, which supports the
    execution of our National Defense Strategy objectives in the Indo-
    Pacific region.
        Question. How can MSI be leveraged to build shared maritime domain
    awareness capabilities and build multilateral cooperation amongst
    participating nations?
        Answer. My understanding is that DOD is currently prioritizing
    needed training, equipment, supplies, and small-scale construction to
    enable regional partners to establish a common maritime operating
    picture. If confirmed, I will work to advance this critical program.
        Over the last several years, China has exerted its influence with
    our partner nations throughout the Indo-Pacific. Challenged by
    competition over economic resources, fishing areas, access to water,
    concerns over rising sea levels, and more, some of our partner nations
    have voluntarily or involuntarily turned to China for support--in many
    cases because United States engagement has been absent or inadequate.
        Question. In your view, how should DOD seek to engage with partner
    nations to better support their ability to protect their sovereignty
    and natural resources?
        Answer. DOD should provide sustained support to our partners
    through robust capacity-building programs, training and exercises, and
    an enhanced focus on defense professionalization and military
    education. Freedom of Navigation Operations and other U.S. presence
    operations are also critical components of ensuring DOD is poised to
    support a rules-based order.
        Question. Respect for human rights has long been a core principle
    of United States foreign and security policy. In your view, what role
    does U.S. military engagement, including efforts to help
    professionalize foreign partner militaries, play in encouraging respect
    for human rights?
        Answer. Through DOD's interaction and engagement with partner
    militaries, the United States can consistently message that respect for
    human rights and the rule of law are critical to the continued support
    and advancement of initiatives within our defense relationships.
    Working to professionalize foreign partner militaries--including
    through military training and education--serves as an opportunity for
    DOD to reinforce our commitment to democratic principles and to
    encourage partners to act in accordance with universal values and human
    rights.
                                     china
        Question. How would you characterize the current United States
    relationship with China?
        Answer. I agree with the assessment in President Biden's Interim
    National Security Strategic Guidance that China is ``the only
    competitor capable of combining its economic, diplomatic, military, and
    technological power to mount a sustained challenge to a stable and open
    international system.'' If confirmed, I would be honored to support
    Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks in their mission to
    prioritize China as the Department's number one pacing challenge.
        Question. What is your assessment of the current state of United
    States-China military-to-military relations?
        Answer. Department of Defense engagement with the People's
    Liberation Army (PLA) supports overall United States policy and
    strategy toward the PRC. DOD engagements with the PLA continue to be
    limited, and focused on mitigating risk and preventing miscalculation.
    Engagements are conducted in accordance with the statutory limitations
    of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000.
        Question. What do you believe should be the objectives of United
    States-China military-to-military dialogue?
        Answer. The Department of Defense should seek to maintain a
    constructive, stable, and results-oriented defense relationship with
    the People's Liberation Army to advance the objectives of crisis
    management, risk mitigation, and cooperation where interests align.
        Question. What are the limitations on this kind of dialogue?
        Answer. The limitations on this kind of dialogue are primarily due
    to the vast differences in values and interests between the United
    States and the PRC. Divergent perspectives on a range of issues,
    including the purpose and utility of crisis management mechanisms,
    further limit this kind of dialogue. If confirmed, I will work to find
    ways to advance U.S. goals and priorities accounting for these
    differences and limitations.
        Question. What do you believe are the objectives of China's steady
    increase in defense spending and its overall military modernization
    program?
        Answer. I believe that China's ambitious military modernization
    program and increased defense spending are aimed at safeguarding what
    it considers its sovereignty, security, and development interests,
    which includes building toward an illiberal China-led order in the
    Indo-Pacific and beyond that reduces the influence of the United States
    and accommodates Beijing's authoritarian political imperatives. To
    achieve these aims, China's leaders have stated in numerous forums that
    they want to modernize the People's Liberation Army into a ``world-
    class'' military by the end of 2049, which many have interpreted to
    mean that they want a military that is equal or superior to that of the
    United States.
        Question. In what technology areas are you most concerned about the
    erosion of U.S. advantages?
        Answer. Technology is at the center of United States-China
    competition. PRC leaders are focused on seizing the advantage in
    critical and emerging technologies with military application, including
    artificial intelligence (AI), advanced robotics, quantum technologies,
    biotechnology, hypersonics, directed energy, and advanced computing.
    The PRC's overseas investments, ability to use economic ties to exert
    political influence, pursuit of expertise from advanced foreign
    militaries, and promotion of national champions in strategic sectors,
    such as 5G, pose strategic risks for the United States and ally/partner
    interoperability, data security, information sharing, military
    mobility, and military readiness.
        Question. What is your assessment of China's increasing military
    presence overseas, including installations like its bases in Djibouti
    and across Africa, as well as other infrastructure projects across the
    Indian Ocean?
        Answer. China's overseas infrastructure projects are a mechanism
    for increased influence overseas and a potential inroad for
    establishing overseas logistics and basing infrastructure. The PLA's
    growing access to foreign ports and airfields allows the preposition of
    logistic support necessary to sustain military operations abroad. This
    includes naval deployments in the Indian Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea,
    and the Atlantic Ocean. A global network of PLA logistical support
    facilities and installations could enable China to project and sustain
    military power at greater distances, reinforce its overseas interests,
    interfere with United States military operations, and potentially
    support offensive operations against the United States and United
    States interests.
        Question. What is your assessment of the strategic and military
    implications for the United States of China's Belt and Road Initiative?
        Answer. The PRC regards the One Belt, One Road initiative as a
    means to expand its global influence and footprint by developing and
    maintaining access to foreign markets, resources, and critical
    infrastructure including ports and airfields that could host PLA
    assets. The expansion of China's overseas military and logistical
    support could manifest in a loss of access and influence for the United
    States while increasing coercive PRC pressure on host nations.
        Question. What are the strategic and military implications for
    other countries in the Indo-Pacific?
        Answer. Our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region can
    expect increasing pressure from China to deny the United States
    military operational and logistical support, transit and basing. The
    loss of this access would present additional challenges for U.S.
    efforts to support a free and open Indo-Pacific region. The degradation
    of U.S. access in the region could also increase the vulnerability of
    Indo-Pacific nations to PRC coercion and malign activities, further
    endangering their sovereignty and independence.
        The smaller number of nuclear weapons possessed by China relative
    to the United States and Russia is often cited as an impediment to
    nuclear arms control talks with China.
        Question. What do you think could motivate China to participate in
    nuclear arms control negotiations in a genuine and meaningful way?
        Answer. At present, the PRC does not appear to view participating
    in nuclear arms control negotiations as in its interest. There are
    indications that the PRC will remain disinclined to engage meaningfully
    until its nuclear arsenal is on relative par with the United States. If
    confirmed, I will work with interagency partners to address the PRC's
    resistance to participating in meaningful negotiations on nuclear
    weapons and risk reduction.
        Question. What are the strategic implications of the rapid
    modernization of Chinese nuclear weapons that are set to at least
    double by 2030, and what approach should the United States take to
    address those implications, in your view?
        Answer. It is my understanding that China's nuclear weapons
    modernization is driven by its evolving view of the security landscape,
    concerns over the survivability of its nuclear forces, and perspective
    on what it means to be a great power. The modernization,
    diversification, and increase in the number of land, sea, and air-based
    nuclear delivery platforms presents a security challenge for the United
    States, particularly given some ambiguity over the conditions under
    which China would leverage its nuclear capability. As a result, I
    believe it is essential that the United States continue its efforts to
    understand China's evolving capabilities, as well as press for
    transparency and dialogue regarding China's strategic intent and
    capabilities.
                                     taiwan
        Question. How do you assess the current cross-strait relationship
    between China and Taiwan, and how can the United States help prevent
    miscalculation on either side?
        Answer. The PRC is increasing its aggressive and destabilizing
    activities toward Taiwan. If confirmed, I would continue to monitor
    this situation closely, especially given the more recent increase in
    PLA military activity in the vicinity of Taiwan and increased risk of
    miscalculation. I would also ensure the United States is fulfilling its
    commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act.
        Question. How do you assess the current military balance across the
    Taiwan Strait?
        Answer. The PLA today is mission-focused, well-resourced, and
    rapidly developing both in terms of direct military pressure on Taiwan
    and through other PLA capabilities aimed at deterring, delaying, or
    denying third-party intervention in a crisis. If confirmed, I will
    carefully review the current military balance across the Taiwan Strait
    to ensure that our defense cooperation with Taiwan is commensurate with
    the threat posed by the PRC.
        Question. What do you believe should be the objectives and
    priorities for United States military assistance to Taiwan?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that we are focused on
    providing Taiwan with the necessary defense articles, as well as the
    training and expertise to ensure its Armed Forces support a combat-
    credible deterrent. I will continue to advance our defense cooperation
    with Taiwan, encouraging Taiwan to focus on mobile, cost-effective, and
    resilient capabilities that aid Taiwan's already substantial geographic
    and societal advantages.
        Question. Do you think Taiwan is making appropriate investments in
    its defensive capabilities and if not, what changes would you
    recommend?
        Answer. I believe that Taiwan can demonstrate through sound
    investments that it remains committed to its own defense. Taiwan has
    sought to allocate its defense budget to investments in capabilities
    that confer an advantage against the PRC, and if confirmed, I will
    ensure the Department continues to support progress on this front.
        Question. What is your view of the United States' responsibilities
    under the Taiwan Relations Act?
        Answer. Our actions to fulfill our responsibilities enumerated in
    the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) have remained strong, principled, and
    bipartisan for over forty years. If confirmed, I will continue to
    uphold our one China policy, as described in the TRA, the Three United
    States-PRC Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances, and will continue
    to prioritize the Department's effective provision of defensive arms
    and services to Taiwan and support the Secretary's ability to maintain
    a credible deterrent to the use of force or other forms of coercion
    against Taiwan.
        Question. Some have argued that the time has come to explicitly
    state that the United States would respond militarily to any Chinese
    use of force against Taiwan as a means to deter such actions. Do you
    support such a policy change? Why or why not?
        Answer. The President has said clearly many times that United
    States support for Taiwan is rock solid, which reflects more than 40
    years of a consistent, principled, and bipartisan one-China policy
    based on the Taiwan Relations Act, the Three United States-PRC Joint
    Communiques, and the Six Assurances. If confirmed, I will continue to
    support these commitments commensurate with the threat the PRC poses to
    Taiwan.
        Question. In March 2021, the former commander of INDOPACOM, Admiral
    Davidson, testified ``Taiwan is clearly one of [China's] ambitions . .
    . and I think the threat is manifest during this decade, in fact, in
    the next six years.'' How concerned are you about potential conflict in
    the Taiwan Strait as a result of ambition or miscalculation, and what
    do you assess is the likelihood of a conflict during this decade?
        Answer. The PRC has yet to renounce the use of force against
    Taiwan. What we've seen instead over the last few years is the PLA's
    rapid modernization alongside PRC efforts to coerce and degrade
    Taiwan's security through diplomatic, informational, military and
    socioeconomic tools. These activities are destabilizing, and indicative
    that the PRC may no longer be willing to resolve differences with
    Taiwan in a peaceful manner. As a result, we must remain vigilant in
    providing combat-credible deterrence in the region. If confirmed, I
    will continue to monitor the evolving security situation in the Taiwan
    Strait.
                               republic of korea
        Question. What is your assessment of the United States-South Korea
    security relationship?
        Answer. The United States-Republic of Korea (ROK) Alliance, built
    on the foundation of shared values, trust, and cooperation, is the
    linchpin of peace and security in the Indo-Pacific region. Our
    steadfast Alliance of over 70 years is among the most combined,
    interoperable, capable, and dynamic bilateral alliances in the world.
    It remains critical to maintaining peace on the Korean peninsula and
    addressing the threats posed by the Democratic People's Republic of
    Korea (DPRK). Moreover, the importance of the alliance stretches beyond
    the peninsula. It is key to promoting United States interests in the
    region and around the globe, with the ROK having deployed with United
    States Forces as part of nearly every war that we have fought since
    1950. If confirmed, I will work with our ROK allies to ensure we
    continue to bolster our combined force.
        Question. What measures, if any, would you take to improve this
    security relationship?
        Answer. The United States-ROK Alliance is among the most dynamic
    bilateral Alliances in the world. The foundation of a shared worldview,
    mutual trust, and multi-faceted cooperation guarantees our alliance
    remains strong. The alliance is critical to countering North Korea's
    malign behavior. Our combined force posture has been critical to
    deterring North Korean aggression for more than 70 years, and these
    forces have been postured to respond should deterrence fail. If
    confirmed, I will work with our ROK allies to prioritize the
    capabilities necessary for our common defense in addressing our
    collective threats on the Korean Peninsula and beyond. I will also make
    sure there is mutual understanding regarding necessary requirements to
    improve our robust combined defense posture in the face of challenges
    posed in the Indo-Pacific region.
        Question. In your view, is South Korea carrying an appropriate
    share of the burden of the cost of the United States presence in South
    Korea?
        Answer. The United States-Republic of Korea (ROK) Alliance is the
    linchpin of peace and security in the Indo-Pacific region and the ROK
    is among our strongest allies. The ROK is currently spending more on
    defense as a percentage of its gross domestic product than nearly any
    other treaty ally. The Department of Defense works constantly with the
    ROK to maintain and develop this dynamic bilateral Alliance, which is
    one of the most combined, interoperable, and capable in the world. If
    confirmed, I will continue to work with our ROK allies to ensure that
    we strengthen the relationship and also invest in the right combination
    of defense capabilities to provide for our common defense. The new
    United States-ROK Special Measures Agreement that was concluded
    recently demonstrates the ROK commitment to burden-sharing and the
    stable stationing of United States Forces on the Korean Peninsula.
        Question. Do you believe South Korea is investing appropriately in
    its defensive capabilities? If not, what changes would you recommend?
        Answer. The ROK, strengthening its status as a global economic
    leader and Alliance partner, has demonstrated a firm commitment to
    significant investment in its defensive capabilities, with a defense
    budget of approximately 2.8 percent of its GDP and rising. Although
    this is promising, there is still more work to be done. If confirmed, I
    will work closely with the ROK to ensure that our alliance maximizes
    our capabilities investments to optimize the effectiveness of our
    combined force and sustain ``Fight Tonight'' readiness.
        Question. Do you believe the transfer of wartime operational
    control from the United States to the Republic of Korea should be
    conditions-based? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I do believe the transfer of wartime operational control
    (OPCON) from the United States to the ROK should be conditions-based,
    as bilaterally established within the Conditions-Based OPCON Transition
    Plan (COTP). The COTP was the result of a clear-eyed assessment by the
    United States and the ROK on what is needed protect our respective
    peoples from the DPRK threat. A carefully planned and executed
    transition is necessary for our sustained security and the fulfillment
    of our alliance commitments. If confirmed, I will work with our ROK
    partners to preserve our shared commitment to a Conditions-Based
    approach to OPCON transfer, and I will encourage ROK partners to make
    every effort to meet the established conditions.
                                  north korea
        Question. In your view, what should be the overall United States
    overall strategy to mitigate the threat posed by North Korea to our
    allies in the region and to the United States?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the military and
    political requirements for dealing with the threat from North Korea.
    Primary roles of the Department include maintaining the readiness of
    our United States-ROK combined forces and supporting the enforcement of
    United Nations Security Council Resolutions pertaining to North Korea.
    Having a strong and credible deterrent force is essential for any
    potential path that we pursue to mitigate the North Korean threat,
    including through diplomatic engagement. If confirmed, I will ensure
    that we work with interagency partners, as well as regional partners
    and allies, to forge a comprehensive approach to North Korean threats,
    including those emanating from weapons of mass destruction, missile,
    and cyber programs.
        Question. How important are cooperation and collaboration with
    South Korea and Japan in addressing the threat from North Korea?
        Answer. Close cooperation and collaboration with the Republic of
    Korea and Japan are an essential part of addressing the threat from
    North Korea. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the Department has
    effective, affordable, and tailored solutions to deter and respond to
    North Korean nuclear and ballistic missile provocations, and to
    maintain our robust deterrent and readiness posture in Northeast Asia
    in close collaboration with our regional allies, including through
    trilateral training events and exercises.
        Question. In your view, what is the role of China in addressing the
    security threat posed by North Korea?
        Answer. China has an obligation under international law and
    multiple United Nations Security Council Resolutions to help address
    the North Korea nuclear, weapons of mass destruction, and ballistic
    missile threat. If confirmed, I will review the current and proposed
    United States strategies to engage the PRC on the North Korean problem
    set and will work with our allies and partners to develop appropriate
    policy approaches in this area. I will also prioritize holding China
    accountable for international commitments it made as a permanent member
    of the United Nations Security Council.
        Question. What recommendations would you have concerning the United
    States approach to North Korean nuclear and ballistic missile
    provocations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work to ensure the Department has
    effective, affordable, and tailored solutions to deter and respond to
    North Korean nuclear and ballistic missile provocations. These
    provocations threaten the United States and our allies and partners and
    I would endeavor to ensure that U.S. Forces have what they need to
    maintain our robust deterrent and readiness posture in Northeast Asia
    in close collaboration with our regional allies and partners. In
    addition, trilateral cooperation and information sharing among the
    United States, ROK, and Japan are a critical component of our ability
    to defeat North Korean ballistic missiles. If confirmed, I will
    continue to reinforce trilateral cooperation as a center piece of our
    strategy vis-`-vis the DPRK.
        Question. What are the core elements of a strategy to contain or
    deter the North Korean threat?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the full range of current and
    proposed strategies to deal with the North Korean threat. This includes
    reviewing efforts on sanctions enforcement, bi- and trilateral
    cooperation between the United States, the ROK, and Japan, and the
    current status of our bilateral and multilateral exercises to maintain
    the readiness of forces in and around the Korean Peninsula.
        Question. What policy recommendations would you make to ensure
    United States and allied forces have the capability to address the
    challenge posed by the significant number of sites in North Korea
    containing weapons of mass destruction?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the entire range of current and
    proposed activities to enhance United States and allied capabilities to
    deal with North Korea's development of weapons of mass destruction,
    including their chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs, and
    means of delivery. I will also work with our allies and partners to
    prioritize missile defense, readiness, interoperability, and
    development of capabilities related to intelligence, surveillance, and
    reconnaissance.
        Question. What is your assessment of the threat that North Korea
    poses as a possible source of proliferation of missile, nuclear, or
    other military technology?
        Answer. North Korea has a history of proliferation activities. If
    confirmed, I will prioritize addressing the proliferation threat posed
    by North Korea and will work to advance or develop effective DOD
    solutions and responses as part of a whole-of-government approach.
                                     japan
        Question. How would you characterize the current United States-
    Japan security relationship?
        Answer. As Secretary Austin stated during his visit to Tokyo in
    March, the United States-Japan security Alliance is strong, resolute,
    and resilient. In addition to maintaining our readiness today, we
    should continue placing emphasis on adapting to future challenges,
    broadening the scope of the alliance, and increasing Japan's role in
    securing a free and open Indo-Pacific region, through bilateral and
    multilateral efforts.
        Question. How does Japan's relationship with its regional
    neighbors--including China, North Korea, South Korea, and Taiwan--
    influence the United States-Japan relationship?
        Answer. Japan and the Republic of Korea (ROK) are two of our most
    important allies in the Indo-Pacific region. In the face of shared
    challenges posed by North Korea and China, it is critical that we build
    strong relationships between and among our three countries. If
    confirmed, I will work to expand trilateral and bilateral defense
    cooperation, including through increased information-sharing and joint
    military exercises and training. Japan and the United States also share
    a common view of the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan
    Strait.
        Question. What steps, if any, do you believe Japan should take to
    improve its capability and capacity to deter and, if necessary, respond
    to North Korean aggression?
        Answer. Japan is a premier partner in missile defense cooperation,
    and the North Korean missile capability is a primary area of concern
    for Japan. Under the United States-Japan Mutual Security Treaty, if
    confirmed, I would look forward to consulting with Japan on the
    requirements for and scope of any response to North Korean provocations
    or aggression.
        Question. What about Chinese aggression?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure we continue efforts to work
    with Japan to address challenges from China in the East and South China
    Seas. We should remain engaged in continuous discussion with our
    Japanese allies on ways in which they can increase their support for
    regional and global security efforts. I am encouraged that the Japan
    Self Defense Forces are a capable and well-equipped component of
    Japan's steadily growing international presence.
        Question. Given the buildup of Chinese ballistic and advanced
    cruise missiles, how important is it for Japan to be able to defend
    itself against such missiles?
        Answer. The quantity and sophistication of regional missile threats
    posed by adversaries in the Indo-Pacific, including China and North
    Korea, continue to grow. Although missile defense is only one component
    of a broader U.S. posture needed to stand up to these regional threats,
    it remains an important tool to shape an adversary's risk-benefit
    decision calculus to deter, and if necessary, defend against
    conventional regional aggression. If confirmed, I will ensure that we
    continue to work closely with Japan to bolster its existing missile
    defense capabilities and to seek out new areas of potential
    cooperation. The United States should not face these threats alone; we
    need strong allies like Japan to increase regional missile defense
    capacity while investing in the right technologies in order to ensure
    our future ability to deter aggression and maintain stability in the
    Indo-Pacific region.
        Question. What do you perceive to be the potential for
    reinvigorating United States-Japan cooperative missile defense efforts?
    Please explain your answer.
        Answer. Japan remains one of our most robust BMD cooperation
    partners. I understand that we continue to consult closely with Japan
    following its mid-2020 decision to suspend land-based Ballistic Missile
    Defense (BMD) sites in favor of sea-based alternatives. In addition, I
    also understand that we regularly discuss missile defense policy issues
    with Japan through a variety of bilateral and trilateral forums. As the
    Department conducts a new Missile Defense Review, if confirmed, I will
    conduct regular consultations with our closest allies and partners,
    including Japan.
                                   australia
        Question. What is your assessment of the current state of the
    United States-Australia alliance and what specific priorities would you
    establish for this relationship?
        Answer. Our time-tested Alliance with Australia is strong. It
    provides operational reliability, political viability, and mutual
    confidence, facilitating a combined alliance approach to the current
    and future global operational environment. Our shared commitment to
    freedom, democracy, and the rules-based international order remains
    resolute. Australia is a critical partner, facilitating our shared
    operational freedom of maneuver in the Indo-Pacific region. If
    confirmed, I will work to strengthen the alliance's defense cooperation
    and force posture efforts to ensure operational success, deter PRC
    aggression, and preserve the security and prosperity of the Indo-
    Pacific. I am also committed to supporting the continued enhancement of
    defense acquisition and development efforts to advance alliance
    interoperability.
        Question. What is your assessment of Australia's relations with
    China?
        Answer. Australia is taking a clear-eyed approach to its relations
    with China. Recent Australian legislation to counter foreign influence
    was a direct response to PRC interference in Australia's domestic
    political environment. Australia has also banned Huawei and ZTE, called
    an investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 virus, and criticized
    Beijing over harsh reactions to political dissent in Hong Kong. These
    well-considered measures have led to aggressive retributive actions by
    the PRC. I would expect Australia to continue protecting and promoting
    its own values and sovereignty, while working toward a productive
    relationship with the PRC.
        Question. What impact does that relationship have on the United
    States-Australia alliance?
        Answer. Every nation sets its own priorities and protect its own
    interests. Australia's strategic reassessment of its defense strategy
    and approach to the region, articulated in its Defence Strategic Update
    2020, represents a clear-eyed view of the strategic environment that
    closely aligns with U.S. perspectives. If confirmed, I will work to
    ensure that our alliance remains strong and is prepared to address the
    challenges posed by the strategic environment based on our shared
    values and objectives.
                                     india
        Question. What is your view of the current state of United States-
    India security relations and what specific priorities would you
    establish for this relationship?
        Answer. The United States-India security relationship is built on
    both shared values and interests. If confirmed, I would continue to
    strengthen the United States-India Major Defense Partnership and
    enhance the ability of the United States and Indian militaries to
    advance shared interests across the Indo-Pacific region.
        Question. What is your assessment of the relationship between India
    and China and how does that relationship impact the security and
    stability of the region?
        Answer. The India-China relationship has seen an increase in
    tensions driven by China's growing aggressiveness and assertiveness in
    the region, especially along the Line of Actual Control--India and
    China's disputed border--and increasingly in the Indian Ocean. As two
    of the largest territorial powers in Asia, a secure and stable
    relationship between India and China contributes to regional stability.
    A stable relationship, however, should not come at the expense of
    India's interests. India, like the United States, seeks to ensure
    regional stability against China's territorial revisionism, while also
    seeking areas of potential cooperation. If confirmed, I will continue
    to monitor this situation closely.
                                  philippines
        Question. What is your current assessment of the United States-
    Philippines alliance and the state of our defense cooperation?
        Answer. The Philippines is a treaty ally, and we have a long
    history of mutual defense cooperation dating back to World War II. The
    Mutual Defense Treaty and other bilateral defense agreements continue
    to provide the foundation for the defense relationship and enable
    critical U.S. military support, presence, and interoperability. This
    Alliance has made key contributions to regional security, including
    combatting the growth of terrorism in the southern Philippines and in
    Southeast Asia.
        Question. What areas, if any, do you perceive as having the
    potential to increase defense cooperation between United States and the
    Philippines armed forces?
        Answer. Continued defense cooperation with the Philippines is
    critical to our shared goals of advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific
    region. If confirmed, I would continue to enhance cooperation on common
    interests such as maritime security, counter-terrorism, humanitarian
    assistance, and defense institution-building.
        Question. What do you believe the United States goals should be in
    the Philippines and how best can we achieve those goals?
        Answer. The United States and the Philippines share the goal of
    upholding a free and open Indo-Pacific region that supports peace,
    stability, economic opportunity, and the rule of law. If confirmed, I
    would work closely with our Philippine allies to strengthen cooperation
    in the critical areas of maritime security, counter-terrorism,
    humanitarian assistance, and defense institution-building.
        Question. What is your assessment of the relationship between the
    Philippines and China?
        Answer. Due to geographic proximity and economic ties, the
    Philippines has a strong interest in maintaining a relationship with
    China, but they also have points of disagreement, particularly in the
    South China Sea. United States-Philippines defense cooperation remains
    strong and United States advocacy for a free and open Indo-Pacific
    reinforces Philippines efforts to protect its own sovereignty and
    national interests.
        Question. What impact does that relationship have on the United
    States-Philippines alliance?
        Answer. The United States-Philippines Alliance stands on its own.
    It benefits both of our nations and contributes to peace and prosperity
    in the Indo-Pacific region.
                                    thailand
        Question. What is your assessment of United States-Thailand
    relations and what specific priorities would you establish for this
    relationship?
        Answer. DOD is committed to our decades-long Alliance with
    Thailand, which benefits both of our nations and supports peace and
    prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region. I understand we conduct a
    significant number of military-to-military engagements and exercises
    with Thailand each year, including COBRA GOLD, the Indo-Pacific
    region's largest multilateral exercise. If confirmed, I will work to
    strengthen our Alliance with Thailand through promoting
    interoperability, military professionalism and modernization, and
    reciprocal access and posture initiatives.
        Question. What is your assessment of the relationship between
    Thailand and China?
        Answer. Due to geographic proximity and economic ties, Thailand has
    a strong interest in maintaining a relationship with China, but they
    also have points of disagreement. The United States-Thai Alliance helps
    contribute to Thailand's ability to support a free and open Indo-
    Pacific region.
        Question. What impact does that relationship have on the United
    States-Thailand relationship?
        Answer. The United States-Thailand Alliance stands on its own. It
    benefits both of our nations and supports peace and prosperity in the
    Indo-Pacific region.
                                    vietnam
        Question. What is your current assessment of the United States-
    Vietnam security relationship and what specific priorities would you
    establish for this relationship?
        Answer. The United States-Vietnam defense relationship is strong
    and growing, built upon the shared goal of preserving a free and open
    order in the Indo-Pacific region. If confirmed, I will work to expand
    bilateral cooperation on shared interests such as maritime security,
    cybersecurity, and support for Vietnam's own war remains recovery
    efforts.
        Question. What is your assessment of the relationship between
    Vietnam and China?
        Answer. Due to geographic proximity and economic ties, Vietnam has
    a strong interest in maintaining a relationship with China, but they
    also have points of disagreement, particularly in the South China Sea.
    United States-Vietnam defense cooperation remains strong. United States
    advocacy for a free and open Indo-Pacific region reinforces Vietnam's
    efforts to protect its own sovereignty and national interests.
        Question. What impact does that relationship have on the United
    States-Vietnam relationship?
        Answer. The United States-Vietnam partnership stands on its own. It
    benefits both of our nations and supports peace and prosperity in the
    Indo-Pacific region.
                                   indonesia
        Question. What is your view of the current state of military-to-
    military relations with Indonesia and what specific priorities would
    you establish for this relationship?
        Answer. Defense relations between the United States and Indonesia
    are strong. I understand the Department of Defense is focused on
    enhancing the bilateral United States-Indonesia partnership through
    training, exercises, and support for Indonesia's professional military
    education. If confirmed, my priorities will include supporting
    Indonesia to enhance defense professionalism and training, and to
    improve its maritime capabilities.
        Question. What is your assessment of the relationship between
    Indonesia and China?
        Answer. Due to geographic proximity and economic ties, Indonesia
    has a strong interest in maintaining a relationship with China, but
    they also have points of disagreement, particularly in the South China
    Sea. United States-Indonesia defense cooperation remains strong. United
    States advocacy for a free and open Indo-Pacific reinforces Indonesia's
    efforts to protect its own sovereignty and national interests.
        Question. What impact does that relationship have on the United
    States-Indonesia relationship?
        Answer. The United States-Indonesia partnership stands on its own.
    It benefits both of our nations and supports peace and prosperity in
    the Indo-Pacific region.
                                  afghanistan
        Question. President Biden announced the transition of all United
    States forces from Afghanistan by September 11, 2021.
        Do you agree that despite the transition of forces from the
    country, it should remain the policy of the United States to ensure
    Afghanistan will not be a source of planning, plotting, or projection
    of terrorist attacks around the globe, including against the United
    States Homeland?
        Answer. Yes, I agree with the President that we should not take our
    eye off any potential terrorist threat emanating from Afghanistan. If
    confirmed, I will work closely with U.S. Central Command and other
    Components and agencies to ensure this mission is addressed
    appropriately.
        Question. If you agree, how would you advise that we best adapt our
    counterterrorism posture in the region to account for the transition of
    forces from Afghanistan?
        Answer. Secretary Austin and other DOD senior leaders have
    explained in recent testimony that the Department will maintain
    substantial capabilities in the region and will continue to work
    closely with regional partners. If confirmed, a top priority of mine
    will be aligning United States regional policy with our enduring
    counter-terrorism objectives.
        Question. If you do not agree, what do you assess to be our
    national security interests in Afghanistan and how would you advise
    that the United States advance those interests once our forces are
    transitioned out of the country?
        Answer. N/A
        Question. What specific challenges do you foresee in conducting
    counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan from ``over the horizon''?
        Answer. General McKenzie has stated that ``over the horizon''
    counterterrorism operations will be difficult, but not impossible.
    Issues associated with time, distance, and intelligence are among the
    primary challenges. One under-reported advantage, as I understand it,
    is that even with all of its challenges, the Afghan security forces do
    conduct counter-terrorism operations and they bring meaningful capacity
    to that fight.
        Question. What do you recommend doing to address these challenges?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would support efforts to develop an
    effective ``over-the-horizon'' capability while ensuring that our
    support to the Afghan security forces continues. The latter will
    reinforce counter-terrorism efforts in Afghanistan, as well as help to
    maintain security and stability in the country.
        Question. If confirmed, would you advocate for continuing support
    to the Afghan Security forces in light of the transition of United
    States and NATO forces from the country? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. Yes. Supporting the Afghan National Defense and Security
    Forces (ANDSF) is essential to the viability of the Government of
    Afghanistan and its capability to combat terrorist organizations within
    Afghanistan. If confirmed, I will work within the Department and with
    Congress to ensure the Afghan forces are sufficiently funded and
    resourced.
        Question. What can be done to ensure proper oversight of United
    States support to the Afghan security forces after United States troops
    leave Afghanistan?
        Answer. I understand that the President has directed that DOD
    continue to support the ANDSF through the Afghanistan Security Forces
    Fund (ASFF) appropriation. Proper oversight and accountability of the
    ASFF will be as crucial from an over-the-horizon posture as it has been
    in the past. If confirmed, my commitment in this regard is twofold:
    first, understanding and validating accountability mechanisms will be
    part of every discussion about ASFF in my office; and second, I commit
    to transparency with Congress.
        Question. Do you agree that an effective Afghan air force is
    essential to countering terrorists in Afghanistan?
        Answer. Yes. Afghan air power provides the Afghan ground forces
    with a powerful tactical advantage over terrorist threats in
    Afghanistan. If confirmed, I will prioritize a continued focus on
    sustaining the Afghan air force.
        Question. What approach would you recommend to ensure that the
    United States can effectively equip and support the Afghan air force,
    while maintaining appropriate oversight, from ``over the horizon''?
        Answer. My understanding is that DOD is already shifting to an
    over-the-horizon approach to sustainment of the Afghan aircraft fleet.
    This involves virtual or tele-maintenance support, transporting
    aircraft to third country locations to perform complex maintenance
    tasks, and continued training of pilots and maintainers in third
    countries.
        Question. What is your assessment of the roles Pakistan, Russia and
    Iran are playing in Afghanistan, including with regard to support for
    the Taliban and other militant groups?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will have access to greater information
    that can help inform a more complete view of the regional players'
    roles in Afghanistan. I agree with Secretary Austin that the United
    States should work with Pakistan to defeat al-Qa'ida and ISIS-K, and to
    advancea negotiated peace settlement in Afghanistan. I understand that
    Russia and Iran favor the United States withdrawal from the region, but
    are also concerned about a destabilized Afghanistan.
        Question. What is your assessment of the role China is playing in
    Afghanistan?
        Answer. China has engaged both the Government of Afghanistan and
    the Taliban in pursuit of regional stability. According to DOD's
    December 2020 Section 1225 Report to Congress, Afghanistan has not been
    a major economic partner for China to date.
                                    pakistan
        Question. What is your view of the current state of the United
    States-Pakistan security relationship?
        Answer. Pakistan is an important, yet challenging, partner. If
    confirmed, I would seek to work with Pakistan on defeating al-Qaida
    (AQ) and the Islamic State--Khorasan (ISIS-K), pursuing a durable peace
    in Afghanistan, and enhancing regional stability, among other things. I
    would also assess the use of the International Military Education and
    Training program (IMET), along with other opportunities, to develop and
    deepen our relationships with Pakistan's future military leaders.
        Question. Do you believe United States security assistance to
    Pakistan is effective and supports United States national security
    objectives?
        Answer. I understand that United States security assistance to
    Pakistan remains suspended, with limited exceptions for programs that
    advance United States national security interests. If confirmed, I
    would assess whether any changes to security assistance may be useful
    to advance U.S. interests in the region.
        Question. What steps would you recommend the United States take to
    convince or compel Pakistan to do more to cut off support and sanctuary
    for militant and terrorist groups?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Pakistan's military leaders
    to collaborate on mutual priorities. I will continue to press Pakistan
    to take action against militants and violent extremist organizations
    operating in its territory.
        Question. Are there additional conditions on security assistance to
    Pakistan that you believe should be considered if Pakistan declines to
    cut off support and sanctuary for militant and terrorist groups? If so,
    what are the additional conditions on assistance that you would
    recommend?
        Answer. I understand that United States security assistance to
    Pakistan remains suspended, with limited exceptions for programs that
    advance United States national security interests. If confirmed, I will
    work to ensure that any U.S. security assistance is shaped to advance
    U.S. interests.
                                   terrorism
        Question. What is your assessment of the threat to United States
    interests posed by al Qaeda, ISIS, and affiliated terrorist
    organizations operating in the Indo-Pacific region?
        Answer. Following the withdrawal of combat forces from Afghanistan,
    the potential for the reemergence of al-Qaida in Afghanistan is a risk
    that must be addressed. The President has committed to ensuring that
    even after a U.S. withdrawal, the United States Government will have
    capabilities that remain available to help manage the risk that al
    Qaeda or ISIS attempts to rebuild. If confirmed, I will work with
    Secretary Austin to ensure we have the capability to address any
    terrorist threat that would emanate from the Indo-Pacific Region.
        Question. What is your understanding of the U.S. counterterrorism
    strategy in the region and, what changes, if any, would you recommend
    to that strategy, particularly given the impending departure of United
    States Forces from Afghanistan?
        Answer. It is my understanding that even after a U.S. withdrawal,
    the United States Government will have capabilities within the region
    that will help us to manage the risk of al Qaeda or ISIS attempting to
    rebuild. If confirmed, I will ensure our regional strategy accounts for
    our counterterrorism objectives and accounts for the threat landscape
    we face today.
                               sexual harassment
        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.
        What is your assessment of the current climate regarding sexual
    harassment, gender discrimination, and other harassment in the Office
    of the USD(P)?
        Answer. I have not had the opportunity to assess the current
    climate regarding sexual harassment, gender discrimination, or other
    harassment in the office of the USD(P). However, if confirmed, ensuring
    a safe and equitable work place for all employees will be a top
    priority. It is my expectation that each member of Policy has a safe,
    healthy, and respectable place to work.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
    receive or become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment,
    discrimination, or other harassment from an employee of the Office of
    the ASD(IPSA)?
        Answer. If confirmed, and made aware of such a complaint, I would
    first ensure the complainant was in a safe place and had access to
    support resources. I would direct the case be handled promptly and
    properly, following the DOD guidelines and policies, and swiftly work
    to resolve the complaint appropriately. It would be a top priority to
    create a safe workplace for all staff and free from hostile or abusive
    conduct by anyone.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
    appropriate committees of Congress are able to receive testimony,
    briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
    communications) and other information from the Department.
        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 Angus S. King, Jr.
                         afghan special immigrant visas
        1. Senator King. Dr. Ratner, the United States may need to create
    an intermediate screening location, external to the United States, to
    receive and screen our Afghan partners while the United States
    Government processes their special immigrant visas. This would solve
    some of the immediacy of the plight of the Afghans and also allow
    national security concerns to be addressed. Please suggest at least
    three options for an outside the continental United States (OCONUS)
    reception and screening location. Options that include cooperative
    solutions with allies and partners are welcome. Additionally, please
    include a short summary of the benefits and detriments for each
    location.
        Dr. Ratner.I agree that it is critically important that the United
    States Government takes appropriate measures to expedite the processing
    of Afghan Special Immigrant Visa applications. If confirmed, I will
    join in the discussions about expediting these applications, and I will
    advocate for whatever Department of Defense support may be appropriate
    to establish intermediate screening locations. I also agree that it
    will be important to work with our allies and partners on this issue.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Gary C. Peters
                                     cyber
        2. Senator Peters. Dr. Ratner, if confirmed, you will oversee all
    regional security cooperation programs. Do you consider cyber security
    assistance or measures to enhance resiliency to be a part of this
    portfolio?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes. If confirmed, I will help to ensure, in
    coordination with the Department of State, that we prioritize the cyber
    security and resilience of our allies and partners, consistent with
    overall U.S. regional and cyber policies. Strengthening the cyber
    resilience of our allies and partners is an important mission for the
    Department of Defense, and cyber cooperation is an area of growing
    importance for many countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

        3. Senator Peters. Dr. Ratner, North Korea is a criminal syndicate
    with a flag--does the Department of Defense (DOD) have a role in
    combating their cybercrimes?
        Dr. Ratner. North Korea continues to develop a range of programs
    that threaten the United States and our allies and partners, including
    weapons of mass destruction, ballistic missiles, and cyber
    capabilities. If confirmed, I will review the full range of activities
    that enhance United States and allied defenses against North Korea's
    growing capabilities in these areas. I will also work with partners
    across other United States Government departments and agencies, as well
    as regional partners and allies, to forge a comprehensive approach to
    addressing North Korean threats.
                                   __________
                   Questions Submitted by Senator Tom Cotton
                 intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
        4. Senator Cotton. Dr. Ratner, I'm assuming that launching
    Afghanistan intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
    missions from over the horizon bases will impact the on-station time of
    our assets. Just how much time will these platforms have on station and
    how is that changed from missions that are currently launched from
    within Afghanistan?
        Dr. Ratner. I understand that the Department of Defense is working
    to reposition our counterterrorism capabilities, including ISR assets,
    to prevent the re-emergence of a terrorist threat to the United States
    Homeland from Afghanistan. If confirmed, I will examine how best to
    maximize the ``over-the-horizon'' approach in order to detect and
    disrupt threats to the U.S. Homeland and to our allies and partners.

        5. Senator Cotton. Dr. Ratner, how many additional ISR orbits or
    missions will we need to maintain a similar level of coverage as we
    have today?
        Dr. Ratner. It is my understanding that the Department has already
    begun developing an ``over-the-horizon'' surveillance capability for
    Afghanistan. If confirmed, I look forward to providing this Committee
    with more specifics on what this capability looks like in Afghanistan.

        6. Senator Cotton. Dr. Ratner, where are these additional lines
    being sourced from and will that impact operations in other areas of
    responsibility such as United States Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM)
    or Africa?
        Dr. Ratner. It is my understanding that the Department of Defense
    leadership continually reviews requests for forces from all Combatant
    Commanders and allocates resources in accordance with applicable
    national security priorities. If confirmed, I will ensure that the
    global force management process benefits from the best regional
    insights.
                           visas for chinese citizens
        7. Dr. Ratner, in your December 2019 CNAS [Center for New American
    Security] report, titled ``Rising to the China Challenge: Renewing
    American Competitiveness in the Indo-Pacific,'' you wrote it would be
    ``sensible'' to prohibit F or J visas for People's Liberation Army
    (PLA)-employed, -funded, or -sponsored individuals (p. 24). Do you
    still stand by this position?
        Dr. Ratner. Yes, I support Presidential Proclamation 10043 of May
    29, 2020, which suspended entry of certain students and researchers
    from the People's Republic of China. As Proclamation 10043 states,
    ``the People's Republic of China is engaged in a wide-ranging and
    heavily resourced campaign to acquire sensitive United States
    technology and intellectual property, in part to bolster the
    modernization and capability of the People's Liberation Army.'' This
    acquisition is a threat to our nation's long-term economic vitality and
    the safety and security of the American people.
                                   __________
                   Questions Submitted by Senator Thom Tillis
                                  afghanistan
        8. Senator Tillis. Dr. Ratner, Secretary Lloyd Austin wrote in his
    testimony last week: ``In Afghanistan, the Department is working to
    conduct a deliberate, orderly, and safe withdrawal, as directed by the
    President. This is an important step in responsibly ending this two-
    decade-long conflict, and it offers us an opportunity to redirect our
    resources toward strategic competition.''
        General Kenneth McKenzie testified to the committee in March of
    this year that to accomplish the counter-terrorism mission from over
    the horizon: ``The ranges will be greater. The resources will be
    greater. The risks will all be greater...''
        Last week, Acting Air Force Secretary John Roth said the Air Force
    budgeted for $10 billion in unspecified U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM)
    needs to deal with post-withdrawal missions. Do you think that it will
    cost more or less to execute over the horizon counter-terrorism
    operations in Afghanistan after we withdraw?
        Dr. Ratner. It is my understanding that the Department's priority
    mission in Afghanistan remains preventing al Qaeda, ISIS, and other
    terrorist groups from operating, directing, or supporting external
    attacks against the United States Homeland, our citizens, and our
    allies and partners from Afghanistan. If confirmed, I will examine how
    the Department is addressing this priority from an ``over-the-horizon''
    posture and will ensure that the global force management process has
    the full regional perspective as it balances resource allocations.

        9. Senator Tillis. Dr. Ratner, do you think these more remote
    operations will be more effective or less effective that pre-withdrawal
    operations?
        Dr. Ratner. If confirmed, I will have the opportunity to examine
    operational planning and sensitive intelligence that would inform a
    judgment about whether our strategy and operational approach are
    effective.

        10. Senator Tillis. Dr. Ratner, are you worried about how we take
    care of Afghans who helped us during the war, such as interpreters who
    have saved the lives of United States troops on the battlefield?
        Dr. Ratner. I agree that the United States Government should
    support Afghans who supported us during our mission in Afghanistan and
    who now may be under threat from the Taliban. If confirmed, I will
    strongly support the efforts of the Departments of State and Homeland
    Security to accelerate the processing of Afghan Special Immigrant
    Visas, and I will advocate for any support the Department of Defense
    may be in a position to provide.

        11. Senator Tillis. Dr. Ratner, do you agree we should take
    extraordinary measures to ensure the safety of these allies, given the
    risks they have taken on behalf of the lives of our troops?
        Dr. Ratner. I agree that the United States Government should
    support Afghans who supported us during our mission in Afghanistan and
    who now may be under threat from the Taliban. If confirmed, I will
    strongly support the efforts of the Departments of State and Homeland
    Security to accelerate the processing of Afghan Special Immigrant
    Visas, and I will advocate for any support the Department of Defense
    may be in a position to provide.

        12. Senator Tillis. Dr. Ratner, why do you think that the United
    Nations (UN) would issue a report that says al Qaeda and other
    terrorists with international ambitions are celebrating the United
    States and coalition withdrawal from Afghanistan as a victory?
        Dr. Ratner. I am not able to comment on the motivations of the
    United Nations. If confirmed, I will be part of an unwavering U.S.
    commitment to prevent AQ, ISIS, and other terrorist groups from
    operating, directing, or supporting external attacks against the United
    States Homeland, our citizens, and our allies and partners from
    Afghanistan.
                                   __________
                Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
                           china--afghan relationship
        13. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Ratner, how has China's Afghan policy
    changed in recent years, and how do you expect the United States
    withdrawal from Afghanistan will impact the Chinese?
        Dr. Ratner. The People's Republic of China will have to reassess
    elements of its approach to Afghanistan following the United States
    retrograde. Although leaders in Beijing may welcome the reduction of
    United States Forces in the region, they will also face new challenges,
    including as a result of the ongoing genocide of Muslim Uighurs in
    Xinjiang. If confirmed, I would closely monitor China's regional
    ambitions, work with our allies and partners, and engage directly in
    interagency discussions on a coordinated United States approach to
    ensure China's actions do not undermine vital United States interests.

        14. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Ratner, how would you advise that United
    States policy evolve to address China's growing roles with respect to
    Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the region, generally?
        Dr. Ratner. Secretary Austin has said repeatedly that China is the
    Department of Defense's number one pacing challenge and, if confirmed,
    my top priority would be advancing that agenda. As part of that, I
    would closely monitor China's regional ambitions in Central and South
    Asia, work with our allies and partners in the region, and engage
    directly in interagency discussions on a coordinated United States
    approach to ensure China's actions do not undermine vital United States
    interests.
                             military--civil fusion
        15. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Ratner, military-civil fusion (MCF) is a
    cornerstone of People's Liberation Army (PLA) power, but please discuss
    how our own DOD can serve as a better partner with the private sector,
    universities, and our national labs to achieve our own synergistic
    effect between these entities.
        Dr. Ratner. If confirmed, I would work with my counterparts in the
    Offices of the Under Secretaries of Defense for Acquisition and
    Sustainment and Research and Engineering, and elsewhere in the
    Department of Defense, to ensure that we strengthen laboratory and
    university partnerships for basic research. If confirmed, I would also
    work closely with the Military Services to meet the challenges posed by
    China's military-civil fusion strategy. I believe that the Department's
    new Innovation Steering Group will provide an important mechanism for
    synchronizing and driving innovation efforts forward.
                                   __________
                   Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
                          deterring chinese aggression
        16. Senator Hawley. Dr. Ratner, there are reports that the Pentagon
    is considering setting up a permanent naval task force for the Western
    Pacific. There are also reports that the Pentagon is thinking about
    establishing a named military operation for the Pacific. How would
    setting a permanent naval task force or a named operation for the
    Pacific help us in our efforts to deter China?
        Dr. Ratner. It is critical that the Department of Defense continue
    taking measures to bolster deterrence in the Western Pacific. If
    confirmed, I would work with leaders throughout the Department to
    assess the best existing and prospective means of achieving DOD
    objectives in the region and would look forward to keeping members of
    the Committee informed about DOD efforts in this regard.

        17. Senator Hawley. Dr. Ratner, there is a tension between the
    requirements for deterring China in the next 5-7 years and transforming
    the Joint Force in order to sustain deterrence for the next 10 or 15
    years. How should the Department manage these tradeoffs, so we can
    deter China in the near term without undermining our ability to do so
    in the medium or long term?
        Dr. Ratner. It is imperative that the Department of Defense take
    concerted steps to deter PRC aggression in the near-term and also to
    develop the operational concepts, capabilities, force posture, and
    partnerships necessary to maintain that deterrence into the future. I
    anticipate the ongoing Global Posture Review and National Defense
    Strategy development process will address key requirements and
    tradeoffs to achieve these goals. If confirmed, I would seek to play an
    active role in these reviews, as well as engage in global force
    management and programming discussions to ensure that regional insights
    and mission requirements over time are understood in making policy and
    strategy decisions.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Dr. Ely S. Ratner follows:]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Dr. Ely S. Ratner, which was
    transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

                                     ______

        [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 Dr. Ely S.
    Ratner in connection with his nomination follows:]

                                     ______

        [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.]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Dr. Ely S. Ratner was reported to the
    Senate by Chairman Reed on June 22, 2021, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on July 22, 2021.]
                                     ______

        [Prepared questions submitted to Ms. Shawn G. Skelly by
    Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]
                            Questions and Responses
                                     duties
        Question. Section 138 of Title 10, United States Code, provides
    that an Assistant Secretary of Defense shall perform such duties and
    exercise such powers as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe.
        What is your understanding of the duties and functions of the ASD
    for Readiness?
        Answer. The ASD(Readiness) is the principal advisor to the
    Secretary of Defense and the USD(P&R) on all matters related to the
    readiness of the Total Force to execute its assigned missions. The
    ASD(Readiness) develops policy, and provides oversight and guidance on
    matters including: readiness assessments and reporting, global force
    management, military training, joint exercises, professional military
    education, voluntary education, financial readiness, operational and
    occupational safety, and occupational health.
                                 qualifications
        Question. What background and experience do you have that you
    believe qualifies you to perform the duties and functions of this
    position?
        Answer. I believe my cumulative career experience, in uniform and
    out, provides me both the background and experience to perform the
    duties and functions of ASD(Readiness). As a career Navy officer and
    qualified Naval Flight Officer, I have seen and lived many aspects of
    the portfolio firsthand, from my journey through commissioning as NROTC
    scholarship graduate through flight school to becoming a fully
    qualified mission commander, flight instructor, and later department
    head as a tactical aviator; I'm intimately familiar with how readiness
    is created and maintained at the servicemember and tactical until
    level. My time as a staff officer at both the U.S. Second Fleet and the
    then-U.S. Pacific Command at the operational and theater strategic
    levels taught me how readiness is assessed, how major units are
    certified for deployment, and how their availability and joint
    capabilities are applied to contingencies, named operations, and
    operational plans. As a graduate of the College of Naval Command &
    Staff, I know with certitude how that specific course of Professional
    Military Education has enabled my personal performance in every
    position I've held and endeavor I've undertaken; in uniform, other
    public service, and industry, over the past nineteen years. As a former
    aviator, I am keenly aware of the imperative of the Department's safety
    programs, both operational and occupational, in safeguarding the lives
    and wellbeing of the servicemembers and civilians in its charge and
    protecting the investments the American taxpayers have made in
    equipment and facilities. Unswerving vigilance and proactive,
    accountable leadership of safety programs and practices are paramount.
    Having led junior sailors, I know well the importance of financial
    education programs, how finance issues can complicate family readiness
    and ultimately impinge upon individual servicemember readiness.
    Finally, my combined experience in uniform, industry, and as a DOD
    civilian official has given me in depth perspective as to how the
    determination of requirements, technology and systems development, and
    the acquisition process provide the materiel capabilities that combine
    with and enable our personnel to execute their missions in support of
    the National Defense Strategy.
        Question. Specifically, what leadership and management experience
    do you possess that you would apply to your service as ASD(Readiness),
    if confirmed?
        Answer. The past twenty years of my career have provided me with
    multiple opportunities to develop my personal skills and experience in
    leadership and management that I believe would serve me well were I to
    be confirmed as ASD(Readiness). I have had the responsibility to lead
    high-performing, cross-functional teams responsible for large
    portfolios and creating and sustaining joint and interagency
    relationships in order to provide senior leader decision support at
    ever increasing levels of the DOD and the Executive Branch. I was an
    acting division chief responsible for politico-military affairs in
    thirty countries in the U.S. Pacific Command AOR, frequently briefing
    the Commander and Deputy Commander personally, in addition to directly
    supporting the Commander's travel to major treaty allies. I led the
    Marine Corps' service-level working group responsible for coordinating
    the response to Improvised Explosive Devices and providing lifesaving
    capabilities to deployed marines and sailors in combat in close
    partnership with joint and interagency partners and making
    recommendations on the service's Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and
    Execution actions required to support those capabilities. I was the
    day-to-day coordinator of the DOD's Department-wide forum, exercised
    under the authority of the Deputy Secretary of Defense, to respond to
    Combatant Commanders' most urgent operational needs, primarily in
    support of the Operations Inherent Resolve and Resolute Support and the
    Global War on Terrorism, focusing and facilitating the execution of
    those responses from requirements definition through delivery, while
    working with virtually every component of the DOD. I served as a
    personal and confidential assistant to a Cabinet Secretary and Deputy
    Secretary, as the Director of the Office of the Executive Secretariat
    of the Department of Transportation, responsible for all of the
    Department's official correspondence with Congress, the White House,
    interagency, and state, local, and tribal levels of government.
    Finally, I served as a Presidentially-appointed Commissioner, a
    principal, on the National Commission on Military, National, and Public
    Service, a three-year effort established by Congress to address the
    strategic future of the Select Service System and to address other
    national security and public service needs of the nation, submitting a
    report on our findings to Congress in 2020, and subsequently testified
    in front of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs
    Committee. Through this all, I've learned that the bedrock of any
    complex, collaborative endeavor is the relationships formed and
    maintained with both people and organizations. Relationships that are
    based on trust, transparency, reliability, and an unwavering focus on
    mission and shared success. Relationships that endure whether they are
    close, daily partnerships or episodic. People, whether they are my own
    organization's team members, partner organization team members, or
    personal interlocutors, are what make success achievable and
    sustainable. Finally, I've learned that senior leaders' time,
    especially in the decision support space, has to be viewed as and
    actively treated as a precious and vital commodity that requires
    deliberate planning and execution in furtherance of defined, strategic
    goals, in each instance. Anything less than such an approach risks
    squandering often fleeting windows of opportunity, potentially wasting
    a leader's time, wasting a team's effort and jeopardizing its
    credibility. This is the very approach I would apply were I to be
    confirmed as ASD(Readiness).
        Question. Are there any actions you would take to enhance your
    ability to perform the duties and exercise the powers of the
    ASD(Readiness)?
        Answer. If I were to be confirmed as ASD(Readiness), beside the
    normal onboarding and introductory briefings and meetings one would
    reasonably expect to have, I would seek to expeditiously establish
    relationships with the leaders and organizations responsible for
    capabilities that I believe are crucial to the future demands of the
    Total Force's ability to maintain the nation's defense, not only to
    increase my personal knowledge and understanding of these areas in the
    context of readiness, but also to ensure the ASD(Readiness)
    organization understands them as well. These include the U.S. Space
    Force, the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, the DOD CIO on the DOD
    Cloud Strategy, the Joint Staff for the Joint All Domain Command and
    Control Strategy, and multiple other stakeholders with equity in the
    Department's way ahead with unmanned and autonomous systems in all
    domains.
        Question. If confirmed, what other duties would you recommend the
    Secretary of Defense or the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
    and Readiness (USD(P&R)) assign to you, particularly in light of the
    readiness component of the 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS)?
        Answer. If I were to be confirmed as ASD(Readiness), any
    consideration of additional duties could only come after I have been
    fully briefed, to include any and all classified elements, on all the
    component responsibilities, guidance documents, and organizational
    capabilities, to include personnel, and I have then had an opportunity
    to assess my ability to perform the duties and functions of
    ASD(Readiness). If I were to subsequently determine that additional
    duties were required, I would work with the Administration and Congress
    as necessary to make that case.
                                major challenges
        Question. In your view, what are the major challenges confronting
    the next ASD for Readiness?
        Answer. In my view, the major challenges confronting the next ASD
    for Readiness are centered first on the need to improve current
    readiness assessment capabilities in light of the ever increasing
    availability of data and the ability to capture, process, and analyze
    that data through advanced analytics systems and approaches the
    Department is rapidly implementing, to inform strategic resourcing
    decision making with regard to the creation and sustainment of current
    and near term Total Force readiness. Second, a simultaneous need to
    pursue and create a future-focused definition and understanding of
    readiness in the context of the numerous capabilities the Department is
    pursuing as pillars of future Total Force capabilities; such as
    Artificial Intelligence, next generation joint command and control, new
    space doctrine and capabilities, and unmanned and autonomous systems,
    all of which will require an appreciation not just for the numbers of
    these systems and their operational status but their individual and
    combined effects' contributions to the Total Force's ability to perform
    in multiple, if not all mission areas, and most likely simultaneously.
    Finally, the next ASD(Readiness) will be charged with determining a
    data-informed means of assessing the Department's long term progress
    towards those capabilities and their desired effects in order to
    routinely and regularly inform the ongoing, near term resourcing
    decisions regarding current and legacy capabilities and systems.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions and timelines would you have
    for addressing each of these challenges?
        Answer. If confirmed as ASD(Readiness), my immediate focus in the
    first three months would be, while becoming familiar with the
    responsibilities and portfolio itself, understanding the state of the
    implementation of advanced analytics within the organization, its
    performance, and effects, while putting in place a deliberate framework
    to consider the readiness implications of the Department's future
    capability priorities. In the succeeding three to six months, I would
    pursue a detailed examination of those future capabilities and apply
    that knowledge to a portfolio-wide assessment of the implications for
    the organization's mission relevance and effectiveness in order to
    inform near- and mid-term ASD(Readiness) organizational decision-making
    in support of its role in supporting the Secretary of Defense and the
    Total Force, to include both duties and authorities. After that period,
    I would look to make any necessary deliberate recommendations with
    regard to Total Force readiness analysis and reporting in concert with
    all the appropriate stakeholder organizations and in accordance with
    relevant Departmental strategic planning and resourcing processes and
    timelines.
                        national defense strategy (nds)
        Question. The 2018 NDS outlines that the United States faces a
    rising China, an aggressive Russia, and the continued threat from rogue
    regimes and global terrorism.
        Some have suggested that understanding the role of the
    ASD(Readiness) begins with the question: ``Ready for What?''. What are
    you views on this assertion?
        Answer. ``Ready for What?'' is a fundamental question that must be
    continuously reassessed given that the current strategic environment is
    dynamic and becoming increasingly more complex. If confirmed, I will
    work closely with my colleagues across the Department to ensure that
    the Joint Force is ready to operate across all domains to deter, and if
    necessary, defeat threats posed by a rising China, an opportunistic
    Russia, and myriad other strategic challenges.
        Question. In your view, what is the best answer to the ``Ready for
    What?'' question? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. The ``Ready for What?'' question is the fundamental
    readiness question across the Department. Both the President and the
    Secretary of Defense have been clear on the three priorities facing the
    Department of Defense. The Department must be ready to meet the
    challenge of our strategic competitors and the Secretary has
    prioritized China as the pacing challenge. We must also address and be
    ready to respond to and deter nation-state threats from Russia, Iran,
    and North Korea. I also share Secretary Austin's view that the
    Department must be ready to continue supporting ongoing federal COVID-
    19 response efforts.
        Question. Where does the DOD stand, in your view, in rebuilding
    readiness to address the challenges set forth in the NDS--ranging from
    competition . . . to so-called ``gray zone'' conflict . . . to full-
    fledged kinetic conflict with a near-peer?
        Answer. Building and sustaining strategic readiness must be a
    priority. If confirmed, I would seek to understand readiness against
    the requirements of the current strategy and the emerging strategic
    environment. We must ensure our armed forces are manned, trained,
    equipped, and appropriately modernized to meet the many challenges
    posed by strategic competitors both in large-scale combat operations,
    and in activities below the level of armed conflict.
        Question. The strategy states that the Global Operating Model is
    comprised of four layers: contact, blunt, surge, and Homeland. In your
    view, how do each of these layers influence readiness planning and what
    are the unique factors that must be considered in planning for each?
        Answer. The Global Operating Model describes how the Department
    will posture and employ the Joint Force to achieve its peacetime
    competition and wartime missions. The model is designed to support the
    National Defense Strategy in providing a flexible global posture and
    agile employment model that enables the Department to build the
    capabilities and readiness needed for strategic competition. For the
    Global Operating Model to work, the Department will need to ensure
    sufficient readiness is resident in each layer to support combat
    credible deterrence in peacetime and effective prosecution of the
    military strategy in wartime. If confirmed, I would work closely with
    the Joint Staff and Military Departments and Services to ensure
    relevance and utility in how we evaluate readiness to meet the
    expanding strategic requirements of the Global Operating Model.
        Question. Do you believe that the military services' current force
    structure and authorized end strengths are sufficient to support the
    NDS? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. Force structure and end strength decisions must be informed
    by rigorous analysis and national strategic priorities. If confirmed, I
    will work closely with my colleagues in the Office of the Secretary of
    Defense (OSD), the Military Departments and Military Services, and the
    Joint Staff to provide data-driven analysis and recommendations that
    ensure the appropriate joint force structure and end strength to meet
    the nation's security objectives.
        Question. What changes to the Services' current force structure or
    authorized end strength that you would recommend, if confirmed, to
    implement properly all three lines of effort set forth in the 2018 NDS?
        Answer. With the FY 2021 authorized force structure and end
    strengths, I believe the Department will meet the operational demands
    of the Combatant Commanders. If confirmed, I will work tirelessly to
    continually assess the force's readiness in the context of the
    priorities in the President's Interim National Security Strategic
    Guidance and the National Defense Strategy and ensure that resources
    are balanced appropriately to build and sustain readiness.
                           readiness responsibilities
        Question. Section 136 of title 10, United States Code, assigns to
    the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R))
    certain responsibilities for military readiness. The Secretaries of the
    Military Departments, the Joint Staff, and other Under Secretaries of
    Defense (e.g., the Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment
    exercises purview over logistics, sustainment, and materiel readiness),
    each have important responsibilities in the readiness domain.
        What is the role of the USD(P&R) in the domain of readiness?
        Answer. The USD(P&R) is the senior advisor to the Secretary on the
    overall readiness of the Joint Force to execute its assigned missions.
    This includes readiness to respond quickly in the case of contingency
    operations, as well as by projecting the readiness of Forces to engage
    in strategic competition across the continuum of conflict today and in
    the future.
        Question. What is the role of the ASD(Readiness)?
        Answer. The ASD(Readiness) develops policy, and provides oversight,
    guidance, and assessments of the readiness of the Joint Force to
    execute assigned missions. The ASD(Readiness) also prepares policy for
    military training, joint exercises, military education, operational and
    occupational safety, and occupational health. The ASD(Readiness)
    engages stakeholders across the OSD staff, Joint Staff, and Military
    Departments and Services to ensure all inputs to readiness are being
    considered to inform senior leader decisions, and that decisions across
    the Department consider readiness impacts.
        Question. How do the roles of the USD(P&R) and the ASD(Readiness)
    network with the roles of the Military Department Secretaries, the
    Joint Staff, and the other Under Secretaries in the domain of
    readiness?
        Answer. The USD and ASD must work hand-in-hand with the Military
    Departments, the Joint Staff, and the other Under Secretaries of
    Defense, to ensure the most pressing readiness issues are identified
    and addressed. As members of the Secretary's staff, the USD(P&R) and
    ASD(Readiness) must develop the policies that set the conditions for
    readiness across the force for today and in the future. They must then
    provide the oversight to ensure progress toward those readiness goals,
    and guidance regarding the tools (e.g., authorities, processes, best
    practices) available to the Military Departments and Services for
    building and sustaining readiness under all conditions.
        Question. What is your understanding of the responsibilities of the
    ASD(Readiness)in developing and promulgating policies and in exercising
    oversight of the implementation of materiel readiness policies and
    programs?
        Answer. It is my understanding that commanders assess the status of
    their unit's readiness based upon personnel, training, and equipment
    (condition and supply). The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
    and Readiness has policy oversight for most aspects of personnel and
    training, while the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
    Sustainment has policy oversight for materiel readiness. If confirmed,
    I would work closely with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Sustainment to ensure that equipment condition and supply levels are
    sufficient to meet readiness requirements, that pertinent policies and
    oversight processes are in place, and that the universe of equipment
    and supply data are available to ensure timely, relevant monitoring of
    material readiness across the Joint Force.
        Question. What role does the ASD(Readiness) play in ensuring that
    the personnel and health programs under the auspices of the USD(P&R)
    promote the readiness requirements of the Military Departments?
        Answer. Readiness is connected to the personnel and health issues
    overseen by USD(P&R) because challenges in these areas can have
    detrimental impacts on the readiness of the Force. Issues in
    recruiting, retention, end strength, deployability, resilience, and
    medical readiness are prime drivers that reduce readiness of the Joint
    Force. If confirmed, I will work with my counterparts within the Office
    of the USD(P&R), including the ASD(Health Affairs) and ASD(Manpower and
    Reserve Affairs) to ensure we are aware and mutually supportive in
    these areas to reduce the potential impact to readiness.
        Question. Given that responsibility for reserve affairs also
    resides under the USD(P&R), what role does the ASD(Readiness) play in
    matters of Reserve Component readiness?
        Answer. Secretary Austin has been clear that increasing Joint Force
    readiness is one of his top priorities, and the readiness of our
    Reserve Components is a key element of Joint Force Readiness. The ASD
    for Readiness has responsibility for Joint Force Readiness programs and
    assessments to execute the National Defense Strategy, as well as
    implementing Reserve Component mobilization policy and overseeing
    Reserve Component participation in the global force management process.
    If confirmed, I will ensure the Department meets this priority and
    continues to access the Reserve Component in accordance with current
    polices. I will also assess and reinforce all appropriate efforts
    currently underway to ensure the readiness of the Joint Force.
        Question. Given that responsibility for health affairs also resides
    under the USD(P&R), what role does the ASD(Readiness) play in matters
    related to the medical readiness of military forces--both Active and
    Reserve Components?
        Answer. The ASD(Readiness) works closely with the ASD(Health
    Affairs) to monitor and report on the medical readiness of the Joint
    Force, and advocate for key initiatives and policies to ensure the
    Department has the ready medical capabilities required to maintain the
    most capable Active and Reserve force. If confirmed, I would continue
    the strong relationship I understand exists with Health Affairs to
    implement reporting and data analysis improvements that assist the
    Department in monitoring and accurately assessing the medical readiness
    of the Joint Force.
        Question. Do you believe that the position of the ASD for Readiness
    would be better aligned under a different Undersecretary of Defense?
    Why or why not?
        Answer. No, I do not believe that the ASD for Readiness should be
    aligned anywhere other than under the USD(P&R). As Secretary Austin
    noted in his Message to the Force, ``we remain the preeminent fighting
    force in the world because of our personnel in and out of uniform.''
    Our readiness to confront the challenges of today and in the future is
    rooted in our people. Most importantly, the more you look at readiness,
    the more you realize that the recruiting, retention, development,
    education, and training of people are the principal generators of ready
    forces. Personnel and readiness are inextricably linked because people
    are the foundational building block of readiness.
        Question. What do you perceive to be the most critical duties and
    functions that should be assigned to the ASD(Readiness) for execution?
        Answer. Foremost, the ASD(Readiness) must be charged with ensuring
    the Department is doing all it can to promote and sustain the readiness
    of the Joint Force to accomplish its assigned missions today and in the
    future. The ASD(R) should lead the Military Departments and Services,
    and the Joint Staff, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense in a
    team effort focused on identifying key challenges to readiness, and
    employing the most appropriate means to mitigate operational and
    strategic risks.
        The ASD(Readiness) should be expected to influence readiness--not
    just report it. This means being an active voice in the development of
    policies for manning, training, and equipping the force in such a way
    that we incentivize continuity and professionalism of our leaders and
    warfighters, educate them to out-think our adversaries, train them in a
    realistic and rigorous environment, live or virtual, and equip them
    with the best affordable technologies available.
        Question. Does the ASD(Readiness) have purview over these duties
    and functions today? If not, what specific steps would you take, if
    confirmed, to bring these critical duties and functions under the
    authority, direction, and control of the ASD(Readiness)?
        Answer. If confirmed, one of my first tasks will be to confirm my
    assumptions about who-does-what across the broad readiness community in
    the DOD.
        The ASD(Readiness) has within its organization today the DASD for
    Force Readiness, the DASD for Force Education and Training, and the
    Director of Force Safety and Occupational Health, so those duties and
    functions (including military education, training, and safety) are
    already organic to ASD(Readiness). The ASD(Readiness) also manages the
    Defense Readiness Reporting System--Strategic, providing access to
    thousands of Commanders' assessments of their readiness today. The
    Manpower and Reserve Affairs and Health Affairs staffs within USD(P&R),
    enable access and collaboration to promote the best personnel and
    medical readiness practices and outcomes.
        Partner offices for specific readiness concerns such as
    acquisition, sustainment, posture, global force management, and
    resourcing policies are also within the OSD staff, and if confirmed, I
    will seek out these partners to ensure all of our efforts are
    synchronized. If confirmed, I am fully committed to leading the
    Readiness team by enforcing effective policies, oversight, and guidance
    for readiness, with the greatest regard and support for the Secretaries
    of the Military Departments in making the tough decisions as they
    balance the risks and payoffs associated with their readiness.
        Currently, the ASD for Readiness exercises authority, direction,
    and control over a number of disparate offices with no clear
    relationship to producing combat readiness.
        Question. In your assessment, why is the Deputy Assistant Secretary
    of Defense for Force Education and Training aligned under the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Readiness?
        Answer. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force
    Education and Training (DASD(FE&T)) plays a vital role in advancing
    force readiness, advising the ASD(R) on all policy aspects of military
    education and training to ensure the readiness of the total force to
    execute the strategy and missions assigned by the President and the
    Secretary of Defense. DASD(FE&T)'s oversight of training develops the
    ability of our warfighters to perform their assigned missions and
    continually remain ready in the future, while DASD(FE&T)'s oversight of
    military education develops the leadership capacity and cognitive
    readiness skills of our warfighters. DASD(FE&T)'s portfolio
    collectively contributes to force readiness at all levels--from
    building initial readiness, to increasing readiness, to sustaining
    readiness. In so doing, it also closely aligns with and reinforces the
    mission of the DASD(Force Readiness) under the ASD(R).
                   relationship with the military departments
        Question. The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
    Readiness has implemented a Readiness Recovery Framework that includes
    working with the Military Departments to establish a defined readiness-
    rebuilding plan, to include developing comprehensive goals and metrics
    to evaluate the extent to which identified goals are achieving intended
    outcomes.
        Is the Readiness Recovery framework fully institutionalized across
    all component of the DOD?
        Answer. I believe so. The Department developed the Readiness
    Recovery Framework (R2F) to track the readiness of our most stressed
    combat force elements and ensure that resources are connected to
    readiness. The Department currently tracks 42 Major Force Elements
    (MFEs) in the R2F, across the Military Services. The Readiness Recovery
    Framework is the Department's method for tracking and assessing
    readiness trends for select force elements that face the most severe
    readiness challenges.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to
    continue the rebuild of full spectrum readiness across the department.
        Answer. Thanks to Congress' support, the Department has made
    significant progress in rebuilding Joint Force readiness. If confirmed,
    I will make readiness analysis and reporting a priority, take stock of
    the current ability of our tools and expertise, and refine our
    assessment processes to ensure we are employing the best technologies
    and people to convey readiness challenges and develop appropriate
    mitigating strategies. Advanced analytics are key to providing senior
    leaders holistic understanding of the risks and tradeoffs between
    current readiness, future readiness, and modernization.
        Question. In your view, what are the metrics that should be used to
    track readiness-rebuilding progress?
        Any efforts at rebuilding full spectrum readiness must be well-
    grounded in analysis and risk/benefit tradeoffs. Metrics should derive
    from solid data from authoritative data sources. If confirmed, I will
    strive to focus on data-rich readiness-rebuilding efforts with
    definable metrics and supported by rigorous analysis.
        Are these metrics being tracked today?
        Answer. I understand that the Department is improving readiness
    data collection and sharing and, as a result, is increasing its ability
    to accurately measure and build readiness. If confirmed, I will
    continue to build and advance the Department's data integration
    efforts, leveraging data science and other analytic techniques to
    ensure an unbiased, data-driven approach to measuring readiness,
    identifying trends, systemic issues, and leading indicators of
    readiness, to provide the Department and Congress with valuable,
    actionable readiness information.
        Question. Which components of DOD currently track these metrics?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Office of the Secretary of
    Defense, the Joint Staff, and the Military Departments and Services
    develop, refine, and track various readiness metrics used to identify
    readiness trends in select force elements and provide input into
    appropriate leadership decision-making processes. If confirmed, I will
    continue to advance USD(P&R)'s data analytic capability to develop
    predictive readiness indicators and a ``Readiness Common Operating
    Picture'' that will support senior leader awareness and influence key
    decision processes throughout the Department.
        Question. How should these metrics be employed to affect decision
    making in the domain of readiness?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will assess and reinforce all efforts
    currently underway to track and report on the readiness of the Joint
    Force. This includes developing required policies and maintaining
    oversight needed to develop, standardize, and refine meaningful metrics
    that convey relevant information to decision makers, consistent with
    the way forces are actually employed, to optimize management of the
    current and future force. If confirmed, I will employ advances in data
    science to make our data more strategically informative and help the
    Department develop predictive readiness models to anticipate, and
    ultimately avoid readiness shortfalls.
        Question. Are these metrics currently being employed in the fashion
    you suggest?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with my partners in the Office of
    the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, and Military Departments and
    Services to ensure readiness metrics are properly aligned with the
    National Defense Strategy and employed in a manner that provides
    rigorous data-driven information to influence critical decision making
    processes and provide the most accurate and relevant reporting to
    senior Department leadership and to Congress.
        Question. In your view, what additional investments or departmental
    reforms are needed to ensure the Military Services are addressing
    readiness recovery?
        Answer. In my view, the Department must continue to invest in
    technology that enhances readiness analysis and decision-making
    processes. We need accelerated investments in artificial intelligence,
    machine learning, and other advanced technologies that help us to see
    ourselves better, and answer in response to the question of ``Ready for
    What?'' These investments will enable the optimization of resources
    needed to generate force readiness capable of deterring or defeating
    adversaries.
        Question. Do you believe the ASD for Readiness has the necessary
    authorities to engender and oversee meaningful readiness improvements?
    If not, what additional authorities does the ASD(Readiness) need?
        Answer. Yes, I do believe that the position has the necessary
    authorities to create and direct meaningful readiness improvements.
    However, if confirmed, I will review existing authorities and work with
    the Administration and with Congress if I determine additional
    authorities are necessary.
        Question. Does OUSD(P&R) have the analytic tools and expertise to
    assist you in evaluating DOD personnel and training readiness across
    the spectrum of challenges presented by the current strategic
    environment--from low intensity, gray-zone conflicts to protracted,
    high-intensity fights with major-power rivals? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. There are always ways to improve how we analyze data and
    assess readiness. If confirmed, I will continue ongoing efforts to
    develop a data-informed decision-making tool, one that will take a
    strategic level view of readiness, and will help clarify impacts of
    policy and resourcing decisions on readiness and modernization over the
    long term. I would seek to increase the role that the ASD(Readiness)
    plays in the Department's resource allocation process to ensure funding
    for readiness is appropriately balanced with other priorities, such as
    modernization.
                              readiness monitoring
        Question. Section 117 of title 10, U.S. Code, directed the
    Department of Defense (DOD) to ``establish a comprehensive readiness
    reporting system for the Department of Defense.'' This led to the
    creation of the Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS). Initially,
    each Military Department established its own service-specific DRRS. But
    the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
    prohibited any further expenditure of funds for the development of
    service-specific systems, and required transition to single system--
    DRRS-Strategic--by 2020.
        In your view, does the current readiness reporting system
    accurately and reliably collect and display the information necessary
    to establish that our forces are not only ``ready'' but ``Ready for
    What?''?
        Answer. The Defense Readiness Reporting System--Strategic (DRRS-S)
    presents valuable insight into the readiness of the Military Services
    and Combatant Commanders to meet specified missions. I understand that
    the Semi-Annual Readiness Reports to Congress use that DRRS-S
    information to display it within the ``Ready for what?'' context from
    the Military Department and Military Services. Going forward, however,
    the ``Ready for what?'' context could capture a broader range of
    potential contexts--from low intensity, gray-zone conflicts to
    protracted, high-intensity fights, to provide a better sense of our
    strategic readiness for many or all likely scenarios.
        Question. What is your understanding of the responsibility you will
    have, if confirmed, for the operation and evolution of DRRS?
        Answer. If confirmed, the Defense Readiness Reporting System--
    Strategic (DRRS-S) will be a significant part of my portfolio and I
    will have the responsibility to oversee the development, operation,
    sustainment, and modernization of it. As such, if confirmed I will work
    to ensure DRRS-S continues to evolve to meet the needs of the
    Department to provide leadership with timely and accurate, data-driven
    strategic and operational level readiness assessments, through sound
    data analytics using authoritative data sources, in order to inform
    policy and programmatic decisions.
        Question. How satisfied are you with the current utility and usage
    of DRRS in informing the development or update the NDS? Please explain
    your answer.
        Answer. I believe the Department's readiness reporting system
    should continually evolve to meet the needs of the Department and its
    overseers in order to provide timely and accurate, data-driven
    strategic and operational level readiness assessments which can inform
    policy decisions and strategic documents. If confirmed, I will work
    with my counterparts in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
    for Policy to determine how the Department's readiness reporting system
    can help inform National Defense Strategy development.
        Question. How satisfied are you with the current utility and usage
    of DRRS in informing the Secretary of Defense's development of the
    defense planning guidance pursuant to section 113(g) of title 10?
        Answer. I believe the Department's readiness reporting system
    should continually evolve to meet the needs of the Department in order
    to provide timely and accurate, data-driven strategic and operational
    level readiness assessments which can inform policy, programming, and
    budgeting decisions. If confirmed, I will work with my counterparts in
    the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to determine
    how the Department's readiness reporting system can help inform the
    Defense Planning Guidance.
        Question. How satisfied are you with the current utility and usage
    of DRRS in informing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff's
    development of the National Military Strategy?
        Answer. I believe the Department's readiness reporting system
    should continually evolve to meet the needs of the Department in order
    to provide timely and accurate, data-driven strategic and operational
    level readiness assessments which can inform policy decisions and
    strategic documents. If confirmed, I will work with the Chairman of the
    Joint Chiefs of Staff to determine how the Department's readiness
    reporting system can help inform the National Military Strategy.
        Question. How satisfied are you with the current utility and usage
    of DRRS in informing the development and review of Combatant
    Commanders' operational plans and acceptance of risk?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the current DRRS-S
    functionality captures Combatant Commander assessed risk against
    Operational Plans and named operations through consolidated mission
    essential task assessments. If confirmed, I will seek to continually
    evolve this aspect of readiness reporting, working with stakeholders to
    ensure the Department's readiness reporting system is responsive to
    both the Combatant Commanders in deriving risk assessments and to
    senior Departmental leadership in understanding strategic level risks.
        Question. How satisfied are you with the current utility and usage
    of DRRS in informing DOD Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and
    Execution systems to address readiness gaps?
        Answer. It is my understanding that, as currently structured, DRRS-
    S is not configured as a tool to forecast future readiness. If
    confirmed, I will work to evolve the Department's readiness reporting
    system to meet the Department's needs in providing timely and accurate,
    data-driven strategic and operational level readiness assessments which
    could be used to inform the Department's Planning, Programming,
    Budgeting, and Execution systems. I will also continue ongoing efforts
    to develop a data-informed decision-making tool, one that will take a
    strategic level view of readiness, and will help clarify impacts of
    policy and resourcing decisions on readiness and modernization over the
    long term.
        Question. Will you commit, if confirmed, to conducting a review of
    the utility and usage of DRRS--across all domains--and reporting your
    findings and recommendations back to this Committee within 120 days of
    your appointment?
        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would undertake a review of the
    current utility and usage of DRRS and report the findings and
    recommendations back to Congress.
        Question. Recent op-eds by Generals Brown and Berger, Chief of
    Staff of the Air Force and Commandant of the Marine Corps,
    respectively, posited that readiness reporting across DOD should be
    updated. They proposed, ``. . . a broader framework for readiness to
    better integrate elements of current availability, effects across
    combatant commands, future availability and readiness, and
    modernization efforts.''
        How does the current readiness reporting structure integrate the
    four elements to which Generals Brown and Berger referred?
        Answer. I believe there is always opportunity to better understand
    readiness at the enterprise level and to improve how the Department
    assesses readiness. If confirmed, I would work toward developing a
    policy that defines strategic readiness and establishes a framework for
    integrated assessment. This type of assessment would address the
    Generals' concerns about the balance of current availability,
    modernization, and risks. Similarly, if confirmed I am committed to
    continuing ongoing efforts to leverage data from across the Department
    to help improve readiness and risk assessments over the short- and
    long-term.
        Question. Do you agree with their assessment and proposed approach
    to readiness reporting? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I agree we need a more rigorous, data-driven framework that
    is capable of viewing readiness through a strategic lens, incorporating
    longer-term considerations of future availability and modernization
    efforts. If confirmed, I am committed to continuing our consolidation
    and refinement of the Defense Readiness Reporting System--Strategic
    (DRRS-S), DOD's ongoing progress toward digital modernization, and
    incorporation of advanced analytic capabilities.
                     quarterly readiness report to congress
        Question. In your view, does the Quarterly Readiness Report to
    Congress provide the elements of information required to clearly inform
    Congress of the readiness of the joint force, including near-term risks
    and areas where congressional action may be needed?
        Answer. I believe so. I understand that the Department's Semi-
    annual Readiness Report to Congress delivers a report on the current
    state of readiness and the top concerns of the Military Departments and
    Services, and provides information on how the Department is mitigating
    these challenges. Additional reporting requirements enacted through
    National Defense Authorization Act language have expanded the aperture
    for readiness reporting, and highlight additional issues that are
    complementary to operational readiness concerns reported by the
    Military Departments and Services. If confirmed, I am committed to
    working with Congress to ensure that the Semi-annual Readiness Report
    meets the needs of the Members and professional staff.
        Question. Are you aware of readiness information that is currently
    in use within DOD, but that is not currently shared with Congress and
    that would be useful for the exercise of congressional oversight?
    Please explain your answer.
        Answer. The Defense Readiness Reporting System--Strategic (DRRS-S)
    is the system of record for reporting readiness data and as we expand
    our data analytics efforts to incorporate more authoritative data
    sources, additional readiness data will become available. If confirmed,
    I would work with Congress to determine what data and information
    should be included in periodic reporting such as the Semi-Annual
    Readiness Report to Congress to support congressional oversight
    responsibilities.
                     overall readiness of the armed forces
        Question. How do your assessment of the current readiness of the
    Armed Forces?
        Answer. I believe the armed forces of the United States are ready
    to meet the challenges in this environment of strategic competition.
    The Military Services are manned, trained, and equipped to compete, and
    if required, succeed in Operational/Contingency Plans in support of the
    National Defense Strategy.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your roles and
    responsibilities for monitoring the Military Department and Service
    progress toward goals for reset and reconstitution of combat forces and
    equipment?
        Answer. There are multiple interested parties within the Department
    involved in monitoring the Military Departments' and Services' progress
    toward goals for reset and reconstitution of equipment and combat
    forces. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness has the
    responsibility to establish and execute policy, oversight, and guidance
    for strategic and operational readiness across the Department. If
    confirmed, I will execute these responsibilities by working with all
    stakeholders to ensure that impacts of reset and reconstitution on
    readiness equities are identified and appropriately addressed.
        Question. What is your understanding of the timeline on which the
    Department will restore readiness, and the specific shortfalls that
    will require the longest investment of time and money?
        Answer. I have not been privy to the most current data that would
    inform this response. If confirmed, however, I am committed to finding
    out what specific shortfalls will require the most time and money, and
    then lead the Readiness team to provide recommendations to work-down
    this list in priority order. If confirmed, I also commit to keeping the
    Congress informed through the Semi-Annual Report to Congress.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you plan to restore full spectrum
    readiness and on what timelines?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Military Departments
    and Military Services and the Joint Staff to ensure progress made thus
    far in building full spectrum readiness does not erode. The Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Readiness maintains readiness metrics with
    established milestones to measure progress across the Military
    Departments and Military Services. If confirmed, I will continue to
    improve the Department's ability to assess readiness through improved
    readiness data collection and analytics to develop readiness indicators
    that can identify readiness challenges before they become an issue.
        Question. In recent years, the term ``readiness'' has come to mean
    many things to different stakeholders, in a variety of contexts.
        What is your definition of ``readiness''?
        Answer. As currently defined, I look at readiness from the
    perspective of ``operational readiness,'' defined in the DOD Dictionary
    of Military and Associated Terms as ``the capability of a unit/
    formation, ship, weapon system, or equipment to perform the missions or
    functions for which it is organized or designed.'' However, I believe
    the Department must expand its thinking and gear its assessments toward
    strategic-level readiness spanning the short- and long-term, gauging
    whether the Department possesses the amount of ``readiness'' to meet
    the challenges and objectives outlined in the President's Interim
    National Security Strategic
                  guidance, and the national defense strategy.
        Question. In your view, would there be value in establishing a
    standardized DOD-wide definition of ``readiness''? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would lead the effort to establish a
    standardized definition of ``readiness.'' I would work to establish a
    standard definition that views readiness from the strategic level,
    across echelon and timeframes, and focus the Department on building the
    kind of readiness that postures DOD for success in meeting objectives
    outlined in the President's Interim National Security Strategic
    Guidance, and the National Defense Strategy.
        Question. What is your understanding of the degree to which units
    are completing all Military Department and Combatant Commander-mandated
    training before deploying?
        Answer. It is my understanding that DOD policy requires that the
    Secretaries of the Military Departments to execute pre-deployment
    training to satisfy theater-entry training requirements. Before
    deploying forces, they are to ensure units are trained and ready and
    must notify the relevant Combatant Commander of any requirements that
    their servicemembers and units will not be able to fulfill before
    deployment. If confirmed, I would assess how well our current readiness
    reporting systems account for mitigations taken by commanders to meet
    deployment timelines (e.g., conducting required training while underway
    and in-transit to the theater of operations).
                             monitoring deployments
        Question. Current DOD policy is to set rotational deployment goals
    for both Active and Reserve component servicemembers. However, some
    service force elements are deploying more frequently than DOD policy
    intends.
        If confirmed, what mitigation efforts would you propose to deal
    with the high pace of operations, particularly for high-demand, low-
    density force elements that deploy more frequently?
        Answer. The Department must balance sustainable readiness to meet
    today's challenges while also modernizing the Joint Force and
    preserving readiness to respond in the future if needed. To do this,
    the Department must judiciously manage the availability and readiness
    of those high-demand, low-density force elements that are critical in
    both day-to-day competition and in wartime. If confirmed, I would
    monitor and assess readiness impacts to those force elements to prevent
    impacts to their ability to respond to crisis. I would work across the
    DOD to investigate mitigation strategies, including building additional
    capacity, pursuing modernization, exploring alternative capabilities,
    and considering Active/Reserve component mix.
        Question. What steps would you take, if confirmed as the ASD for
    Readiness to ensure that the Military Departments deploy servicemembers
    in accordance with established rotational goals, or to adjust
    deployment and dwell policy, as appropriate? Please address both the
    Active and Reserve components in your response.
        Answer. I understand the Department has clearly established both
    its goals and ``redlines'' for deployment-to-dwell (D2D) and
    mobilization-to-dwell (M2D) for the Active and Reserve components,
    respectively. I support the current policy of a 1:3 goal and 1:2
    ``limit'' for D2D and a 1:5 goal/1:4 ``redline'' for M2D. As the Joint
    Staff develops and proposes changes to Global Force Management
    policies, and actions are taken to deploy units, I will, if confirmed,
    ensure the Military Departments and Services provide solid, data-
    informed rationale for the few instances where they may need the
    Secretary's approval to break the M2D or D2D redlines, if all other
    proposed sourcing solutions fail.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to
    collect and analyze reliable data to measure servicemember ``time
    away,'' consistent with Comptroller General recommendations in the
    report ``Military Readiness: Clear Policy and Reliable Data Would Help
    DOD Better Manage Service Members' Time Away from Home'' (GAO-18-253)?
        Answer. I agree with the Comptroller General's recommendation and,
    if confirmed, will ensure that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Readiness provides all information and support needed to establish a
    consistent and reliable Department-wide personnel tempo system. Part of
    this support could include revision to current policy to establish a
    consistent set of standards and definitions across the Department.
                      force safety and occupational health
        Question. The ASD (Readiness) is the DOD Designated Agency Safety
    and Health Official and oversees DOD Occupational Safety and
    Occupational Health (OSHA) policies. The calendar year 2019 DOD
    Occupational Safety & Health Reports states, ``DOD has some of the
    lowest civilian employee injury and lost time case rates among all
    federal agencies.'' But despite a lower overall case rate, a higher
    percentage of DOD OSHA cases were ``lost time'' cases compared to the
    Federal government overall. These lost time cases are more significant
    and disruptive. Although DOD comprises 26 percent of the total Federal
    civilian workforce, it accounted for 31 percent of OSHA fatalities.
        Specifically, what is the value added provided by the
    ASD(Readiness) in the domain operational safety and occupational
    health?
        Answer. I understand that the ASD(Readiness) provides an enterprise
    perspective of safety and occupational health, promulgating DOD-wide
    guidance, supporting enterprise-wide analysis, and gathering the safety
    community to share best practices and lessons learned. If confirmed, I
    will work to ensure goals and objectives for reducing and eliminating
    occupational accidents, injuries, and illnesses are met and evaluated
    to ensure that the DOD occupational safety and health program remains
    effective at all operational levels. I will also work with the Military
    Departments to ensure compliance with the safety and occupational
    health policies that I would oversee. I will ensure safety programs
    remain an integrated part of daily operations and activities, maintain
    awareness of specific risk areas, and oversee ongoing efforts to
    mitigate risk across the Department.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you use the forum provided by the
    Defense Safety Oversight Council to address safety challenges that
    present across the force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will use the Department's senior safety
    governance forum to set the tone for promoting a safety culture
    throughout the Department. I will institute a culture that ensures safe
    decisions in both high risk situations and daily operations and
    activities. The Defense Safety Oversight Council forum must possess the
    right membership with the right experience to effectively influence any
    safety challenge that may arise. If confirmed, I will lead by example--
    safety must start at the top and be woven into the culture of every
    organization.
        Question. What are the most critical issues you would you identify
    for the Council to tackle?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments and
    Services to implement, as appropriate, the recommendations provided by
    the National Commission on Military Aviation Safety to address aviation
    mishaps and focus on other high risk areas such as motor vehicle
    safety. I will ensure safety data is accurate, reliable, timely, and
    informative to support resource and policy decisions. Additionally, I
    will also review safety-related funding throughout the Department to
    ensure adequate resources are available to support safety programs and
    technologies.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific steps would you plan to take
    to reduce DOD's lost time rates and workplace fatalities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to understand the issues
    impacting civilian workplace lost time and fatalities, and provide
    policy guidance and oversight to reduce hazards that result in lost
    time. To fully understand what is causing lost time and workplace
    fatalities, I will work to ensure the Military Departments and Services
    improve safety data standards, and include safety information in all
    data modernization efforts. I will regularly review safety data and
    trends, and collaborate with the Military Services on specific risk
    areas. This informed approach will ensure we can mitigate the
    appropriate risk to occupational injury, illness, or potential
    fatality.
        Question. What are the most common causes of DOD workplace
    fatalities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments and
    Services to understand the primary causes of workplace fatalities
    amongst our civilian workforce. It would be my responsibility to
    provide oversight, policy, and guidance of all workplace safety
    programs and I will seek to ensure preventable fatalities are
    effectively mitigated though clear communication and hazard abatement.
                          voluntary education programs
        Question. Do you believe DOD's Voluntary Education Programs
    contribute to military recruiting and retention, and to military
    readiness?
        Answer. Yes, I believe the Tuition Assistance (TA) program offers
    tangible progress toward personal growth expectations and thus
    contributes to military recruiting and retention. It is also my
    understanding that there are positive correlations with promotions,
    retention, and successful civilian transition. If confirmed, I will
    ensure that the tuition assistance continues to provide servicemembers
    the opportunity to achieve their respective professional and personal
    educational goals.
        Question. By what metrics does DOD assess and evaluate the
    contribution of such programs to recruiting, retention, and readiness?
        Answer. I understand that DOD policy allows each Military Service
    to employ TA to provide benefits and incentives that contribute to
    recruitment, retention, professional development, force management, and
    overall Military Service budget priorities as they judge best, and each
    Service measures their return on their investment differently. It is
    critical to ensure there is an enterprise perspective to share best
    practices, and review return on investment in common terms. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that DOD has the information necessary to
    assess and evaluate these programs.
        Question. Do you believe such metrics adequate to discern a causal
    relationship between these programs and desired recruiting and
    retention outcomes?
        Answer. Yes, I understand that education opportunities have been,
    and continue to be, a top reason cited by respondents in their decision
    to join the military. Educational pursuits conducted off-duty
    contribute to the readiness of the force, as education prepares
    individuals to think critically and develop leadership skills.
        Question. Should military service obligations incurred through
    participation in the Tuition Assistance Program run consecutively or
    concurrently with other incurred service obligations, in your view?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing the issue of
    consecutive or concurrent application of service obligations. If
    confirmed, I will ensure the service obligation requirements for the
    tuition assistance program do not have an adverse impact on
    servicemember retention, morale, or abridged length of Service.
        Question. Does DOD receive an adequate return on its investment in
    Tuition Assistance?
        Answer. I believe that these programs are critical to providing
    incentives for service, enabling servicemembers to grow during their
    service, encouraging continued service, and benefitting the Department
    by encouraging a more educated workforce. If confirmed, I will ensure
    that DOD has the information necessary to assess and evaluate the
    return on investment for these programs.
        Question. What is your view of the adequacy of the Department's
    mechanisms and processes for protecting servicemembers seeking to make
    use of Tuition Assistance Program funding from marketing by educational
    institutions that offer academic programs of dubious rigor and
    applicability?
        Answer. I understand that the Department has developed significant
    oversight mechanisms with provisions that help to mitigate potential
    noncompliance with its policies and the provisions of the Memorandum of
    Understanding (MOU) that is required to participate in the TA Program.
    If confirmed, I will ensure that the Department's processes are
    sufficiently protecting servicemembers from predatory practices and
    focused marketing by educational institutions.
        Question. What progress has the Department made in identifying and
    leveraging credentialing programs, both to enhance a servicemember's
    ability to perform his/her official duties, and to qualify the member
    for meaningful civilian employment on separation from the military?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department has made genuine
    strides in strengthening the credentialing and apprenticeship to
    support these goals. If confirmed, I will continue the progress being
    made to build on and leverage the Department's credentialing programs
    to support mission readiness and successful transition to civilian
    life.
                        professional military education
        Question. The 2018 NDS asserts that Professional Military Education
    (PME) has stagnated--that it focuses on the accomplishment of mandatory
    credit at the expense of lethality and ingenuity.
        What do you perceive to be the role of the ASD(Readiness) in
    enhancing DOD's PME system to ensure that it fosters the education and
    development of a cadre of strategic thinkers and planners with the
    intellectual acumen, military leadership proficiency, and sound
    judgment to lead the Joint Force in a globally integrated, multi-domain
    fight?
        Answer. Military education should emphasize intellectual
    leadership, military professionalism, and independence of action in the
    art and science of warfighting to develop intellectual agility required
    for success within the profession of arms. If confirmed, I will ensure
    the Department's learning opportunities focus on outcomes and reflect
    the priorities of the national security and national defense strategic
    guidance. If confirmed, I will also ensure the military education
    system includes assessments and evaluations to measure development and
    performance, and to support continuous improvement of the education
    system.
        Question. How is the ASD(Readiness) ensuring that officers who have
    completed the Secretary of Defense Executive Fellows program are
    identified and tracked, with a view to ensuring that the knowledge and
    experience they glean from the fellowship can be applied in follow-on
    tours of duty?
        Answer. Managing talent is critical to ensuring we are getting the
    most out of the investments we make in our workforce and
    servicemembers. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Department is
    sufficiently tracking individuals following assignments to key
    developmental programs, like the Secretary of Defense Executive Fellows
    program
        Question. If confirmed, what more would you do to improve the
    utility of this program?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that DOD Components have a plan
    to match servicemembers' follow-on and subsequent career assignments to
    areas that use the special skills acquired in their fellowship
    assignment.
                                training ranges
        Question. DOD is fielding Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in
    greater numbers, which has created a strong demand for access to
    national airspace to conduct training and for other purposes. The
    demand has quickly exceeded the current airspace available for military
    operations.
        What is your understanding and assessment of the DOD's efforts to
    develop a comprehensive training strategy for the Department's UAS, to
    include identifying any shortfalls associated with current policies,
    education, stationing plans, and simulator technologies?
        Answer. I understand that there are a number of efforts underway in
    the Department to incorporate UAS into the training ecosystem, but at
    this time I do not have the details to assess the Department's efforts
    in this area. If confirmed, I will review and assess these ongoing
    training efforts, including identifying shortfalls and can brief the
    committee at their request.
        Question. In your view, what infrastructure improvements must be
    made to ensure that DOD training ranges are constructed and equipped to
    provide meaningful training for fifth generation aircraft?
        Answer. It is critical to ensure the Department's training range
    capabilities are able to support training for next generation platforms
    and technology. These capabilities must include live, virtual, and
    constructive entities to enable training in the full range of military
    operations under multi-domain conditions. If confirmed, I will continue
    to pursue training and range capabilities required to enable training
    for strategic competition with near-peer competitors.
                            relations with congress
        Question. What are your views on the state of the relationship
    between the ASD for Readiness and the Senate Armed Services Committee
    in particular, and with Congress in general?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the ASD(Readiness) maintains a
    positive working relationship with the Senate Armed Services Committee
    in particular, and with Congress in general, but I welcome the
    Committee's view on the state of the relationship.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
    productive and mutually beneficial relationship with Congress?
        Answer. Congress is a key partner in ensuring that the Department
    has forces that are ready to deter war and ensure our nation's
    security. If confirmed, I will maintain an open dialogue with the
    Congress on all readiness issues to ensure that the information the
    Department provides through the Semi-Annual Readiness Report to
    Congress, and other reports and engagements, provides the Congress with
    the information necessary to perform their oversight functions.
                               sexual harassment
        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.
        What is your assessment of the current climate regarding sexual
    harassment and gender discrimination in the DOD?
        Answer. The data from the last survey indicates that far too many
    civilian employees are experiencing harassment and discrimination. I
    also am aware that, since this survey fielded, the Department has
    issued a number of policies that specifically address harassment by
    servicemembers and civilian employees. I think having policies such as
    these are critical and, if confirmed, would work to ensure they are
    fully implemented and effective.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
    receive or become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment or
    discrimination from an employee of the Office of the ASD(Readiness)?
        Answer. I have always taken every complaint of this nature
    extremely seriously and will continue to do so if confirmed. I would
    ensure the individual not only understood the options of redress
    available to them within the Department, depending on the specifics of
    the incident, but I would also ensure the individual has access to
    supportive resources throughout the process. As a leader, I am
    responsible for the climate under me and would work to ensure all can
    serve safely and honorably.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this Committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of the Congress receive
    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 the 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,
    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, and 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 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 form
    retaliation any military members, 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 Gary C. Peters
                                  skillbridge
        1. Senator Peters. Ms. Skelly, the International Brotherhood of
    Electrical Workers (IBEW), Teamsters, Helmets to Hardhats, and several
    other Skillbridge partners have invested significant time and resources
    in providing a direct entry program for our servicemembers leaving
    Active Duty. This has not only provided those organizations with
    exceptional apprentices, it has also provided the transitioning
    servicemembers with a career and job immediately upon separation. Your
    predecessor did not value Skillbridge and other similar programs, if
    confirmed, how will you approach initiatives such as Skillbridge?
        Ms. Skelly. If confirmed, I will absolutely support the success of
    the SkillBridge program and its relationships with industry, organized
    labor, non-profit organizations, and other governmental agencies. These
    win-win relationships with industry and the Department of Labor provide
    increased opportunities for our transitioning Servicemembers to gain
    valuable civilian work experience and follow-on employment upon
    separation from the military. I am committed to doing all I can to
    assist our Veterans as they transition to their post-military careers
    as Government civilian employees or in the private sector.
                                   __________
                Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
                           china--afghan relationship
                             civilian cyber reserve
        2. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Skelly, do you believe that a
    cybersecurity reserve corps would meet the intent of the recommendation
    of the Commission on Military, National, and Public Service?
        Ms. Skelly. Expanding access to talent with cybersecurity skills is
    critical to mitigating mission-critical skills gaps and protecting our
    most vital assets. As a former Commissioner of the National Commission
    on Military, National, and Public Service, I do believe that a
    cybersecurity reserve corps would, depending on the details of the
    proposal, meet the intent of the Commission's recommendation regarding
    such a capability. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues across
    the Department, including in civilian personnel management, to ensure
    that we are exploring all available means to assess and improve the
    readiness of our cyber workforce.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Ms. Shawn G. Skelly follows:]

        [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Ms. Shawn G. Skelly, which was
    transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

        [GRAPHIC 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 Ms. Shawn G.
    Skelly in connection with her nomination follows:]

        [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                    ------

        [The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
    questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
    the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
    are contained in the committee's executive files.]

        [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Ms. Shawn G. Skelly was reported to the
    Senate by Chairman Reed on June 22, 2021, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on July 22, 2021.]
                                     ______

        [Prepared questions submitted to Ms. Meredith A. Berger by
    Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                           duties and qualifications
        Question. What is your understanding of the duties and
    responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy,
    Installations, and Environment (ASN(EI&E))?
        Answer. The ASN(EI&E) leads policy for Navy and Marine Corps energy
    programs, real property, installation resilience, environmental
    protection afloat and ashore, safety and occupational health, and
    housing. In addition, the position is responsible for overseeing
    closures and realignments of installations as directed by Congress.
        Question. What background and experience do you possess that
    qualify you to perform the duties and functions of the ASN(EI&E)?
        Answer. I have served in various positions in State and Federal
    government, including positions in the Department of Defense, the
    Environmental Protection Agency, and the Office of the Florida Chief
    Financial Officer. Currently, I work in industry, at Microsoft with the
    Defending Democracy Program. I have also worked at the Mabus group, and
    with Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. I
    am very familiar with the Department of the Navy (DON), its mission and
    processes, having previously served as the Deputy Chief of Staff to the
    Secretary of the Navy, advising him on the formulation, prioritization,
    and execution of Department-wide strategies, policies, plans, and
    standards. I have also worked specifically on environmental matters,
    environmental justice, climate, energy, housing, and finance in my
    previously-listed positions.
        Question. In particular, what management and leadership experience
    do you possess that you would apply to your service as ASN(EI&E), if
    confirmed?
        Answer. Having served in both the Department of Defense (DOD) and
    the Department of the Navy (DON) in policy positions, I understand the
    management and leadership required of senior leaders, the importance of
    effective communication and collaboration, and the necessity of setting
    and meeting measurable goals. Many years of serving as a manager and
    leader in government at both the State and Federal level, and in
    private industry have given me the opportunity to lead large
    organizations and observe the leadership of others in similar
    capacities. If confirmed, I will lead as a hands-on contemplative
    Assistant Secretary, one that works collaboratively within the
    Department and externally to advance the energy, installations, safety,
    and environmental needs of the Department, its personnel, their
    families, and the communities that support it.
        Question. Do you believe that there are actions you need to take to
    enhance your ability to serve as the ASN(EI&E)?
        Answer. I am confident I possess the requisite management
    experience, analytical skills, and leadership qualities required to be
    the ASN(EI&E). I have always educated myself on the specific duties and
    issues associated with each new position I have held in order to carry
    out my responsibilities more effectively. If confirmed, I will dedicate
    myself to leading the ASN(EI&E) organization, working closely with the
    civilian and military leadership within the DOD, and incorporating the
    collective knowledge and experience of the dedicated professionals who
    work in the Office of the ASN(EI&E) and subordinate commands. I will
    also continue to build and enhance working relationships with members
    of other Government Agencies, Congress and their staffs, private
    industry, academia, civil society, local communities, and Tribes.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to develop and
    sustain an open, transparent, and productive relationship between your
    office and Congress, and the Senate Armed Services Committee, in
    particular?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to promote open and frequent
    dialog with Congress and the Senate Members as well as the professional
    staffers who support the Senate Armed Services Committee.
                                major challenges
        Question. In your view, what are the major challenges that confront
    the ASN(EI&E)?
        Answer. In general, the major challenges facing the ASN(EI&E) are
    ensuring the resiliency of our installations, ensuring effective,
    environmentally-protective, and safe areas in which to test and train,
    and providing the necessary infrastructure to support military members
    and their families.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what actions would you take,
    in what order of priority, and on what timeline--to address each of
    these challenges?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with Congress, the Acting
    Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) and the
    Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC), and the Office of the Secretary
    of Defense to prioritize and proactively undertake the actions
    necessary to meet Departmental challenges.
                        civilian control of the military
        In its 2018 report, Providing for the Common Defense, the National
    Defense Strategy Commission cautioned, ``there is an imbalance in
    civil-military relations on critical issues of strategy development and
    implementation. Civilian voices appear relatively muted on issues at
    the center of U.S. defense and national security policy.''
        Question. Do you agree with this assessment?
        Answer. I am not in a position to agree or disagree with the
    specifics of this assessment as it relates to the DON. I understand and
    support the concept of civilian control of the armed forces and the
    subordination of military power to civil authorities. I also understand
    the value of appropriately balanced civilian and military advice on the
    formulation of U.S. defense and national security policy.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure inclusion of the
    ASN(EI&E) in the discussion, debate, and resolution of Department of
    the Navy, defense, and national security issues?
        Answer. I'd immediately seek to establish a positive working
    relationship with my fellow Assistant Secretaries of the Navy, the
    Under Secretary of the Navy, the CNO and the CMC, and the Secretary of
    the Navy. In addition, I'd look for ways to partner with counterparts
    within the United States Air Force and Army, and I would maintain
    frequent and transparent communications between my office and our OSD
    counterparts.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
    that your tenure as ASN(EI&E) epitomizes the fundamental requirement
    for civilian control of the Armed Forces embedded in the U.S.
    Constitution and other laws?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will diligently and arduously fulfill my
    Constitutional and statutory responsibilities to exercise control and
    oversight over the policies and duties of the ASN(EI&E) portfolio.
                         2018 national defense strategy
        The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) outlines that the United
    States faces a rising China, an aggressive Russia, and the continued
    threat from rogue regimes and global terrorism.
        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. I expect a forthcoming new defense strategy will modify the
    lines of effort in the 2018 National Defense Strategy to align with the
    administration's Interim National Security Strategic Guidance. However,
    we know peer and near-peer strategic competitors such as China and
    Russia continue to be critical and enduring threats in the global
    security environment, while still contending with threats from Iran,
    North Korea and terrorist organizations. We also know that climate-
    related disasters are especially costly to our defense budgets and have
    degraded the DoD's ability to operate and train at and from some
    installations. At the same time, climate change is opening up the
    Arctic Region to competition. These climate related issues, and
    opportunities, are critical to our national defense in the current
    strategic environment.
        Question. How do you believe the Office of the ASN(EI&E) directly
    supports the NDS?
        Answer. The readiness of our installations and infrastructure
    directly support our operational forces' ability to compete and prevail
    in great power competition. Our Navy ships, submarines and aircraft as
    well as our Marine Corps forces train from our bases, deploy from our
    bases, and resupply from our bases. Additionally, our installations
    provide support to military family members, whether through housing,
    health care, and childcare; or, through employment assistance training
    and transition services.
        Question. What are the key areas in which the Navy and Marine Corps
    must improve to provide the necessary capabilities and capacity to the
    Joint Force to prevail in great power competition and potential
    conflict with China?
        Answer. The rapid pace of China's military modernization and
    expansion, as well as their increasing aggression in the INDO-PACIFIC
    region and ability to threaten our Homeland, are challenges we must
    face straight on. If confirmed, I will work with the Navy and Marine
    Corps Installations teams to ensure our networks of bases are ready to
    support the operational and Joint Force across the spectrum from
    competition to potential conflict with China. If confirmed, ensuring
    our installations have the required capacity and capabilities our
    warfighters need will be a top priority. We know the United States
    needs more resilient and distributed posture in the Indo-Pacific Area
    of Operations to counter China. If confirmed, I would work with the
    Navy and Marine Corps teams to review current posture to support
    logistical and infrastructure requirements to determine where strategic
    investments will be needed in the future and what our installations
    teams can do to support capacity building and cooperation with allies
    and partners.
        Question. What Department of the Navy infrastructure and military
    construction investments would be required, in your view, to achieve
    these improvements?
        Answer. The DON uses strategy-driven and resource-informed defense
    planning. While I cannot provide an informed assessment yet, if
    confirmed, I would continuously assess the requirements for new or
    additional infrastructure and military construction investments to
    ensure our installations support existing and future operational
    capabilities and have the capacity needed to compete and prevail in
    potential conflict with China.
        Question. What are the key areas in which the Navy and Marine Corps
    must improve to provide the necessary capabilities and capacity to the
    Joint Force to prevail in great power competition and potential
    conflict with Russia?
        Answer. As we have seen recently in the news, cyber-attacks on
    critical infrastructure attributed to Russian hackers continue to
    increase in scope and severity. We must continue to proactively improve
    cybersecurity and mission assurance at our installations and ensure
    critical infrastructure is resilient. There are logistics challenges in
    the European theater as well, related to competition with Russia. This
    is an area where Congress has provided significant European Deterrence
    Initiative funding to address deficiencies and gaps. If confirmed, I
    would conduct a more detailed review of where our Navy and Marine Corps
    installations and energy team could assist the broader departmental
    efforts in this area.
        Question. What Department of the Navy infrastructure and military
    construction investments would be required, in your view, to achieve
    these improvements?
        Answer. While I cannot provide a fully informed assessment on this
    at present, future investments in infrastructure will surely be needed
    to combat increased cyberattacks. If confirmed, this is one area I
    would want to assess for valid requirements related to future
    investments.
                                     safety
        The Department of the Navy continues to experience non-combat
    related injuries, fatalities, and mishaps that undermine its ability to
    execute mission-critical taskings, even when its sailors and marines
    are successfully trained.
        Question. What are your ideas for improving mishap, hazard, and
    near-miss reporting and tracking?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to leverage the solid safety
    and occupational health framework that has been established through
    collaboration with the Naval Safety Center and U.S. Marine Corps Safety
    Division. This teamwork and partnership extends to the Fleets, Echelon
    II and Type commands, and I will take full advantage of this synergy to
    further enhance the Safety and Occupational Health portfolio. Further,
    the DON fielded the Risk Management Information (RMI) System in August
    2020 through a partnership with the Air Force. If confirmed, I will
    continue to enable this capability through effective Streamlined
    Incident Reporting, advanced Analysis and Dissemination and solid
    Safety Program Management.
        Question. What specific steps would you take, if confirmed, to
    ensure that all Department of the Navy personal are protected from
    coercion, discrimination, or reprisal for reporting mishaps, hazards,
    and near misses?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to emphasize an environment
    where reporting of near miss events, hazards and mishaps is encouraged.
    The identification and mitigation of safety and occupational health
    hazards before unplanned outcomes occur cultivates effective risk
    management, and this detailed information facilitates a more proactive
    safety and occupational health program by addressing areas of concern
    proactively. Additionally, if confirmed, I would continue to emphasize
    and promote SECNAV Safety Awareness Campaign Themes that highlight the
    importance of reporting to ensure we are addressing issues at the
    onset. I would ensure that all members of the Navy and Marine Corps
    comply with the requirements in the Secretary of the Navy instruction
    for Military Whistleblower protection.
        Question. In your view, how can available data, current systems,
    and technology be applied to predict safety risks, particularly as
    regards sailor and marine off-duty behavior and activities?
        Answer. The Department is focusing on safety education, tracking
    and oversight to reduce both mishaps and non-combat fatalities,
    including those occurring off-duty. I understand the Department
    recently deployed a new mishap reporting system, Risk Management
    Information Streamlined Incident Reporting that supports better
    capturing of information and data analysis to identify trends for
    corrective action.
        Question. If confirmed, by what principles would you be guided in
    executing the ASN(EI&E)'s role as Program Decision Principal Advisor
    for Safety for Acquisition Program Decision Meetings, Program Reviews,
    and Gate Reviews?
        Answer. Safety in acquisition is vital to ensuring protection of
    our personnel, the environment and material assets through the entire
    acquisition lifecycle--from initial design to disposal. If confirmed, I
    will work closely with ASN(RD&A) to ensure that safety is not
    sacrificed for the sake of expediency of the acquisition process. This
    would be accomplished by addressing barriers and investigating
    opportunities for streamlining and resolving system safety and
    environmental challenges.
                    defense policy review initiative (dpri)
        First launched by the United States and Japan in 2002, the Defense
    Policy Review Initiative (DPRI) aimed to adapt the U.S.-Japan alliance
    to the dramatically changed threat in the security environment of the
    21st century.
        Question. What is your understanding of the status of the
    Department of the Navy's implementation of DPRI?
        Answer. My understanding is that overall, the program is moving
    forward well and construction has recently increased along with many
    recent contract awards this fiscal year. I believe that the goal for
    Okinawa-based marines to relocate to Guam is on track and will begin in
    the first half of 2025. I understand that the program is still on track
    to meet the Department of Defense goal to improve the Indo-Pacific
    defense posture.
        Question. If confirmed to be ASN(EI&E), what would be your role in
    DPRI implementation and execution?
        Answer. If confirmed, my role in DPRI implementation will be to
    oversee the progress of the program and to update Department of Navy
    policies as needed to keep the program on schedule. To support this
    effort, I will review current infrastructure planning and design
    efforts, construction progress and procedures, and the implementation
    of policies regarding environmental and cultural resources.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    address munitions of explosive concern on Guam and in the Commonwealth
    of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) to mitigate adverse effects to
    DPRI-related construction cost and schedule impacts?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Department of Navy has made
    significant progress in discovering and safely removing remaining
    unexploded ordnance from World War II in Guam and CNMI. Continuing this
    effort is of the utmost importance. If confirmed, I will continue to
    ensure that the discovery and removal of unexploded ordnance on Guam
    and CNMI is completed safely while keeping the DPRI program on track
    for completion.
        Question. What is your understanding of current situation as it
    pertains to cost overruns and delays?
        Answer. My understanding is that there have been schedule delays
    and cost increases due to various items including unexploded ordnance
    clearance, COVID-19 impacts to construction, workforce employment,
    environmental concerns, and preservation of cultural resources. While I
    do not have specifics on every project yet, I know the Department of
    Navy met a major milestone with the recent establishment of Marine
    Corps Base Camp Blaz in October 2020, and construction is still on
    track to start moving marines from Okinawa to Guam in the first half of
    2025 to honor the United States agreement with the Government of Japan.
    If confirmed, I will create policy that mitigates delays and cost
    increases to ensure the program remains on schedule in a manner that
    respects the agreement with Japan, and the people of Guam and CNMI.
                   military housing privatization initiative
        In the Fiscal Year 1996 NDAA, Congress established the Military
    Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI), providing DOD with the
    authority to obtain private-sector financing and management to repair,
    renovate, construct, and operate military housing. DOD has since
    privatized 99 percent of its domestic housing. In 2019, the Senate
    Armed Services Committee held three hearings to address concerns voiced
    by military families living in privatized housing that the program had
    been grossly mismanaged by certain of the private partners, that
    military and chain of command oversight were non-existent, and that in
    speaking out about the appalling condition of the quarters in which
    they lived, they were opening themselves and their military sponsor to
    reprisal.
        Question. What are your impressions of the overall quality and
    sufficiency of Navy and Marine Corps family housing, both in the United
    States and overseas?
        Answer. I have read testimony and news articles describing poor
    quality and experiences in privatized housing. However, I have not had
    any recent personal experience with Department of Navy privatized
    housing. If confirmed, I will prioritize safe, quality, well-maintained
    housing and fair treatment from Military Housing Privatization
    Initiative (MHPI) companies for our sailors, marines, and their
    families.
        Question. What is your view of the current goals and structure of
    the Department of the Navy's military housing privatization program?
        Answer. Military members and their families deserve safe, quality,
    well-maintained housing and fair treatment from Military Housing
    Privatization Initiative (MHPI) companies.
        Question. What have the Navy and Marine Corps done to address
    sailor, marine, and family member concerns regarding the untenable
    living conditions prevalent in certain privatized housing locales?
        Answer. The Department of Navy has increased the number of
    government personnel overseeing privatized housing, introduced online
    work order tracking tools, strengthened the involvement of the
    installation commander in housing oversight, and worked with the
    Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) companies to make the
    Tenant Bill of Rights available to our sailors, marines, and their
    families.
        Question. If confirmed as the ASN(EI&E), what specifically would
    you do to ensure accountability in Navy and Marine Corps leaders for
    oversight of the privatized housing program?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure Navy and Marine Corps
    installation commanding officers have the staff, resources and
    authorities they need in order to advocate for military families who
    live in privatized housing.
        Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to improve
    applicable business operations constructs and vest accountability in
    MHPI contractors for strict compliance with the terms of their public-
    private partnership agreements with the Department of the Navy?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review the Department's business
    agreements with the MHPI companies to determine the appropriate
    business operations construct.
        Question. What are your views of the efficacy of the MHPI reforms
    enacted in the Fiscal Year 2020 NDAA, as amended by the NDAA for fiscal
    year 2021?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have the information needed to give
    my views of the efficacy of the NDAA reforms. However, I have read the
    Department of Defense's June 4 announcement on the Tenant Bill of
    Rights, and I am pleased the Department expects all 18 tenant rights to
    be fully available at all installations with privatized housing by the
    end of fiscal year 2021.
        Question. What do you believe to be the root causes of the MHPI
    crisis?
        Answer. At this time, I have not had access to the information
    necessary to identify the root causes of the MHPI crisis. If confirmed,
    I will work with the ASN(EI&E) staff and senior Navy and Marine Corps
    leadership to determine where the program has fallen short and work to
    address those shortfalls.
        Question. Do you believe the Navy has rectified these problems,
    notwithstanding Congress's continued receipt of complaints from
    military families?
        Answer. I believe the Department has worked tirelessly to improve
    privatized housing for our military families over the last few years.
    But there is still much more work to be done.
        Question. If not, what would you do differently to address this
    issue, if confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to seek ways for Department
    leadership to advocate for military families and to give installation
    commanding officers the tools they need to provide oversight of MHPI
    companies.
        Question. What role would you establish for yourself, if confirmed
    to be the ASN(EI&E), in ensuring that the Department of the Navy's use
    of direct hire authority to fill vacancies in military installation
    housing offices results in the timely hire of highly qualified
    individuals to perform these critical duties?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will advocate for direct hire authority and
    other tools that will enable better oversight of privatized housing.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you view and order your
    relationship with the private contractors who own and manage the
    privatized housing agreements with the Navy?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Navy's business agreements
    to understand the ASN(EI&E)'s relationship with the MHPI companies.
        Question. What do you view as your obligations to the ``partners''?
        Answer. I believe the Department's obligations are codified in the
    business agreements with MHPI companies. If confirmed, I will review
    the business agreements to better understand the specific obligations
    the Department and the office of ASN(EI&E) has.
        Question. What do you view as your obligations to the sailors,
    marines, and family members who reside in military housing?
        Answer. Military members and their families deserve safe, quality,
    well-maintained housing and fair treatment from Military Housing
    Privatization Initiative (MHPI) companies.
        Question. If confirmed to be the ASN(EI&E), how would you order
    your relationship with DOD's Chief Housing Officer?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would seek to establish a healthy
    partnership with regular meetings with the DOD Chief Housing Officer.
        Question. What are your views on establishing command
    accountability by having MHPI issues become part of the performance
    evaluations of base commanders and their senior enlisted counterparts?
        Answer. Installation and Command leadership have a responsibility
    to their people and families. If confirmed, I will consult with Navy
    and Marine Corps leadership to determine how this command
    accountability can be best implemented at the base commander and senior
    enlisted leadership level.
        Question. Given the challenges associated with the MHPI, do you
    support the further privatization of Military Service lodging
    facilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would seek the advice from Navy experts on
    the feasibility and advisability of additional housing and lodging
    privatization projects. We must leverage lessons learned from MHPI.
                          base realignment and closure
        In past years, DOD has requested Congressional authorization to
    conduct another Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round.
        Question. Do you believe another BRAC round is necessary? If so,
    why?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will consult with Navy and Marine Corps
    leadership to determine if the Department of Navy would benefit from an
    additional BRAC round.
        Question. Were Congress to authorize another BRAC round, what is
    your understanding of the responsibilities that would be assigned to
    the ASN(EI&E) for formulating BRAC recommendations?
        Answer. If confirmed, and if another BRAC round is authorized, I,
    as the ASN(EI&E), would be responsible for carrying out the
    requirements of the BRAC authorizing language and executing BRAC
    recommendations. If confirmed, I would be the primary liaison with
    Congress, State and local community leaders regarding BRAC actions in
    their jurisdictions.
        Question. How would you undertake to execute these
    responsibilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would look to leverage the Department of
    Navy personnel who are recognized subject matter experts and have
    experience with prior BRAC rounds.
        It has been noted repeatedly that the 2005 BRAC round resulted in
    significant unanticipated implementation costs and saved far less money
    than originally estimated.
        Question. Do you believe such issues could be anticipated and
    addressed suitably in a future BRAC round, and if so, how?
        Answer. I do not have first-hand knowledge of the 2005 BRAC round.
    However, I believe that robust management and oversight controls,
    paired with active communication with Congress and other stakeholders,
    is vital to the success of an initiative like BRAC.
        Question. What steps has the Department of the Navy taken to share
    with the other Military Departments and Services its ``lessons
    learned'' from environmental remediation in support of the
    redevelopment of military bases closed under BRAC--particularly as
    regards the remediation of emerging contaminants?
        Answer. I understand the Department of Navy has a robust
    environmental restoration program and participates in several DOD
    working groups, along with the other Services, to share lessons learned
    regarding environmental remediation successes and challenges.
                   installation modernization and resilience
        Decades of underinvestment in Department of Defense installations
    has led to substantial backlogs in facilities maintenance, while making
    it more difficult for DOD to leverage new technologies that could
    enhance installation efficiency and productivity. Yet, the quality of
    installation resilience directly impacts the entire spectrum of
    military operations--from force development through power projection,
    interoperability with partner nations, and force sustainment--while
    providing an appropriate quality of life for sailors, marines, and
    their families.
        Question. In your view, does the Department of the Navy receive
    adequate funding for its installations? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I understand that the Department of Navy has routinely
    funded facilities sustainment below the Department of Defense's model.
    Additionally, the Navy and Marine Corps is compelled to balance
    investment in current and future infrastructure with today's urgent
    readiness needs, future force requirements and business reforms. At
    this time, I do not have detailed information on the Department's
    specific infrastructure requirements and associated funding
    requirements. If confirmed, I will meet with the commanders of the Navy
    and Marine Corps' installations commands to better understand any
    infrastructure funding shortfalls.
        Question. Do you have any specific plans to leverage infrastructure
    modernization to improve the quality of life for Navy and Marine Corps
    servicemembers and their families?
        Answer. At this time, I do not have a specific plan to leverage
    infrastructure modernization to improve the quality of life of military
    personnel and their families. If confirmed, I will consult with Navy
    and Marine Corps senior leaders to identify specific quality of life
    shortfalls and develop solutions to meet the needs of our sailors,
    marines, and their families.
        Military Construction (MILCON) accounts have failed to see the same
    amount of growth over the last several years compared to other accounts
    such as procurement and research and development.
        Question. If confirmed, what arguments would you advance to
    advocate for additional MILCON dollars during budget builds?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would seek to strengthen the relationship
    of Navy and Marine Corps installations to the lethality and warfighting
    readiness of maritime forces. Our installations are the platforms from
    which we project and sustain our forces. We need modern, resilient, and
    sustainable facilities able to withstand the effects of deliberate and
    directed attacks from our adversaries along with the consequential
    effects of events such as climate change, pandemics, and extreme
    weather.
        The results of past underinvestment in infrastructure is
    particularly acute in naval shipyard facilities. According to the
    Navy's shipyard modernization plan, it may take roughly $1 billion per
    year for 20 years.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize the resourcing of
    Navy shipyard modernization going forward, in light of other competing
    priorities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would partner with the Assistant Secretary
    of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition (ASN(RDA)) to
    ensure the Department is dedicating the resources and oversight
    necessary to improve naval maintenance production through dry dock
    recapitalization, facility layout and optimization, and capital
    equipment and modernization.
        Question. In your view, has the Shipyard Infrastructure
    Optimization Program achieved its objective of streamlining local
    project reviews, resulting in more predictable timelines and solutions
    for shipyard projects?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department has established
    a Program Office to ensure the integration of all elements of the SIOP
    plan. I have not had the opportunity to study the specific elements of
    the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program, but I will do so if
    confirmed.
        Question. If not, how would you adjust the Shipyard Infrastructure
    Optimization Program, if confirmed, to achieve these paramount
    objectives?
        Answer. My understanding is the Department is currently studying to
    see how much additional funding would be needed to accelerate the
    program to meet the needs of a modernized fleet. If confirmed, I would
    consult with the experts in the SIOP program office to advocate for
    adjustments to the program and necessary funding to ensure the
    Department meets its SIOP goals to sustain our current and future
    fleets.
        The Department of the Navy defines ``installation resilience'' as
    the ability of the platforms from which it generates and projects naval
    power to accomplish their missions, despite actions by adversaries or
    other events to deny, disrupt, exploit, or destroy installation-based
    capabilities. The range of threats against which a military
    installation must maintain resiliency: cyber threats, physical attacks,
    political influence, and extreme weather events, is ever-growing.
        Question. Given the 2018 NDS, what priority in the Navy program
    would you accord the survivability of Navy and Marine Corps
    expeditionary advanced bases, forward operating bases, and other
    locations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would accord a high priority on ensuring
    the survivability of our Navy and Marine Corps Installations - both
    enduring installations within the continental United States and
    overseas - and our expeditionary advance bases, forward operation
    bases, and other locations. The Department must continue to work with
    Congress, industry, and community leaders to evaluate and validate
    installation resiliency risks across multiple technical domains and
    incorporate solutions into budgetary planning processes in order to
    mitigate risks and ensure mission survivability and functionality of
    the Shore Enterprise.
        Question. What are the Navy and Marine Corps doing to assess and
    prioritize facility requirements for prepositioned forward fuel,
    stocks, and munitions, as well as to generate options for non-
    commercially dependent distributed logistics and maintenance--all to
    ensure logistics sustainment in the face of persistent multi-domain
    attack?
        Answer. This is a complex issue, and one that I do not yet have
    enough information on to make an evaluation. If confirmed, I will work
    with the Navy and Marine Corps Installation staffs to determine what
    actions have already been taken, what planning is underway and how I
    can assist moving forward to ensure logistics sustainment in the face
    of persistent multi-domain attacks.
                             extreme weather events
        President Biden has declared that climate change is an essential
    element of national security and foreign policy. Secretary Austin has
    stated that DOD will include the security implications of climate
    change in risk analyses, strategy development and planning guidance. If
    confirmed, you would sit on the Secretary's Climate Working Group and
    your portfolio would oversee energy resilience and environmental
    threats to military installations. Thus, you would have a major role in
    implementing this guidance.
        Question. What is your understanding of the ways in which climate
    change poses a risk to national security and the Department's
    responsibility to prepare for its impacts?
        Answer. Climate change is a global crisis and working to both
    mitigate it and ensure resilience to climate change impacts must be an
    essential element of U.S. national security. The changing climate poses
    immediate and long-term impacts to the global security environment and
    the operations of the Department of Defense, and the readiness of the
    force. Partnering with internal Department of Defense organizations and
    external federal agencies and stakeholders, the Department of Navy will
    prepare for and mitigate the negative impacts that climate change poses
    to the Department's operations and infrastructure worldwide.
        Question. How do you believe the Department should be incorporating
    climate change into its risk analyses, strategy development, and
    planning guidance?
        Answer. The Department should incorporate climate change into its
    operations, planning activities, risk analysis and decision-making
    processes. If confirmed, I would support Secretary Austin's direction
    to establish a Department of Defense Climate working group as the
    primary form to coordinate the Department's tackling of the Climate
    Crisis. It is vital for the senior military and civilian leadership
    across the department be personally engaged and to work together to
    track implementation of climate and energy-related actions and progress
    toward goals.
        Question. How should readiness and budget concerns factor into
    these assessments?
        Answer. The Department of Navy readiness and budget analyses should
    incorporate consideration of climate risk and enable the deployment of
    new solutions to strengthen resilience of key capabilities.
        Question. Section 2801 of the Fiscal Year 2020 NDAA required each
    major military installation to include military installation resilience
    in each installation's master plan. If confirmed, do you commit to
    ensuring these plans are completed and shared with this Committee?
        Answer. If confirmed, yes, I will commit to integrate resilience
    into each installations master plan and to share them with the
    committee upon request.
                               energy resilience
        It is essential that the Department of the Navy maintain capability
    to sustain critical operations in the event of intentional and
    unintentional grid outages.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to inculcate
    energy resilience as a mission assurance priority for the Department of
    the Navy?
        Answer. It is my understanding that energy resilience is already
    part of the mission assurance process, but, if confirmed, I would work
    with Navy and Marine Corps leadership to incorporate energy resilience
    into existing exercises and wargames to ensure resilience during grid
    outages.
        Question. When do you envision the work of the Energy Mission
    Integration Group will manifest in actual projects (MILCON or non-DOD
    funded) to fill gaps in individualized Installation Energy Plans and to
    identify and remediate resilience gaps both on- and off-Navy and Marine
    Corps installations?
        Answer. It is my understanding that, starting in fiscal year 2021,
    energy security gaps identified through mission assurance assessments
    and prioritized by the respective Navy and Marine Corps governance
    processes are reflected in third-party financing efforts, the Energy
    Resilience and Conservation Investment Program, Military Construction,
    and installation-funded projects.
        Question. How can the Department of the Navy better integrate
    energy security and resilience as standard components of its MILCON
    projects and programs?
        Answer. It is my understanding that, over the last several years,
    the Navy has been steadily incorporating resiliency planning into all
    aspects of the facilities management lifecycle, from installation
    master planning to the design of new construction and major renovation
    projects. Region and installation facility planners are utilizing
    updated Unified Facilities Criteria, Department of Defense Sea Level
    Rise studies, the Department of Defense Coastal Risk Management tool
    and the new Navy Climate Change Installation Planning Handbook to
    mitigate risks to shore infrastructure. The Department is also
    incorporating new design criteria and the latest industry standards to
    help mitigate the impact of extreme weather and a changing climate.
        Question. How can Naval and Joint Force training exercises and
    wargames better incorporate real-world scenarios regarding energy-
    related threats and constraints--such as less rosy assumptions about
    availability of fuel in the Pacific and assessing black start ability
    in response to a cyberattack on commercial electric grids?
        Answer. Wargaming and training exercises are critical to testing
    how the Department's people, process and equipment will actually
    operate in real-world scenarios. I am aware that the Marine Corps and
    Navy have both completed table top exercises and participated in a
    recent wargames focused on the Pacific area of operation. MCAS Miramar
    completed a full scale black start exercise demonstrating the ability
    to maintain mission critical operations during a planned grid outage
    with San Diego Gas and Electric. Similarly, the Navy is developing an
    Energy Resilience Readiness Exercise program built on multiple phases
    beginning with table top exercises and culminating with ``pull the
    plug'' events. If confirmed, I will continue to incorporate exercises
    that measure an installation's resilience to conduct critical and
    essential missions while disconnected from the commercial power grid.
        Question. Given the Department of the Navy's dependence on non-DOD
    energy sources, how can the public and private sectors best be
    integrated in installation resilience plans and programs to reduce
    vulnerabilities, add redundancy, or improve energy management?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department has a long
    history of successful partnering with local communities, utility
    service providers, and experts in the private sector to collaborate on
    initiatives to reduce vulnerabilities, add redundancy, or improve
    energy management. If confirmed, I will continue to maintain and pursue
    such partnerships.
        Question. In your view, is the use of stationary micro-reactors a
    workable option to provide long-term energy resiliency to U.S.-based
    Department of the Navy installations?
        Answer. I do not currently have the information to make an informed
    opinion on the viability of stationary micro-reactors as a long-term
    energy resiliency strategy for installations. If confirmed, I learn
    more about this technology and how Navy and Marine Corps installations
    can leverage it.
        Question. What initiatives is the Department of the Navy
    undertaking in regard to development of long duration grid batteries
    for use on bases?
        Answer. I understand that the Department of Navy continues to
    partner with industry to purse new energy technologies. I am not aware
    of specific initiatives related to long-duration grid batteries on Navy
    and Marine Corps installations.
                    authorities to improve energy resilience
        DOD and the Military Departments can use any number of authorities
    and mechanisms to pursue distributed energy projects that improve
    installation resilience, increase readiness and mission assurance, and
    offer long-term cost savings. These include: Inter-Government Support
    Agreements, Other Transaction Authority, Utility Privatization, Energy
    Savings Performance Contracts, Utility Energy Service Contracts,
    Enhanced Use Leases, and the Defense Community Infrastructure Program.
    The Navy faces a litany of challenges to fund its infrastructure. If
    contracts are written properly, non-DOD funded mechanisms are excellent
    ways to lock in cost savings for 25 years, increase resilience,
    modernize infrastructure, and diversify energy sources.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to streamline the
    process of writing and awarding contracts that will improve mission
    assurance through the Navy's Energy Security Programs Office?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would partner with Congress and the
    ASN(RDA) to ensure the Department of Navy is resourced and empowered to
    leverage the authorities granted by Congress to continue to execute
    Intergovernmental Support Agreements, Other Transaction Authority,
    Utility Privatization, Energy Savings Performance Contracts, Utility
    Energy Service Contracts, Enhanced Use Leases and the Defense Community
    Infrastructure Program.
        Question. In your view, how can the Department of the Navy use one
    or more of the above mentioned authorities to secure access to advanced
    energy-related technologies and concepts, including cyber-secure
    microgrids?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department has already used
    a combination of these authorities to great success. The Department has
    used enhanced use lease authority to site secure a microgrid at Marine
    Corps Air Station Yuma and Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach and install
    a cutting-edge battery energy storage system at Pacific Missile Range
    Facility Kauai, Hawaii and a fuel cell at Naval Submarine Base, New
    London, Connecticut. If confirmed, I would build upon this momentum and
    ensure energy-related technology is prioritized and pursued.
                               operational energy
        The Department defines operational energy as the energy required
    for training, moving, and sustaining military forces and weapons
    platforms for military operations, including the energy used by
    tactical power systems, generators, and weapons platforms. As early as
    2004, General Mattis cautioned that ``units would be faced with
    unacceptable limitations because of their dependence on fuel'' and that
    resupply efforts ``made us vulnerable in ways that would be exploited
    by the enemy.'' On the battlefield of the future, warfighters will need
    exponentially more energy with rapid recharge and resupply over longer
    operating distances. The quality of electricity will matter too--the
    Navy's vehicles, sensors, robots, cyber forces, directed energy
    weapons, and artificial intelligence will be controlled by systems
    sensitive to fluctuations in voltage or frequency.
        Question. If confirmed, what priorities would you establish for
    Department of the Navy investments in operational energy technologies
    to increase warfighter combat capabilities and reduce logistical
    burdens?
        Answer. Although operational energy responsibilities are executed
    by the ASN(RDA), I believe that the Department is focused on the
    opportunity for energy technologies to increase warfighting capability
    like more time-on-station and silent watch while reducing logistics
    burdens is enabled by hybridization and electrification, advanced
    battery, and energy efficiency technologies.
        Question. In what specific areas do you believe the Department of
    the Navy needs to improve the incorporation of operational energy
    considerations and distributed energy resources into the strategic
    planning processes?
        Answer. I believe that DON should account for energy in budget,
    program, and operational planning and if confirmed, I will work to
    ensure that the Department does so.
        Question. How can Department of the Navy acquisition systems better
    address requirements related to the use of energy in military platforms
    to decrease risks to warfighters?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will pursue opportunities to reduce risk
    through the integration of energy requirements across platforms such as
    ships, airplanes, and ground combat systems, which would create
    efficiencies and redundancies to support the deployment of those
    platforms out of our many bases and stations.
        Question. Further, in your view, how can energy supportability that
    reduces contested logistics vulnerabilities become key factors in the
    requirements process?
        Answer. Improving commanders' visibility of fuel and energy
    consumption by their forces is essential to reducing logistics
    requirements, vulnerabilities, and costs.
        Question. Specifically, how can the Navy broadly include
    operational energy improvements in its ships, such as hybrid electric
    drives, stern flaps, and bow bulbs, to reduce fuel costs and extend
    combat range in multiple classes of ships?
        Answer. Technology improvements often translate between platforms.
    Successes in that space include stern flaps and other energy efficiency
    technologies that are already providing improvements to Naval
    capability. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Navy continues to
    evaluate, invest in and expand energy improvements across and between
    as many platforms as possible.
        Question. In your view, how can the Department of the Navy better
    leverage advancements in data analytics and associated technologies to
    improve commanders' visibility of fuel consumption by the force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would like to work with the Navy and Marine
    Corps to incorporate advanced data analytics in operational energy.
    Under this approach there is an opportunity to collect real time
    information to support data-driven decision making on the part of Navy
    and Marine Corps as well as capture metrics. In order to do that, we
    will need to meter and monitor our platforms, our bases, and our
    stations.
                              energy conservation
        Question. What do you perceive to be the core elements of an
    effective energy conservation strategy for the Department of the Navy?
        Answer. One of the three pillars of the Department of Navy's energy
    security strategy is energy efficiency, which is aimed at reducing the
    demand and cost of utilities through metering, demand response, audits,
    energy intensity reduction, use of renewal energy, and data analytics.
        Question. What do you perceive to be the most achievable and
    realistic energy conservation goals for the Department of the Navy?
        Answer. The Department of Navy's energy conservation goals are
    centered around the energy management requirements and federal building
    energy efficiency standards codified in 42 USC 8253 and 6834,
    respectively. These standards set the foundation upon which the
    Department must build our energy conservation efforts.
        Question. What do you consider to be a ``stretch goal'' for
    Department of the Navy energy conservation?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would collaborate with the ASN(EI&E) staff
    and the Navy's and Marine Corps' senior military leadership to identify
    new stretch goals for energy conservation.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    reach these goals, and how would you measure your progress toward both?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Navy's and Marine
    Corps' senior military leadership to create meaningful, measureable
    benchmarks and set achievable goals together and encourage the
    innovations needed to meet these goals.
        Question. In your view, what is the impact of the current
    Department of the Navy energy conservation goals for the Navy or Marine
    Corps? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. The Navy and Marine Corps have reaped the benefits of
    energy conservation in increased operational flexibility and mission
    assurance as well as the associated cost savings. In addition to the
    tangible benefits of energy conservation, the Navy and Marine Corps
    have cultivated a culture of energy conservation that can be augmented
    and magnified with additional leadership focus on energy conservation.
    I am aware of examples of this conservation in action at Naval Air
    Station Pensacola and Marine Corps Recruit Depot Paris Island, and
    understand there are dozens of success stories across the Department
    that, if confirmed, I would strive to build upon.
                                water resilience
        A secure and reliable supply of water is essential to the
    Department of Defense's ability to perform its critical missions on
    installations and in support of operational deployments.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you lead the Department of the
    Navy in developing a comprehensive water strategy that addresses
    research, acquisition, training, and organizational issues?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would partner with the Navy Secretariat
    leadership as well as senior Navy and Marine Corps leaders to develop a
    comprehensive water strategy that addresses all facets of Department
    operations, including research, acquisition, training and
    organizational roles and responsibility. From an ASN(EI&E) perspective,
    if confirmed, I would continue the Department's work on cooperative
    regional management action plans and a review of water rights to
    mutually benefit the Department and local communities.
        Question. What actions has the Department of the Navy already
    undertaken to improve access to sustainable water sources in drought-
    prone areas across the United States and the globe, and with what
    result?
        Answer. To improve water conservation, the Department promotes
    policies that minimize potable water use for non-core mission functions
    like irrigation, and engages with industry leaders to improve water
    conveyance and treatment systems. For example, Camp Pendleton has
    improved water security, expanding reclaimed water conveyance by
    installing new `recycled water' lines, and new reservoirs for base
    irrigation and aquifer recharge. The use of recycled water helps to
    conserve potable water for core mission functions, and increases the
    health and sustainability of the aquifer basin for the greater San
    Diego area.
        Question. What progress is the Department of the Navy making in
    developing and implementing a technology roadmap to address capability
    gaps for water production, treatment, and purification?
        Answer. Water resilience is critical to mission success. The
    Department has incorporated water resilience into its Energy Mission
    Integration Group (EMIG) process to identify water resilience gaps and
    prioritize investments against other commodities. In fiscal year 2020,
    the EMIG tested water resilience criteria for Navy Region Southwest and
    prioritized necessary water resilience projects at Naval Base Coronado
    and Naval Air Station Lemoore. In 2021, the EMIG opened the analysis of
    water resilience to the entire enterprise and are currently developing
    eight projects to address mission-critical gaps. The identified
    solutions for the Department's water resilience gaps range from
    utilities privatization to the Energy Resilience and Conservation
    Investment Program (ERCIP).
        Question. What actions has the Department of the Navy undertaken to
    improve water conveyance systems to reduce loss, recapitalize aging
    infrastructure, and meet installation mission requirements?
        Answer. The Department includes water systems in its annual
    military construction and facility restoration and modernization
    prioritization process. Additionally, it is my understanding that the
    Department of Navy is in the process of reinvigorating its utility
    privatization program through several pilots at installations to
    evaluate the business case analysis and the ability to improve
    reliable, resilient and efficient energy for the priority missions on
    those installations.
                             emerging contaminants
        The environmental and health effects associated with exposure to
    Per- and Poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have long been a major
    concern for Congress, DOD, military families, and communities in the
    vicinity of military installations.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for the
    ASN(EI&E) in addressing potential PFAS contamination at Navy and Marine
    Corps bases, installations, and operational platforms?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would actively pursue my role as the
    Department of Navy representative on the Department of Defense PFAS
    Task Force.
        Question. In your view, what role should the Navy and Marine Corps
    take in funding and overseeing PFAS-related environmental cleanup and
    restoration activities at Reserve locations and in communities adjacent
    to or near military bases, installations, and operational platforms?
        Answer. As a first step, the Department should identify the
    locations where PFAS released by the Department may have migrated to
    off-installation drinking water sources. The Department should test
    public and private drinking water wells in these areas for PFAS. Where
    EPA lifetime health advisory levels are exceeded, the Department should
    provide a short-term solution of alternate water for drinking and
    cooking purposes and follow up to implement long-term solutions. Once
    these initial actions are taken to protect public health, the
    Department should follow through with investigations and response
    actions in accordance with the Federal cleanup law to ensure protection
    of human health and the environment.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to addressing
    public health concerns--including the concerns of increased
    transparency to servicemembers and their families--regarding alleged
    exposures to potentially harmful contaminants on or deriving from Navy
    and Marine Corps bases?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will promote early, meaningful, two-way
    communication with servicemembers, their families and members of the
    public.
     the fiscal year 2020 ndaa required the department of defense to phase
      out the current aqueous film forming foam (af3) containing pfas by
               2024, with an exception for ships and submarines.
        Question. What is your understanding of the current progress made
    to date in finding a replacement for Aqueous Film Forming Foam?
        Answer. I believe the Department of Navy is actively supporting the
    Department of Defense's research and development effort to identify
    suitable replacements to transition to a PFAS-free firefighting
    alternative on installations. To date, I do not believe there is an
    accepted alternative that meets the Navy's requirements; once an
    alternative is identified, the Department will have a short timeframe
    to convert all fixed and mobile systems to this new product at a yet
    unknown cost.
        The current Navy-owned military specification for AF3 is largely
    based on the need to extinguish fires on ships and submarines within 30
    seconds from contact. Recently tested non-PFAS alternatives can
    extinguish fires in roughly 39 seconds and some Jet-A fires in 21
    seconds or less.
        Question. Given that the required phase out of PFAS in AF3 does not
    apply to ship and submarines, what do you view as the effects of more
    than one specification going forward: one for ships and submarines, and
    another for bases where AF3 cannot contain PFAS?
        Answer. I believe the DON has a capable supply chain system to
    ensure that the correct firefighting agents are provided to ships,
    submarines, and shore installations. If confirmed, I will verify this
    is the case and take actions if needed to make it so.
                      resilience to extreme weather events
        In 2018 alone, extreme weather caused roughly $9 billion in damage
    at military bases across the United States, Camp Lejeune among them. In
    the aftermath of the July 2019 earthquakes that struck outside
    Ridgecrest, California, the Navy was required to recover and restore
    critical weapons system test and development capabilities at Naval Air
    Weapons Station China Lake.
        Question. How would you assess the readiness and resource impacts
    on the Department of the Navy from recent extreme weather events?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with Navy and Marine Corps
    installation management commands to ensure Naval installations have the
    tools and resources they need to plan, prepare, adapt, and recover.
    These solutions would need to consider a range of threats, from natural
    disasters and climate change, to adversarial risks to energy, water
    supplies and industrial cyber controls.
        Question. In your view, how can the Navy and Marine Corps best
    mitigate risks to Department missions and infrastructure associated
    with extreme weather events?
        Answer. Navy and Marine Corps installations must incorporate
    installation resilience into all aspects of installation management,
    from emergency action plans and continuity of operations, to the
    installation master planning process and facility siting, design and
    construction. Installations must also continue to partner and
    collaborate with local communities, utility service providers, and in
    the private sector.
        Question. If confirmed to be the ASN(EI&E), how would you update
    the DOD Building Requirements Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) to
    incorporate designs more resilient to the effects of extreme weather
    events to ensure that MILCON-funded structures exist and remain fully
    functional for their intended lifecycles?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would support the Chief Engineer of Naval
    Facilities Engineering Systems Command as the Department of Navy's
    representative for the Unified Facility Criteria. It is my
    understanding that this group has proactively updated DOD standards to
    be on par or exceed current industry standards and meet congressional
    requirements.
                            environmental compliance
        The Department of the Navy has implemented a robust environmental
    compliance program to ensure the Navy and Marine Corps can meet their
    title 10 responsibilities, in balance with the need for environmental
    stewardship and conservation.
        Question. If confirmed to be the ASN(EI&E), what policies and
    programs would you enable to educate Navy and Marine Corps leaders and
    the force about the imperative of complying with laws and regulations
    addressing environmental matters and the substantive tenets of same?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure the Department of Navy
    promulgates robust and clear policies and instructions to Navy and
    Marine Corps leaders on the integration of environmental protection,
    natural resources and cultural resources into all operations and
    activities.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you work with the Department of
    Interior and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to ensure military
    readiness, while protecting the environment on and around Navy and
    Marine Corps installations, bases, and ranges?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would support and leverage the ongoing work
    by the DOD and DON to forge partnerships with the Department of the
    Interior, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, other government agencies and
    non-governmental organizations to ensure military readiness while
    protecting the environment.
        Question. What are your ideas as to how the process associated with
    generating an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) could be
    streamlined, with a view to completing any future EIS in two years or
    less, from start to finish?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would consult with the environmental
    subject matter experts within the Navy and Marine Corps, and the
    Council on Environmental Quality, to determine how the EIS process
    could be improved and streamlined while fully complying with the
    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.
                           environmental restoration
        Funding for the Department of the Navy's environmental restoration
    program remains a significant part of the Navy's overall environmental
    program budget.
        Question. What do you see as the main priorities for environmental
    cleanup and restoration in the context of the Department of the Navy
    program?
        Answer. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are clearly at the
    forefront of the many chemicals of emerging concern across the nation.
    The Department must continue identifying, evaluating and addressing
    PFAS releases resulting from our activities, and take proactive action
    to identify and mitigate the impacts of PFAS releases to human health
    and the environment.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to
    ensure that the Department of the Navy continues to program, budget,
    and execute adequate funding to permit cleanups under the Installation
    Restoration and Military Munitions Remediation Programs to continue
    apace?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's practice of
    prioritizing Environmental Restoration sites by risk to human health
    and the environment. I will also ensure the Department conducts
    relative risk evaluations in consultation with regulatory agency
    partners and community stakeholders, and then sequences funding and
    projects for assessment and mitigation of the highest risk sites first.
    I believe the majority of the highest risk sites have been mitigated
    and most of the remainder of the Department's environmental response
    program is focused on completing long-term cleanup remedies that will
    span several more decades to fully achieve.
                     encroachment on military installations
        Competition for space and other forms of encroachment continue to
    challenge the resiliency of DOD ranges and amplify the need for larger
    hazard areas to execute training, testing, and operations to meet NDS
    requirements. Encroachment on military installations by commercial and
    residential development can negatively impact ongoing operations and
    significantly delay or halt the construction of new testing and
    training facilities vital to generating readiness going forward.
        Question. In your view, how might virtual testing and training
    solutions contribute to the Department of the Navy's ability to meet
    capability requirements and mitigate the adverse effects of
    encroachment?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work to ensure the Department has
    what it needs to conduct realistic and effective test and training
    activities. The Department must assess new and emerging technology to
    determine how virtual or other innovative methods can supplement our
    training needs.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you lead the Department of the
    Navy in projecting future operations, testing, and training range
    requirements?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with Navy and Marine Corps
    uniformed leadership to ensure the Department's forces have the right
    facilities to train, fight, and win, even as various land, sea, and
    airspace demands reduce the available area for military training.
        Question. How would you structure your role as the ASN(EI&E), if
    confirmed, with regard to engaging with communities surrounding Navy
    and Marine Corps ranges, to address and resolve concerns, while
    ensuring the resilience of range capabilities? If confirmed, I would
    encourage communication with residential communities, state and local
    governments, and non-governmental organizations. For energy projects, I
    would also work closely with the DOD Military Aviation and Installation
    Assurance Siting Clearinghouse as the single point of contact for
    working with stakeholders to resolve mission compatibility issues.
        Answer. One significant tool the Department of the Navy can use to
    mitigate impacts to base encroachment and preserve natural habitat
    buffers to bases, is the Readiness and Environmental Protection
    Integration (REPI) Program. Another avenue to mitigate potential
    conflicts between base radar and energy development is software updates
    and the modernization of radars, which are often paid for by energy
    developers.
        Question. If confirmed, what new ideas would you propose as
    objectives and means for addressing this issue?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would partner with installation commanders,
    operational leadership, local communities, conservation organizations,
    and industry to develop solutions that benefit the community and the
    Department's critical national defense mission.
        Question. If confirmed, what policies or steps would you take to
    balance the trade-off between energy development, radar modernization,
    and impact on operations and training?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would take deliberate and informed steps to
    support energy development that minimizes impacts to military
    operations and training. If confirmed, I will keep Congress informed on
    the Department's progress in this area.
       department of the navy laboratory and test center recapitalization
        Historically, Department of the Navy technical centers,
    laboratories, and test centers do not appear to have fared well in the
    internal Department competition for limited military construction and
    facility sustainment funds; as many facilities in these categories
    approach the mid-point or near-end of their life cycles,
    recapitalization has become a concern.
        Question. What is your view of the importance of technical centers,
    laboratories, and test centers to the ability of the Department of the
    Navy to accomplish its mission now and into the future?
        Answer. The Department of Navy's Research, Development, Testing and
    Evaluation community provide weapons, systems, and platforms for the
    Navy and Marine Corps that give a technological edge over the United
    States' adversaries. The Department's technical centers, laboratories,
    and test centers are uniquely positioned to develop and accelerate
    warfighting technology, capabilities and rapidly deliver advantages to
    the current and future Naval force.
        Question. What metrics would you use to assess and determine the
    appropriate level of investment in the recapitalization of Department
    of the Navy technical centers, laboratories, and test centers?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work closely with the Department's
    Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation community to develop a
    strategy to recapitalize infrastructure at technical centers, labs and
    test centers. This holistic strategy would define metrics and identify
    innovative funding recommendations and partnership opportunities.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you work with the Assistant
    Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition and
    other stakeholders to ensure that the Department of the Navy technical
    centers, laboratories, and test centers are properly recapitalized?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would partner with other leaders at the
    Navy Secretariat level and leaders at all levels of the Department of
    Navy's robust Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation community
    to understand the unique infrastructure requirements of the
    Department's warfare centers and labs as well as all available funding
    solutions.
                             command climate survey
        Question. If confirmed, would you plan to administer a command
    climate survey to the workforce under your leadership and management?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will administer a command climate survey
    across the ASN(EI&E) workforce within the first 100 days of taking
    office.
                               sexual harassment
        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.
        Question. What is your assessment of the current climate regarding
    sexual harassment and gender discrimination in the Department of the
    Navy?
        Answer. I have reviewed the Navy and Marine Corps Fiscal Year 2020
    Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military, which was publically
    released earlier this year. The Department of Navy has a comprehensive
    approach to sexual assault prevention and response. Yet there were
    still more than 2,800 reported assaults in the Navy and Marine Corps in
    fiscal year 2020. No level of sexual assault and harassment is
    tolerable. There is clearly more work to be done to foster a culture
    where respect is the foundation for all interactions and where all
    sailors, marines and civilians have the opportunity to thrive.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
    receive or become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment or
    discrimination from an employee of the Office of the ASN(EI&E)?
        Answer. Sexual assault undermines trust that our sailors, marines
    and civilians place in each other and in their leaders, and it
    threatens the lethality of the Navy and the Marine Corps. If confirmed,
    I would vigorously adhere to DOD and DON policies to ensure that
    complaints of sexual harassment or discrimination are acted upon
    expeditiously and appropriately while protecting the victim.
                            congressional oversight
        In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
    appropriate committees of Congress are able to receive testimony,
    briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
    communications) and other information from the Department.
        Question. 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 Gary C. Peters
                              defense communities
        1. Senator Peters. Ms. Berger, as co-chair of the defense
    communities caucus I can tell you, from my experience, that the duties
    of this position can only be truly executed successfully when you make
    it a top priority to engage with the communities that host
    installations. If it's anything this past year has taught us, it is
    that the big issues you will be facing in this role, including COVID-
    19, climate change, secure and resilient infrastructure, racial
    inequity and quality of life, don't recognize fence lines and require a
    truly one community response. Do I have your commitment that you will
    work closely with defense communities and actively work to establish a
    more integrated and robust installation-community partnership?
        Ms. Berger. The important stakeholders, perspectives, and interests
    that make up the defense communities are critical to consider to make
    sure that the Department of Navy is operating and making decisions in
    an informed and thorough way. If confirmed, I will work with these
    communities and cultivate these relationships and look forward to the
    opportunity to work with you and your office on this effort.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Ms. Meredith A. Berger
    follows:]

       [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Ms. Meredith A. Berger, which
    was transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

        [GRAPHIC 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 Ms. Meredith
    A. Berger in connection with her nomination follows:]

        [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                     ______

        [The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
    questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
    the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
    are contained in the committee's executive files.]

        [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Ms. Meredith A. Berger was reported to
    the Senate by Chairman Reed on June 22, 2021, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on July 22, 2021.]

                                     [all]