[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]