    [Senate Hearing 117-998]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 117-998

    THE NOMINATIONS OF: HONORABLE ROBERT P. STORCH TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL
    OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; DR. LESTER MARTINEZ LOPEZ TO BE ASSISTANT
     SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS; MR. CHRISTOPHER J. LOWMAN TO
      BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SUSTAINMENT; AND MR. PETER J.
        BESHAR TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 15, 2022

                                   __________

             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

    63-543 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2026

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                       JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman

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

                     Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
                  John D. Wason, Minority Staff Director

                                      (ii)

                             C O N T E N T S

                              _____________

                            february 15, 2022

                                                                       Page
    The Nominations of: Honorable Robert P. Storch to be Inspector        1
      General of the Department of Defense; Dr. Lester Martinez-Lopez
      to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs; Mr.
      Christopher J. Lowman to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for
      Sustainment; and Mr. Peter J. Beshar to be General Counsel of
      the Department of the Air Force.

                               Members Statements

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

    Inhofe, Senator James............................................     3

                               Witness Statements

    Storch, The Honorable Robert P., Nominee to be Inspector General      4
      of the Department of Defense.
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................    58
      Questions for the Record.......................................    95
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   107
      Biographical Sketch............................................   108
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   111
      Signature Page.................................................   117

    Martinez-Lopez, Dr. Lester, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of      7
      Defense for Health Affairs.
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................   117
      Questions for the Record.......................................   135
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   144
      Biographical Sketch............................................   145
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   149
      Signature Page.................................................   157

    Lowman, Christopher J., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of         10
      Defense for Sustainment.
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................   157
      Questions for the Record.......................................   172
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   177
      Biographical Sketch............................................   178
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   180
      Signature Page.................................................   184

    Beshar, Peter J., Nominee to be General Counsel of the Department    12
      of the Air Force.
      Advance Policy Questions.......................................   184
      Questions for the Record.......................................   203
      Nomination Reference and Report................................   204
      Biographical Sketch............................................   205
      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   207
      Signature Page.................................................   218

                                     (iii)

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

                                      (iv)

    THE NOMINATIONS OF: HONORABLE ROBERT P. STORCH TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL
    OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; DR. LESTER MARTINEZ-LOPEZ TO BE ASSISTANT
     SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS; MR. CHRISTOPHER J. LOWMAN TO
      BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SUSTAINMENT; AND MR. PETER J.
        BESHAR TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

                                  ----------

                           TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2022

                                  United States Senate,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:32 a.m. in room
    SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Jack Reed,
    Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        Committee Members present: Senators Reed, Shaheen,
    Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters,
    Manchin, Duckworth, Rosen, Kelly, Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer,
    Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan, Cramer, Scott,
    Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED

        Chairman Reed. I will call the hearing to order.
        The committee meets this morning to consider the
    nominations of Mr. Robert Storch to be the Inspector General of
    the Department of Defense, Dr. Lester Martinez-Lopez to be
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Mr.
    Christopher Lowman to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Sustainment, and Mr. Peter Beshar to be General Counsel of the
    Department of the Air Force. On behalf of the committee, I want
    to thank each of you for your willingness to return to public
    service.
        I would also like to welcome the guests and family members
    who are with us today. Mr. Storch, I welcome your wife Sara and
    daughter Hannah.
        Dr. Martinez, I welcome your son, Lucas.
        Mr. Lowman, I welcome your wife Tracey, daughter Shayne,
    and son Ian.
        Mr. Beshar, I welcome your wife Sarah, son Henry, and
    daughter Sophie.
        I know each of the nominees have family members who are
    proudly watching from home, and I thank them for their support
    of your service as well.
        Mr. Storch, you are well-qualified to be Inspector General
    of the Defense Department. In addition to your current role as
    the IG for the National Security Agency, you served as the
    Deputy IG of the Department of Justice from 2012 to 2018.
        There are a number of important duties that will require
    your attention within the Department. It will be your
    responsibility to conduct and supervise audits and
    investigations relating to the Department, provide efficiency
    and effectiveness in the administration of the Defense
    Department, and lead the combatting of fraud, waste, and abuse.
    You will also assist the Secretary of Defense in addressing
    extremism in the military.
        While we continue to believe that the number of extremists
    in the ranks remains very, very small and does not represent a
    systemic issue, even one is too many. The DOD IG has an
    important role to play in assessing the extent of this
    challenge. During your testimony I would ask for your views on
    the issue and your objectives for this position.
        Dr. Martinez, you are nominated to be the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, or the ASD(HA). I
    would note your extensive record of service in military
    healthcare, both in and out of uniform, as having prepared you
    well for this position.
        The ASD(HA) is the principal advisor to the Secretary of
    Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
    Readiness for the all of the Department's force health
    protection policies, programs, and activities. The ASD(HA) is
    also responsible for execution of the Department's medical
    mission, including the readiness of medical services during
    military operations and for ensuring the health of the members
    of the military services, their families, and other eligible
    beneficiaries.
        In addition, you will govern the management of Defense
    Department health and medical programs, the sponsorship and
    oversight of medical research and development, and medical
    education and training.
        If confirmed, you will need to address a number of pressing
    challenges for the Department, including the implementation of
    COVID-19 vaccinations across the force, improving the staffing
    of Walter Reed, and providing medical support to the combatant
    commanders. I hope you will address these challenges in your
    testimony.
        Mr. Lowman, you are nominated to be the Assistant Secretary
    of Defense for Sustainment. You bring more than 30 years of
    service as a marine and Army civil servant to this position;
    experience that will be invaluable given the complex scope of
    responsibilities before you.
        One of the most pressing issues for the Defense Department
    is reducing its contested logistics vulnerabilities. The
    ``tyranny of distance'' challenge is often referenced in
    potential Pacific conflict scenarios, and we saw it proven true
    during our combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although
    there have been several studies and table top exercises on this
    topic, the GAO found the Defense Department has still failed to
    implement more than 50 recommendations from a recent review. I
    would like to know your perspective on how the Department can
    better navigate a contested logistics environment.
        Additionally, maintaining the operational readiness of the
    force has always been expensive. Given the rising costs of new
    platforms like the F-35, coupled with supply chain impacts from
    the pandemic, I hope you will share your plans for tackling
    these challenges.
        Finally, Mr. Beshar, you are nominated to be General
    Counsel of the Department of the Air Force. This position has a
    broad scope of responsibilities, including serving as legal
    adviser to the Secretary of the Air Force and other offices
    within the Department, as well as to the Chiefs of the Air
    Force and Space Force and their staffs. If confirmed, you will
    be tasked with providing legal services throughout the entire
    Department in a variety of disciplines, including fiscal law,
    ethics, dispute resolution, environmental law, labor law, and
    litigation.
        In addition, the General Counsel exercises oversight of
    intelligence and other sensitive activities and investigations.
    These are wide-ranging and complex challenges that will require
    astute legal guidance. I would ask that you share how you plan
    to approach these issues and what objectives you have for this
    important position.
        Thank you, again, to our nominees. I look forward to your
    testimonies.
        Chairman Reed. Now, let me now recognize the ranking
    member, Senator Inhofe.

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR JAMES INHOFE

        Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thanks to our witnesses for being with us and for their
    willingness to serve additionally.
        We have got quite a few challenges facing us, including in
    your areas of responsibility. While the world is watching
    Beijing host the Olympics and whitewash an ongoing genocide,
    China has also accelerated its economic and military
    aggression.
        The Russians are using their military might to try to
    redraw the borders of a sovereign country, and they are using
    energy as a weapon to try to split NATO. Putin's ambitions
    won't stop in Ukraine, and we learned this firsthand when we
    spent some time in Romania just a few weeks ago, and it is very
    clear: it maybe be Ukraine, but Romania is next, and so, this
    is not something that just is some speculation.
        Last week, we heard from General Kurilla that Iran is the
    number one destabilizing threat in the Middle East, and about
    the risks of Iran using sanctions relief to support proxies
    that attack United States forces in the region.
        North Korea fired more missiles in the recent months than
    ever before and apparently they are only pausing now because of
    the Olympics that are taking place, and they don't want to make
    China angry.
        The 2018 Defense Strategy provides that it is still good
    today, and it provides a roadmap to tackle these challenges,
    but we need to stay focused, and we will need your help to do
    so in the positions that you will be assuming, if you are
    confirmed, and you will be confirmed.
        At the same time, historic inflation is hitting every part
    of the Pentagon, from servicemember benefits to maintenance. It
    will make your jobs much, much more difficult.
        Lastly, Afghanistan, and on Afghanistan, I am sure you all
    read the Washington Post reporting about the military's own
    investigation of the withdrawal. It seems like this review can
    teach us some really valuable lessons.
        We are the committee of jurisdiction over the Department of
    Defense. My colleagues and I have been asking for weeks to see
    the reviews that they have made. It is unacceptable for us to
    be finding out about these documents in the Washington Post
    before they are shared with us. I can't really say that in as
    strong of terms as I would like to.
        The last NDAA established a bipartisan commission to
    investigate what happened in Afghanistan, and I supported that,
    but this committee also has the duty to conduct its own
    oversight. I think we will need to hear from some of the folks
    involved with this after-action report very soon, in open and
    closed sessions.
        So, we need strong civilian leadership at DOD who will work
    with Congress. So I look forward to hearing from you all this
    morning.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe.
        Now let me call on Mr. Storch for your testimony, please.

      STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERT P. STORCH, NOMINEE TO BE
             INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

        Mr. Storch. My apologies.
        Chairman Reed. No problem.
        Mr. Storch. Thank you.
        Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, members of the
    committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
    today with regard to my nomination to be the Inspector General
    at the Department of Defense.
        The work of OIGs necessarily reflects that of the
    departments and agencies we oversee. The DOD, of course, has a
    critical mission of securing our national defense, a core
    function of government, and given the tremendous size and scope
    of the Defense enterprise, the Department, in one way or
    another, does essentially everything that government does. This
    requires its OIG to have all the tools in the oversight tool
    belt functioning well to effectively oversee these critical and
    diverse efforts.
        I am truly humbled to have been nominated to lead the team
    at the DOD OIG and believe that I am well-positioned to do so.
    I currently am in my fifth year serving as the presidentially
    appointed, Senate-confirmed Inspector General at the National
    Security Agency, within the Department of Defense, and so I am
    familiar with both, the duties and functions generally
    applicable to a PAS IG, and with carrying out those
    responsibilities at an agency within the DOD where there is
    important integration between civilian and uniformed personnel,
    and under the rules and policies applicable across the
    Department.
        I am very proud of the efforts that my team and I have made
    to enhance the independence and the impact of our oversight
    work at NSA OIG, where I have emphasized getting to the root
    causes of the issues we uncover and holding agency leadership
    accountable for addressing them. I am also proud of the strides
    we have made to enhance the transparency of our work, including
    the launch of our independent public website, where we now
    regularly post unclassified versions of our Semiannual Reports
    to Congress, and unclassified versions or summaries, of a
    number of our underlying reports.
        I also have emphasized the importance of engagement with
    the Congress, which helps us to understand its concerns and to
    provide oversight that may be helpful to inform its
    constitutional, legislative, and oversight functions.
        As the NSA IG, and before that as the Deputy IG and
    Whistleblower Ombudsperson working with, and for, IG Michael
    Horowitz at the Department of Justice, I have worked to advance
    whistleblower rights and protections, which is something that I
    believe is fundamentally important for the operations of OIGs
    and, indeed, for good government.
        Employees and others perform an important service when they
    bring forward evidence of what they reasonably believe to be
    wrongdoing, and they should never suffer reprisal for doing so.
        Of course, none of this work is possible without people. As
    the NSA IG, and before that as the Deputy IG at DOJ, I have
    been actively engaged in promoting diversity, equity,
    inclusion, and accessibility, and in ensuring that we provide a
    positive working environment for our team. I am very proud of
    the efforts we have made in this regard at NSA OIG, and if
    confirmed as the DOD IG, I will bring all of these areas of
    emphasis and approaches to leading that very important office.
        Prior to joining the OIG community, I spent some two dozen
    years as a Federal prosecutor at two U.S. Attorney's Offices
    and between them at the Public Integrity Section of the
    Criminal Division, here in Washington.
        I believe that being an IG and a prosecutor are similar in
    important respects; both fundamentally call for doing what is
    right and both call for the analysis of complex fact patterns
    and the exercise of independent judgment to reach that result.
        Also, as a former federal prosecutor, and now as an IG, I
    understand the importance of ensuring that my office's work not
    be influenced or even perceived as being influenced in any way
    by partisanship. I am honored to have been nominated to be an
    IG by Presidents of both political parties, and if confirmed, I
    shall continue to be true to the principle of nonpartisanship
    that is a hallmark of the IG system.
        I have been actively involved in working across the IG
    community over the past decade, founding and leading the CIGIE
    Whistleblower Ombuds Working Group when I was at DOJ OIG, and
    serving for several years now as Vice Chair of the CIGIE Tech
    Committee, and as Chair of its Emerging Technology
    Subcommittee.
        As for the latter, I think it is essential that we, as IGs,
    be prepared to conduct meaningful, impactful oversight over the
    increasing use of new technologies within the government and
    that we be able to use them ourselves appropriately in our
    work.
        I also was honored to be named, in 2020, to serve as one of
    four IGs on the CIGIE Integrity Committee, and recently to be
    named Vice Chair of the Committee, which has the important role
    of considering allegations of misconduct made against IGs and
    their senior staffs. If I am confirmed, I believe that all
    these experiences will serve me well in leading the diverse
    operations of the Defense oversight community and coordinating
    with other IGs, as appropriate.
        I will end with what is most important to me, and recognize
    and thank my brilliant and wonderful wife, who somehow will
    have put up with me for 30 years of marriage this May, and my
    two spectacular daughters. As I always say, they are the center
    of the universe.
        I would also like to thank my family and friends, who are
    watching online, for their support.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Storch follows:]

              Prepared Statement by The Honorable Robert P. Storch
        Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, Members of the Committee:
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today with
    regard to my nomination to be the Inspector General at the Department
    of Defense. The work of OIGs necessarily reflects that of the
    departments and agencies we oversee. The DOD, of course, has the
    critical mission of securing our national defense--a core function of
    government--and given the tremendous size and scope of the defense
    enterprise, the Department, in one way or another, does essentially
    everything that government does. This requires its OIG to have all the
    tools in the oversight toolbelt functioning well to effectively oversee
    those critical and diverse efforts.
        I am truly humbled to have been nominated to lead the team at DOD
    OIG, and believe that I am well positioned to do so. I currently am in
    my fifth year serving as the Presidentially appointed Senate-confirmed
    Inspector General (PAS IG) at the National Security Agency, within the
    Department of Defense, and so am familiar with both the duties and
    functions generally applicable to a PAS IG, and with carrying out those
    responsibilities at an Agency within the DOD where there is important
    integration between civilian and uniformed personnel, and under the
    rules and policies applicable across the Department.
        I am very proud of the efforts that my team and I have made to
    enhance the independence and the impact of our oversight work at NSA
    OIG, where I have emphasized getting to the root causes of the issues
    we uncover and holding Agency leadership accountable for addressing
    them. I am also proud of the strides we have made to enhance the
    transparency of our work, including the launch of our independent
    public website, where we now regularly post unclassified versions of
    our Semiannual Reports to Congress, and unclassified versions or
    summaries of a number of our underlying reports, putting us in the
    forefront in this area within the intelligence community. I also have
    emphasized the importance of engagement with the Congress, which helps
    us to understand its concerns and to provide oversight that may be
    helpful to inform its constitutional legislative and oversight
    functions.
        As the NSA IG, and before that as the Deputy IG and Whistleblower
    Ombudsperson working with and for IG Michael Horowitz at the Department
    of Justice, I have worked to advance whistleblower rights and
    protections, which is something that I believe is fundamentally
    important for the operations of OIGs and, indeed, for good government.
    Employees and others perform an important service when they bring
    forward evidence of what they reasonably believe to be wrongdoing, and
    they should never suffer reprisal for doing so.
        Of course, none of this work is possible without people. As the NSA
    IG, and before that as Deputy IG at DOJ, I have been actively engaged
    in promoting diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, and in
    ensuring that we provide a positive working environment for our team.
    I'm very proud of the efforts we've made in this regard at NSA OIG and,
    if confirmed as the DOD IG, I will bring all of these areas of emphasis
    and approaches to leading that very important office.
        Prior to joining the OIG community, I spent some two dozen years as
    a Federal prosecutor at two U.S. Attorney's Offices and, between them,
    at the Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division here in
    Washington. I believe that being an IG and a prosecutor are similar in
    important ways--both fundamentally call for doing what is right. Both
    call for the analysis of complex fact patterns and the exercise of
    independent judgment to reach that result. Also, as a former federal
    prosecutor, and now as an IG, I understand the importance of ensuring
    that my office's work not be influenced or even perceived as being
    influenced in any way by partisanship. I am honored to have been
    nominated to be an IG by Presidents of both political parties and, if
    confirmed, I shall continue to be true to the principle of
    nonpartisanship that is a hallmark of the IG system.
        I have been actively involved in working across the IG Community
    over the past decade, founding and leading the CIGIE Whistleblower
    Ombudsperson Working Group when I was at DOJ OIG, and serving for
    several years now as Vice Chair of the CIGIE Technology Committee, and
    as Chair of its Emerging Technology Subcommittee. As for the latter, I
    think it is essential that we as IGs be prepared to conduct meaningful,
    impactful oversight over the increasing use of new technologies within
    the government, and that we be able to use them appropriately in our
    own work. I also was honored to be named in 2020 to serve as one of the
    four IGs on the CIGIE Integrity Committee, and recently to be named
    Vice Chair of the Committee, which has the important role of
    considering allegations of misconduct made against IGs and their senior
    staffs. It is a significant responsibility, but it is essential that
    the community effectively answer the question of who watches the
    watchdogs, and I have learned a great deal about the operations of the
    IG community in the process. If I am confirmed, I believe all of these
    experiences will serve me well in leading the diverse operations of the
    defense oversight community and coordinating with other IGs as
    appropriate.
        I'll end with what's most important to me, and recognize and thank
    my brilliant and wonderful wife, who somehow will have put up with me
    for thirty years of marriage this May, and my two spectacular
    daughters. As I always say, they are the center of the universe. I'd
    also like to thank my family and friends who are watching online for
    their support.
        Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez, please?

    STATEMENT OF DR. LESTER MARTINEZ-LOPEZ, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT
                SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS

        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking
    Member Inhofe, and distinguished committee members.
        Thank you for allowing me to speak with you today. I am
    extremely honored and humbled to be here today as President
    Biden's nominee for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
    Affairs. I am thankful for the trust placed in me by President
    Biden, Secretary Austin, and Under Secretary Cisneros.
        I was raised in Maricao, a small town in the mountains of
    Puerto Rico. Not in my wildest dreams would I have thought I
    would be here, in front of you today.
        During medical school, I was blessed to receive the Health
    Professions Scholarship. The financial support allowed me to
    dedicate myself to my studies and to excel. I was driven by an
    interest in saving lives through medicine and serving the
    United States.
        Upon graduation, I joined the Active Duty Army at Fort
    Bragg, North Carolina, where I completed my family practice
    residency. My plan was to fulfill my service obligation and
    return to Puerto Rico, but after volunteering for the first
    Multinational Force and Observers deployment to the Sinai, I
    got hooked. I loved serving with the Army in the field.
        My service led me to command soldiers for 12 years, at home
    and abroad, serve with field units for 7 years, become the
    Chief Medical Officer of the United Nation's mission in Haiti,
    and serve as the senior medical officer during our Hurricane
    Mitch Response in Central America. My final assignment led me
    to command the United States Army Medical Research and
    Development Command at Fort Detrick, Maryland, where we worked
    on all aspects of medical research.
        Working with soldiers willing to risk their health and
    lives for our country inspired me to continue serving alongside
    them and to deliver them the best medical care possible. Those
    same factors would motivate me to care for our Active Duty
    servicemembers, retirees, and their families if I am lucky
    enough to be confirmed.
        After retiring from the Army, I was fortunate to lead a
    successful and fulfilling civilian life. I was the
    administrator of the Lyndon B. Johnson Hospital, part of an
    integrated governmental system that provides critical
    healthcare service to the residents of Harris County, Texas;
    thereafter, I became the first Chief Medical Officer for an
    over 400-bed, acute care hospital in Brandon, Florida. I
    learned a lot about patient safety, quality of care, and
    efficient health care management.
        One of my favorite experiences was being a member of the
    Army Science Board where I participated in a multitude of
    studies. Through these experiences, I quickly learned that you
    don't need to wear a military uniform to serve the country and
    our communities.
        If confirmed, I believe that my previous military and
    civilian experiences will serve me well as the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs. I will be honored to
    have the opportunity to continue to serve our servicemembers,
    their families, and our retirees.
        I will strive for the highest level of force medical
    readiness and the readiness of the medical force. The future
    may bring difficult missions abroad and at home. To face these
    challenges, it is vital that we have a medically ready force.
    There must be a focus on prevention of injuries; however, if
    injured, we owe our servicemembers the best medical response we
    can muster as a Nation. We must continue to improve our care,
    develop solutions for new and old challenges, and work closely
    with our interagency friends and commercial partners to
    accomplish our mission. Our servicemembers deserve no less.
        I understand the military health care system is very large
    and complex, but if confirmed, I will do my best to improve the
    quality of the care, the quality of the service, and the value
    proposition to all those served by the Military Health System.
    I will work hard to complete the Military Health System Reform
    in a way that will strengthen the medical readiness of the
    Armed Forces and the readiness of the medical personnel, by
    improving health care benefits and services to millions of
    beneficiaries composed of servicemembers, military retirees,
    and family members.
        If confirmed, I commit to do my best for those serving our
    Nation, and I also commit to work with this committee and
    Congress in a transparent and responsive way to meet the health
    care needs of our servicemembers and their families and our
    retirees.
        Senators, I want to thank you for the opportunity to be
    here today and I look forward to your questions.
        [The statement of Dr. Martinez-Lopez follows:]

                    Prepared Statement by Dr. Martinez-Lopez
        Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and
    distinguished Committee Members. Thank you for allowing me to speak
    with you today.
        I am extremely honored and humbled to be here today as President
    Biden's nominee for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs.
    I am thankful for the trust placed in me by President Biden, Secretary
    Austin, and Under Secretary Cisneros.
        I was raised in Maricao, a small town in the mountains of Puerto
    Rico. Not in my wildest dreams would I have thought I would be in front
    of you today. During medical school, I was blessed to receive the
    Health Professions Scholarship Program. The financial support allowed
    me to dedicate myself to my studies and excel. I was driven by an
    interest in saving lives through medicine and serving the United
    States.
        Upon graduation, I joined the Active Duty Army at Fort Bragg, North
    Carolina, where I completed my Family Practice Residency. My plan was
    to fulfill my service obligation and return to Puerto Rico, but after
    volunteering for the first Multinational Force and Observers deployment
    to the Sinai, I got hooked. I loved serving with the Army in the field.
        My service led me to command soldiers for 12 years at home and
    abroad, serve with field units for 7 years, become the Chief Medical
    Officer of the United Nation's mission in Haiti, and serve as the
    senior medical officer during our Hurricane Mitch Response in Central
    America. My final assignment led me to command the United States Army
    Medical Research and Development Command and Fort Detrick, Maryland,
    where we worked on all aspects of medical research.
        Working with soldiers willing to risk their health and lives for
    our country inspired me to continue serving alongside them, and to
    deliver them the best medical care possible. Those same factors would
    motivate me to care for our Active Duty servicemembers, retirees, and
    their families if I'm lucky enough to be confirmed.
        After retiring from the Army, I was fortunate to lead a successful
    and fulfilling civilian life. I was the administrator of Lyndon B.
    Johnson Hospital, part of an integrated governmental system that
    provides critical healthcare service to the residents of Harris County,
    Texas. Thereafter, I became the first Chief Medical Officer of an over
    400-bed acute care hospital in Brandon, Florida. I learned a lot about
    patient safety, quality of care, and efficient health care management.
    One of my favorite experiences was being a member of the Army Science
    Board where I participated in a multitude of studies. Through these
    experiences, I quickly learned that you don't need to wear a military
    uniform to serve our County and our communities.
        If confirmed, I believe that my previous military and civilian
    experiences will serve me well as the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Health Affairs. I will be honored to have the opportunity to
    continue to serve our servicemembers, their families, and our retirees.
        I will strive for the highest level of force medical readiness and
    readiness of the medical force. The future may bring difficult missions
    abroad and at home. To face these challenges, it is vital to have a
    medically ready force. There must be a focus on prevention of injuries;
    however, if injured we owe our servicemembers the best medical response
    we can muster as a Nation. We must continue to improve our care,
    develop solutions for new and old challenges, and work closely with our
    interagency friends and commercial partners to accomplish our mission.
    Our servicemembers deserve no less.
        I understand the military health care system is very large and
    complex, but if confirmed, I will do my best to improve the quality of
    care, the quality of service, and the value proposition to all those
    served by the Military Health System. I will work hard to complete the
    Military Health System Reform in a way that will strengthen the medical
    readiness of the Armed Forces and the readiness of medical personnel;
    by improving health care benefits and services to millions of
    beneficiaries composed of servicemembers, military retirees, and family
    members.
        If confirmed, I commit to do my best for those serving our Nation.
    I also commit to work with this Committee and Congress, in a
    transparent and responsive way, to meet the health care needs of our
    servicemembers, their families, and our retirees.
        Senators, I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here today
    and I look forward to your questions.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you.
        Mr. Lowman, please?

      STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER J. LOWMAN, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT
                  SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SUSTAINMENT

        Mr. Lowman. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
    Inhofe----
        Chairman Reed. Your microphone, please.
        Mr. Lowman. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
    Inhofe and committee members. I am deeply honored to come
    before you today as President Biden's nominee for Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Sustainment.
        I would like to thank the President for nominating me and
    Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks for their
    confidence in me. If confirmed, I am excited for the
    opportunity to continue serving our Nation in this critical
    role during these extraordinary times.
        I want to start off by acknowledging my wife Tracey, who is
    here with me today and has been by my side for the last 25
    years. Tracey is the bedrock of our family, whose support has
    made my career and service to this Nation possible. Our
    greatest joy are our four children; two of which are here today
    with me, Shayne, a graduate of Virginia Commonwealth
    University, and Ian, a high school senior.
        Our other two children, Rhyane and Addison, are currently
    students at the University of Virginia and are watching
    virtually; in fact, my daughter Addison is currently enrolled
    as a Navy intern with a focus on computer science, and so she
    will continue the tradition of service.
        I am also grateful to my immediate and extended family for
    their sustained and honorable service to this country. We are a
    multi-generational, multi-service family, representing every
    service, and the Coast Guard, going back 80 years. My family's
    legacy of service has been a guiding force during my 36-year
    career, which began in 1984 on the well-known, yellow
    footprints at Parris Island. I started my post-Marine Corps
    life with the Army as a young GS-5, never in my wildest dreams
    did I imagine that I would, one day, be a nominee for the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense.
        I have served alongside both, women and men, soldiers and
    civilians, who dedicated their lives helping to sustain the
    readiness of our forces. I could not be more proud to call them
    colleagues and friends, and if confirmed, I will continue to
    serve at their side.
        The purpose of the Department of Defense is to provide
    military forces needed to deter war and ensure our Nation's
    security. To accomplish this mission, we must posture our
    sustainment capabilities to enable the readiness and meet the
    Nation's requirements when needed. Sustainment is most
    effective when integrated with the joint force and in
    coordination with our allies and industry partners. I
    appreciate the importance of sustainment and throughout my
    career I have learned that resilient sustainment is critical to
    enhancing our military's effectiveness.
        The role of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Sustainment is to ensure the resources needed to execute the
    Department's mission are readily available, while maximizing
    execution and affordability. The Assistant Secretary must
    ensure the services have the policies and processes necessary
    to succeed, and the Department has the proper oversight to
    ensure our strategic readiness posture is sufficient. The
    ultimate goal is to provide our servicemembers with the most
    modern, capable, and sustainable military equipment and
    supplies necessary to deter or defeat our adversaries.
        Secretary Austin has laid out clear priorities in his March
    2021, Message to the Force: defend the Nation; take care of our
    people; and succeed through teamwork. To that end, and if
    confirmed, my priorities will be to ensure our supply chain is
    resilient and defended; our civilian workforce is trained and
    equipped with the necessary analytical skills and tools needed
    to sustain a military in a complex, multi-domain environment;
    that our organic industrial base is modernized and fortified to
    meet the challenges of sustaining technologies required on a
    modern battlefield; and finally, that our modernization
    programs account for life-cycle and sustainment costs early in
    the acquisition process.
        I will work towards sustainment strategies that balance
    readiness requirements with cost in order to produce the
    maximum amount of combat power. There are numerous challenges
    in each of these areas, but with the help of the members of
    this committee and Congress, we will make the necessary
    improvements to ensure sustained readiness far into the future.
        If confirmed, I pledge to work with Congress, the services,
    industry, our partners and allies, and other stakeholders to
    enhance and sustain military readiness. The heavy
    responsibility and demands of this position are evident. Given
    the critical nature of the role and the importance of the
    mission I would dedicate myself fully to this task.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Lowman follows:]

                  Prepared Statement by Christopher J. Lowman
        Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and Committee
    members. I am deeply honored to come before you today as President
    Biden's nominee for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment. I
    would like to thank the President for nominating me and Secretary
    Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks for their confidence in me. If
    confirmed, I am excited for the opportunity to continue serving our
    Nation in this critical role during these extraordinary times.
        I want to start off by acknowledging my wife, Tracey, who is here
    with me today and has been by my side for the last 25 years. Tracey is
    the bedrock of our family, whose support has made my career and service
    to this Nation possible. Our greatest joy are our 4 children, two of
    which are here today, Shayne, a graduate of Virginia Commonwealth
    University, and Ian, a high school senior. Our other two children,
    Rhyane and Addison are currently students at the University of Virginia
    and are watching virtually. In fact, my daughter, Addison, is currently
    enrolled as a Navy intern with a focus on computer programming. I am
    also grateful to my immediate and extended family for their sustained
    and honorable service to this country. We are a multi-generational,
    multi-service family, representing every service, and the Coast Guard,
    going back 80 years.
        My family's legacy of service has been a guiding force during my
    36-year career, which began in 1984 on the well-known, yellow
    footprints at Parris Island. I started my post-Marine Corps life with
    the Army as a young GS-5, serving alongside both women and men--
    soldiers and civilians who dedicated their lives helping to sustain the
    readiness of our forces. I could not be more proud to call them
    colleagues and friends, and if confirmed I will continue to serve at
    their side.
        The purpose of the Department of Defense is to provide military
    forces needed to deter war and ensure our Nation's security. To
    accomplish this mission, we must posture our sustainment capabilities
    to enable the readiness and meet the Nation's requirements when needed.
    Sustainment is most effective when integrated with the joint force and
    in coordination with our allies and industry partners. I appreciate the
    importance of sustainment, and throughout my career I have learned that
    resilient sustainment is critical to enhancing our military's
    effectiveness, as well as applying all instruments of national power.
        The role of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment is
    to ensure the resources needed to execute the Department's mission are
    readily available, while maximizing execution and affordability. The
    Assistant Secretary must ensure the services have the policies and
    processes necessary to succeed, and the Department has the proper
    oversight to ensure our strategic readiness posture is sufficient. The
    ultimate goal is to provide our servicemembers with the most modern,
    capable, and sustainable military equipment and supplies necessary to
    deter or defeat our adversaries.
        Secretary Austin has laid out clear priorities in his March 2021,
    Message to the Force: Defend the Nation; Take Care of our People; and
    Succeed Through Teamwork. To that end, and if confirmed, my priorities
    will be to ensure our supply chain is resilient and defended; our
    civilian workforce is trained and equipped with the necessary
    analytical skills and tools needed to sustain a military in a complex,
    multi-domain environment; that our organic industrial base is
    modernized and fortified to meet the challenges of sustaining
    technologies required on a modern battlefield; and finally, that our
    modernization programs account for life-cycle and sustainment costs
    early in the acquisition cycle. I will work towards sustainment
    strategies that balance readiness requirements with cost in order to
    produce the maximum amount of combat power. There are numerous
    challenges in each of these areas, but with the help of the members of
    this committee and Congress, we will make the necessary improvements to
    ensure sustained readiness far into the future.
        If confirmed, I pledge to work with Congress, the services,
    industry, our partners and allies, and other stakeholders to enhance
    and sustain military readiness. The heavy responsibility and demands of
    this position are evident. Given the critical nature of the role and
    the importance of the mission I will dedicate myself fully to the task.
    Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you.
        Mr. Beshar, please?

    STATEMENT OF PETER J. BESHAR, NOMINEE TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF
                    THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

        Mr. Beshar. Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe,
    distinguished members of the committee, I consider it the honor
    of my life to be nominated by President Biden to serve as the
    General Counsel of the Department of the Air Force and have the
    opportunity to appear before this committee.
        A moment like this is really about all those who have
    supported you, and at the top of that list is my dear family.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for recognizing my wife Sarah, who has
    been at my side, my blessed side for 31 years, and our
    children: Isabel, Henry and Sophie.
        I would like to offer my comments this morning in the
    context of the three priorities set by Secretary Austin for the
    Department of Defense.
        First: Defend the Nation. Non-kinetic attacks pose a
    significant threat to our national security. As the Air Force
    develops its next-generation air dominance program, modernizes
    its nuclear enterprise, and builds out the Space Force,
    cybersecurity and technological innovation will be critical
    priorities. Over the past decade, I have developed domain
    expertise in cybersecurity, with a particular focus on public-
    private partnerships to protect our critical infrastructure.
        I have had the privilege of testifying before many of you
    in prior appearances before the Senate Homeland Security,
    Banking, and Commerce Committees about ways in which government
    and industry must come together to protect our critical
    infrastructure.
        Second: Take care of our people. The brave men and women of
    our armed forces represent the best of America. To honor their
    commitment and sacrifice, society has a solemn duty to protect
    them, as well as their families and our veterans. As recent
    reports have shown, there is important work that needs to be
    done to fully meet this responsibility.
        Early in my career, I had the great privilege of serving as
    the Special Assistant to former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance
    in the peace negotiations in the Balkans.
        It was my first exposure to war and it sparked a profound
    respect for our military and a deep interest in our national
    security.
        As Chair of the Veterans' Committee at John Jay College for
    Criminal Justice and executive sponsor of our veterans' program
    at Marsh McLennan, I spearheaded a series of initiatives, under
    the banner ``We've Got Your Six,'' to help veterans with job
    opportunities and enhanced benefits.
        If confirmed, one of my top priorities would be to support
    Secretary Kendall and the rest of the Department's leadership
    in implementing the sexual assault reforms recently approved by
    Congress and fostering a culture of integrity and inclusion.
        Third: Succeed through teamwork. In this era of strategic
    competition, the security challenges before our country require
    intense collaboration across the Executive Branch, with
    Congress, with industry, and with our allies. For the past 17
    years, I have served as the General Counsel of Marsh McLennan,
    a global professional services firm.
        With the support of my colleagues, I built a world-class,
    and diverse, legal and compliance team. I have developed the
    project management skills to drive policy change across an
    organization of more than 80,000 employees in 100 countries.
        If confirmed, I look forward to partnering with the
    civilian and military lawyers within the Department of the Air
    Force to provide sound and pragmatic advice in support of the
    mission articulated by Secretary Kendall, ``One Team. One
    Fight.''
        I want to express my appreciation to all the members of the
    committee for your consideration. I look forward to your
    questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Beshar follows:]

              Prepared Statement by Peter Beshar Opening Statement
        Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and distinguished Members of
    this Committee. I consider it the honor of my life to be nominated by
    President Biden to serve as the General Counsel of the Department of
    the Air Force and have the opportunity to appear before this Committee.
        A moment like this is really about all those who have supported
    you. At the top of that list is my dear family. Mr. Chairman, thank you
    for recognizing my wife, Sarah, who has been at my side for 31 blessed
    years, and our children, Isabel, Henry and Sophie.
        I would like to offer my comments within the framework of the three
    priorities set by Secretary Austin for the Department of Defense.
        First, defend the Nation.
        Non-kinetic attacks pose a significant threat to our national
    security. As the Air Force develops the next generation air dominance
    program, modernizes its nuclear enterprise and communication systems,
    and builds out the Space Force, cybersecurity and technological
    innovation will be critical priorities.
        Over the past decade, I have developed domain expertise in
    cybersecurity, with a particular focus on public-private partnerships
    to protect our critical infrastructure. I have had the privilege of
    testifying before many of you in prior appearances before the Senate
    Homeland Security, Banking and Commerce Committees about ways in which
    government and industry must come together to protect our critical
    assets against cyber threats.
        Second, take care of our people.
        The brave men and women of our armed forces represent the best of
    America. To honor their commitment and sacrifice, society has a solemn
    responsibility to equip them properly and care for them--as well as
    their families and our veterans. As recent reports have shown, there is
    important work that needs to be done to fully honor this commitment.
        Early in my career, I had the great privilege of serving as the
    Special Assistant to former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance in the peace
    negotiations in the Balkans. It was my first exposure to war, and it
    sparked a profound respect for our military and an abiding interest in
    our national security.
        As Chair of the Veterans' Committee at John Jay College for
    Criminal Justice and executive sponsor of our veterans' program at
    Marsh McLennan, I spearheaded a series of initiatives, under the banner
    ``We've Got Your Six,'' to provide veterans with job opportunities and
    enhanced benefits.
        If confirmed, one of my top priorities would be to support
    Secretary Kendall and the rest of the Department's leadership in
    implementing the sexual assault reforms recently adopted by Congress
    and fostering a culture of integrity and inclusion.
        Third, succeed through teamwork.
        In this era of strategic competition, the security challenges
    before our country require close collaboration--across the Executive
    branch, with Congress, with industry and with our allies.
        For the past 17 years, I have served as the General Counsel of
    Marsh McLennan, a global professional services firm that specializes in
    risk management. With the support of my colleagues, I have built a
    world-class, and diverse, legal and compliance team. I have also
    developed the project management skills to drive policy change across
    an organization of more than 80,000 employees in 100 countries.
        If confirmed, I look forward to partnering with the civilian and
    military lawyers within the Department to provide sound and pragmatic
    advice to support the mission articulated by Secretary Kendall:
        ``One Team. One Fight.''
        I want to thank each of the members of this Committee for your
    consideration.
        I look forward to your questions.

        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
        Gentlemen, I have a series of questions that are directed
    at all nominees. You may answer in unison.
        Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations
    governing conflicts of interest?
        [All three witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Reed. Have you assumed any duties or taken any
    actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the
    confirmation process?
        [All three witnesses answered in the negative.]
        Chairman Reed. Exercising our legislative and oversight
    responsibilities makes it important that the 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?
        [All three witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Reed. Do you agree to provide records, documents,
    or electronic communications in a timely manner when requested
    by this committee, its subcommittees, or other appropriate
    committees of Congress, and to consult with the requester
    regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial, in
    providing such records?
        [All three witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        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?
        [All three witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Reed. Will you cooperate and provide any witnesses
    and briefers, in response to congressional request?
        [All three witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Reed. Will those witnesses and briefers be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
        [All three witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
        Just for information of my colleagues, we anticipate a vote
    at noon. At that vote, we will hopefully have a committee
    hearing off the floor to move military nominations; military
    nominations alone. We would like to get this done; otherwise,
    we will lose some valuable time getting military personnel
    confirmed, including General Kurilla, who has been appointed as
    the new CENTCOM commander.
        Now, Mr. Storch, the IG plays so many critical roles, but
    one critical role is in maintaining the ethical sensitivity and
    priorities of the men and women of the Armed Forces. I think it
    springs from at least three sources, probably more: the
    constitutional oath one takes, the personal integrity one
    expects of the members of the military services, and also the
    ethic of protecting, not exploiting your subordinates.
        How can the IG help raise the ethical standards and insist
    on ethical qualifications?
        Mr. Storch. Thank you for the question, Chairman Reed.
        You know, IGs, I believe, play an important role in that
    area in a number of different ways, one of which is by doing
    audits, evaluations, and other oversight work that examines
    different issues across the Department and ensures that the
    Department is carrying out its responsibilities appropriately
    and in compliance with all requirements.
        On the other side, of course, we have an Investigations
    Division and where people don't meet those standards, it needs
    to be understood that IGs will appropriately investigate
    administrative misconduct, making findings, where appropriate,
    and also referring all matters for civil or criminal
    investigation, if that is appropriate.
        Additionally, beyond all of those sorts of functions, I
    think IGs play a critical role in the communication of ethical
    standards. I mentioned whistleblowers in my opening statements.
    I think that it is critically important that it be understood
    throughout an agency, up to the very top, that we encourage
    people, and people are encouraged to come forward if they see
    something that is wrong so that someone can look into it, and
    if appropriate, take corrective action, and so, that message
    needs to be disseminated across the Department, really starting
    at the very top.
        Additionally, IGs participate routinely in trainings and
    other programs that help to make clear to the workforce, the
    standards that are expected. So, I think there are myriad ways
    in which that can been done, and, if confirmed, I look forward
    to working on it.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Beshar, am I pronouncing that correctly, by the way?
        Mr. Beshar. More or less, Mr. Chairman: Beshar.
        Chairman Reed. Beshar.
        Well, in Rhode Island, it is Beshar, but Beshar for the
    moment. Thank you.
        I apologize.
        Mr. Beshar. Anything works.
        Chairman Reed. Yeah, I apologize.
        In a similar vein, the General Counsel of the Air Force
    will have a significant role in maintaining the ethical
    standards of the Air Force and, again, springing from the
    constitutional oath that we all take, the integrity of the
    individuals we expect, and also, for particularly military
    personnel, placing oneself behind the responsibilities for
    subordinates.
        Can you comment on your approach?
        Mr. Beshar. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
        I really think of the role in two ways. One is to serve as
    the principal legal advisor, as you indicated, to the Secretary
    and the leadership. Secretary Kendall has articulated seven
    operational imperatives and I would want to consult with the
    Secretary about how the Office of General Counsel could best
    support him.
        The second is really as the chief ethics officer in trying
    to inculcate an environment of integrity and inclusion, not
    simply to comply with the law, but also to engender trust with
    other stakeholders.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Lowman, congested logistics is a critical aspect.
    Napoleon said, an Army moves on its stomach, and, well, we are
    moving in the air, on sea, and on land, but we have got to
    move.
        Can you briefly comment on your approach to dealing with
    this issue?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you.
        So, as you rightly point out, Senator, global operations
    require secure access to supply chains and it requires secure
    access to both, inter- and intra-theater lift, whether that is
    surface lift or airlift capabilities.
        So, operations, for example, in the Indo-Pacific would
    require the necessary posture and positioning of our supplies.
    It requires the necessary end-to-end supply chain oversight and
    visibility, such that we understand where the supplies are, in
    fact, positioned, and that they are positioned at echelon and
    ready for use in support of any operation, regardless of where
    that is globally.
        If confirmed, Senator, I would certainly work with my staff
    on ASDS, as well as the COCOMs and the services, to ensure that
    end-to-end visibility is available and that we are reviewing
    the strategic positioning of supplies.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez, my time is short, but could I ask you
    what you consider, and very briefly, the greatest threat to the
    long-term viability of the military health care system?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, thank you very much for the
    question.
        I think readiness is the most important aspect to the
    military health system, so if the challenge is what is
    happening today in order to also sustain the readiness,
    resources, how many resources we have available, and the last
    question, and the tricky question is, what are the threats?
        Threats keep changing, especially in the medical field. We
    never dreamed of having a COVID maybe 10 years ago and now we
    are dealing with it.
        So, what will be the next threat and how well are we going
    to be equipped and resourced to deal with that threat.
        So, we have to be nimble and we have to be ready, too; I
    think that will be the biggest challenge the Department will
    face.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Doctor.
        Senator Inhofe, please?
        Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Beshar, the last NDAA, we just enacted some of the most
    sweeping changes to the uniform code of military justice since
    it has been created. To allow the military services to
    implement these reforms, we put into place a 2-year
    implementation period.
        With your background, people have heard me talk about this,
    but why is it so important for the Air Force to have time to
    implement these changes?
        Mr. Beshar. Senator Inhofe, sexual assault in any context
    is reprehensible. Sexual assault in the context of the military
    is particularly destructive because of its impact on unit
    cohesion and force readiness.
        The changes that the Congress have approved, taking
    specific crimes out of the chain of command, as well as the IRC
    recommendations that have been embraced by the Department of
    Defense, are substantial undertakings and are going to require
    a really sustained commitment from military commanders across
    the field, as well as the other senior leaders within the
    organization.
        The goal is to get it right, naturally; and, if confirmed,
    that is what I would try to do.
        Senator Inhofe. To get it right, it does take time,
    sometimes.
        Mr. Storch, I have heard some people recently calling for
    the use of artificial intelligence to monitor servicemembers'
    communications in order to root out potential extremists before
    they act. To me, this is one of the most outrageous things that
    I have ever heard.
        I would just ask you, in your view, what are the risks to
    servicemembers' civil liberties from using artificial
    intelligence to monitor their activities and how would you
    ensure that servicemembers' civil liberties are protected?
        Mr. Storch. Ranking Member Inhofe, as indicated in my
    initial statement, artificial intelligence and emerging
    technologies is an issue in which I have taken particular
    interest in the IG community and I lead the IG community's
    subcommittee in that area, where we are looking at ways to do
    oversight over its use.
        Additionally, at NSA OIG, we have been looking at that and
    we currently have a joint review that is pending, actually,
    with the Department of Defense IG, looking at the integration
    of artificial intelligence into the NSA CIGIE activities to
    ensure that that is being done in compliance with DOD and IC
    guidelines.
        So, those are issues with which I am generally familiar
    and, if confirmed, I would work with a team at the DOD IG to
    examine the issues you have identified and I would welcome the
    opportunity to engage with you and your staff on any concerns.
        Senator Inhofe. Sure, and I know, that is why I asked you
    the question, because you have that familiarity and that
    background.
        Mr. Storch. Yes, sir.
        Senator Inhofe. Now, Mr. Storch, there have been thousands
    of requests from the servicemembers for religious
    accommodations to the Department's COVID vaccine mandate and
    there have only been 12 accommodations granted thus far; that
    is three for marines and I think nine of them for airmen, and
    each of those servicemembers is already planning to leave.
        So, does it seem reasonable to you that services would
    grant only 12 religious accommodations when they have received
    over some-10,000 requests?
        I am not going to ask you, there wouldn't be time to answer
    anyway, how you would want to correct this situation, but will
    you commit to reviewing this issue and so we can have something
    in place to correct that problem?
        Mr. Storch. So, the OIG, obviously, has jurisdiction over
    all programs and operations of the Department. I know that the
    office has been engaged in looking at different aspects of the
    COVID response and has a pending audit related to the vaccine
    distribution plan. It is a rapidly changing situation.
        If I am confirmed, I certainly will commit to meeting with
    the team at the OIG and discussing the situation as it then
    exists, and if it is appropriate to do a review, then I am
    looking forward to pursuing that. That is something I would
    discuss with the team and would welcome the opportunity to
    discuss with you, as well, sir.
        Senator Inhofe. Thank you very much.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
        Senator Shaheen, please?
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations to each of the nominees and thank you to
    you and your families for being willing to come back into
    public service and take on these important positions.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez, I want to begin with you because in
    December with over 20 of my colleagues, we sent a bipartisan
    letter to the Department of Defense expressing our concern over
    the July 2021 DOD Inspector General Report on PFAS blood
    testing for firefighters.
        I am going to ask you about this, as well, Mr. Storch.
        But I was pleased, the Department moved quickly to provide
    a briefing, but I am very concerned that there still requires
    oversight of all PFAS matters and that that is going to require
    continuing attention.
        So, I would ask you, Doctor, you talked about the focus on
    the prevention of injuries, but, if confirmed, will you commit
    to really doing something with this data so we can assess what
    it says about the potential health impacts of PFAS and those
    who are exposed to it?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, PFAS and the threat it
    presents is, you know, all those chemicals have been with us
    for many, many years, 40 or more, and now we are learning that
    some may be dangerous to us.
        So, yes, if confirmed, I commit to look into this issue,
    look at ways to, if we could, get help in working with the
    services to get rid of those that we can get rid of; and if
    not, figure out a way to mitigate the exposure.
        Again, working with the service, I will give them the
    medical, environmental health experience that we bring, and
    hopefully, we will come out with a solution set that will, (A),
    prevent servicemembers and family members from getting exposed
    to these chemicals, and if not, ways to mitigate, and if
    needed, treated for the conditions.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you.
        One of the things that the Department is doing right now is
    fulfilling its requirement to provide PFAS blood testing for
    firefighters, but it doesn't encompass the broader military
    family.
        So, do you believe that blood testing for servicemembers
    and military families stationed at installations with known
    PFAS exposure should be offered blood testing?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, again, this is a concerning
    issue to all of us. We need to come out with an action plan.
        If confirmed, I will work with a health affairs team to try
    and figure out an answer to your question. Right now, I am not
    prepared to answer one way or the other, because I don't know.
    But I hope that, if confirmed, I will be able to come back to
    you and give you a clinical answer that is relevant to those
    exposed to these chemicals.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I really appreciate that and I
    am sure that this committee will be interested in working with
    you on that.
        Mr. Storch, I talked about the DOD IG report back in July
    on PFAS exposure. The report revealed that sufficient
    protective measures have not been taken to reduce exposure to
    PFAS substances and that PFAS blood testing programs for
    firefighters were underutilized to track exposure.
        So, can you talk about how you would see your role in
    monitoring progress related to PFAS testing and remediation.
        Mr. Storch. Absolutely, Senator.
        You know, it is, I am familiar with the report that you are
    talking about, obviously, and it is part of all OIG's work, not
    just to issue reports, but then to follow-up, as appropriate,
    right. So, we track the recommendations across the IG
    community.
        I am not, obviously, familiar with the particular status of
    those, but if I am confirmed, I certainly would look into that,
    and it is the IG's job to make sure that the agency is taking
    timely and appropriate action to meet the intent of our
    recommendations. So, I would work with a team at the OIG to
    make sure that is being done.
        Additionally, as we do that, we often find areas for
    additional review that are warranted and we would continue to
    be open to that, as well, and if appropriate, do such a review.
    Thank you.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Again, I know this committee looks forward to working with
    you on that and doing what we can to be responsive.
        Mr. Lowman, again, if confirmed, you will be responsible
    for overseeing energy and environmental policies within the
    Department. Identifying the source of PFAS in the environment
    is crucial to protecting safe drinking water in our
    communities, particularly at DOD installations.
        So, can you talk about how you will work with the EPA to
    develop and employ new methods to address PFAS?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you.
        So, first, let me just say that the safety of our
    servicemembers, families, and local communities is of paramount
    importance. I understand that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
    just signed out a memorandum establishing an Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for energy, environment, and
    installations.
        If confirmed, I will work very closely with the new ASD
    EI&E to make sure that there is a deliberate and efficient
    transfer of the personnel and resources and policies from ASDS
    to the ASD EI&E to enable success and continue the momentum in
    this area.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much. I really
    appreciate that.
        I am out of time, but Mr. Beshar, I would just point out
    that the Air Force was very responsive when PFAS showed up in
    the water at the former Pease Air Force Base in Portsmouth, New
    Hampshire. I would hope that you, in your role, will continue
    to support those efforts and encourage continued responsiveness
    on the part of the Air Force when PFAS shows up at
    installations.
        Mr. Beshar. I will, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Cramer, please?
        Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you all for being here, for your willingness to
    serve, and congratulations to all of you.
        I have a couple of questions, Dr. Martinez that I want to
    focus in on with you, and a little feedback there. I am going
    to start with, you are obviously familiar with fertility
    awareness, so the fertility awareness-based method, a natural
    type of pregnancy that is--is used by several women; obviously,
    it enables them to observe and chart changes in one or
    biomarkers. It is a method, of course, that has no side
    effects. It is relatively inexpensive. Currently, though, there
    is a lack of access to this at military installations or
    treatment facilities and, of course, TRICARE doesn't cover it.
        Would you commit to looking into adding fertility
    awareness-based methods to the options that our servicemembers
    have when they are doing their family planning?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, thank you very much for the
    question.
        You know, the healthcare of all servicemembers, including
    female servicemembers, is of utmost importance to the
    Department. If I get confirmed, I would commit to you, we need
    to look at ways to bring parity for reproductive health issues
    relating to our servicemembers.
        So, yes, I will be looking into those kinds of issues and
    we need to come out with a parity equation with the rest of the
    Nation for how we address all those issues.
        Senator Cramer. I appreciate that. I will look forward to
    that upon your confirmation and to following up.
        Also, you know, DARPA's pandemic preparedness program,
    Doctor, was really integral in lots of ways. I mean, it was
    very successful, but it was particularly integral for antibody-
    discovery programs and that, of course, led to a therapeutic to
    combat COVID. Now, I think we see, as we look back on that and
    as we look forward, that these therapies are probably the best
    defense and maybe even the best offense in combatting COVID
    and, perhaps, other viruses in the future.
        So, there is a company in North Dakota, Genovac that has
    been leading and working with DARPA in antibody discovery.
    Through them I have seen just how very fast we are able to
    respond and quickly we can develop these targeted responses to
    other viral threats.
        So, do you agree that we should be devoting as much, if not
    more, resources for therapeutic discovery and development, and
    then, and maybe if you just want to elaborate a little bit on
    what else DOD can do to prepare for future pandemics along
    these lines.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, my last post was at a command
    at Fort Detrick and I am very proud that, to have been part of
    that exercise, of bringing about new technology that now we see
    all over, serving the country well. I was partnered with DTRA.
    I was partnered with DARPA, trying to advance this kind of
    technology and, by the way, mRNAs, you know, vaccines, that is
    where they came about from.
        Senator Cramer. Yes.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. The genesis of all that new technology
    was a DOD-based research, you know, program.
        So, if confirmed, sir, I would love to keep being a proud
    member of that team that advances science for the country and
    comes out with new solution sets to the new problems that we
    are going to be facing.
        Senator Cramer. That is great, Doctor.
        I might, then, use this opportunity, as I often like to do,
    to invite you to North Dakota to Fargo, to see some of what is
    going on right there. You can either come in February, that
    earns you a lot of street cred, or you can come in June, which
    is just a, you know, nice time to visit.
        With that, I yield back.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Cramer.
        Now, via Webex, let me recognize Senator Gillibrand,
    please.
        Senator Gillibrand. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
        Welcome to all our nominees.
        First, for Mr. Storch, Mr. Storch, in your current position
    as NSA Inspector General, are you familiar with the DOD's IG's
    ongoing assessment of the response from DOD components to the
    intrusions of unidentified aerial phenomenon into controlled
    DOD airspace, as well as UAP activities around naval and air
    operations; further, do you think the NSA has been responsive
    to the DOD's IG inquiries?
        Mr. Storch. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        I am afraid that is not an issue with which I am currently
    familiar; however, if confirmed, I certainly am willing to look
    into that and to take any action that is appropriate.
        Senator Gillibrand. Well, thank you.
        If confirmed, can I have your commitment to sustain this
    comprehensive assessment until it reaches its appropriate
    conclusion, including the possibility of follow-on actions,
    such as audits or investigations, if the assessment recommends
    as much?
        Mr. Storch. Well, again, I honestly am not familiar with
    that particular review, but as is typical, I think, across the
    IG community, when a new IG comes in, if there are pending
    matters, those would continue in the office and it would be
    perfectly appropriate to examine them.
        If I am confirmed, I can assure you that anything that is
    pending when I am in the office, I will give my best attention
    to and if there is appropriate follow-up to be done, we will do
    it.
        Senator Gillibrand. Okay. So, since you are familiar, can
    you please familiarize yourself with this issue and respond to
    both of those questions in writing before your confirmation,
    please?
        Mr. Storch. Yes, ma'am.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        Mr. Storch. I have confirmed that the DOD OIG publicly
    announced in May 2021 that it was initiating an evaluation of
    the DOD's Actions Regarding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. The
    stated objective of the evaluation is to determine the extent
    to which the DOD has taken actions regarding unidentified
    aerial phenomena, and the DOD OIG indicated, as I believe is
    typical, that it might revise the objective as the evaluation
    proceeds and would consider suggestions from management for
    additional or revised objectives. It is my understanding that
    this evaluation is pending. The distribution of the memorandum
    announcing the evaluation included the directors of the defense
    intelligence agencies, including the NSA, and I am not aware of
    any particular issue regarding the responsiveness of the NSA to
    any DOD OIG inquiries in connection with the matter. As NSA is
    within the DOD and the DOD OIG regularly conducts independent
    oversight work at the NSA, I believe that it is well positioned
    to address any such concerns. I would, of course, be prepared
    to provide any assistance to the DOD OIG as may be requested
    and appropriate consistent with the memorandum of understanding
    between our offices.
        If I am confirmed and this evaluation is pending, I would
    intend to work with the team at DoD OIG to ensure that it
    reaches an appropriate and logical conclusion, including the
    possibility of follow-on actions or investigations if the
    current assessment suggests a need to do so.

        Senator Gillibrand. Okay. Mr. Lowman, recently, Balfour
    Beatty Corporation, a privatized military housing contract,
    pleaded guilty to defrauding the DOD and was ordered to pay $65
    million in damages. Balfour Beatty's lack of maintenance
    unnecessarily exposed military families to toxic mold, insect
    infestations, water leaks, and burst pipes, causing health
    problems like migraines, asthma, and skin conditions. Despite
    the fraud, Balfour still manages military housing on
    installations across the country.
        In January, I joined 16 of my democratic colleagues in
    sending the Department of Defense a letter asking how they plan
    to protect servicemembers and their families going forward.
        If confirmed, how do you plan on correcting deficiencies in
    military privitized housing systems to protect servicemembers
    and their families from hazardous living conditions?
        Mr. Lowman. Thank you, Senator.
        So, our servicemembers sacrifice much in the service to
    this Nation, along with their families, and at a minimum, they
    deserve safe, clean housing to reside in. I understand, Senator
    that the Deputy Secretary of Defense signed out memorandum
    yesterday creating an Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Energy, Installations, and the Environment.
        So, if confirmed, I will work with the ASD EI&E to ensure
    that we have a deliberate and planned transition of the
    resources, the policies, and the personnel necessary to ensure
    that that organization is stood up and is able to hold
    contractors, such as Balfour Beatty, accountable.
        Senator Gillibrand. Thank you.
        Mr. Beshar, congratulations and welcome. I have a tough
    question for you, too. In November 2021 DOD IG Report
    highlighted several deficiencies with the Department's special
    victims investigation and prosecution capabilities.
        The report specifically identified shortcomings within the
    Air Force's prosecution of special victims cases, finding that
    the Air Force only assigns special victims-certified
    prosecutors in 6 percent of eligible cases, which is, by far,
    the lowest among the services. It is unacceptable to not assign
    trained personnel to deal with these complex and sensitive
    cases.
        If confirmed, do you intend to assist the Secretary in
    addressing this issue and do you further commit to ensuring
    there are enough trained personnel to handle these sensitive
    cases?
        Mr. Beshar. Senator Gillibrand, fostering a culture of
    integrity and inclusion within the Department is
    extraordinarily important. I think the diversity is what makes
    our forces the greatest in the world.
        I am not familiar in my current position, outside of
    government, with the level of staffing, but certainly trying to
    have a number of qualified investigators able to look into
    those types of matters would be important, and, if confirmed, I
    would work toward that goal.
        Senator Gillibrand. Thank you very much, Mr. Beshar.
        With my last 10 seconds, for Dr. Martinez-Lopez, in
    January, I wrote a letter calling on TRICARE to expand its
    coverage to include at-home testing for servicemembers and
    their families, without a physician referral.
        Will you commit to expanding coverage of the at-home
    testing in order to ensure our forces sustain readiness?
        I have three questions specifically on suicide and mental
    health capacity, which I will forward for the record so that
    you can respond to it after the hearing.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, thank you very much for the
    question.
        You know, healthcare parity of the services we offer to our
    servicemembers, family members, and retirees has to be very
    important to us. So, if confirmed, I will look at, with my
    team, I will work hard to understand better what prevents us
    from achieving parity and I will strive for that. If I need
    help, I probably may come back to ask for help, but I commit
    that I will look at solution sets that will bring healthcare
    parity for all.
        Senator Gillibrand. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to our nominees.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Gillibrand.
        Let me recognize Senator Blackburn, please.
        Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        To each of you, I want to say thank you for willingness to
    serve our country and for your family's willingness to allow
    you to serve our country.
        Mr. Lowman, I want to come to you first. FSRM is something
    that we in Tennessee talk about a good bit, because as you are
    aware, we have a heavy military presence in our state, and this
    is something important to us.
        What is the current backlog on FSRM? What is that deficit
    right now?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you for that question.
        So, FSRM is critical to sustaining the readiness of our
    services.
        Senator Blackburn. Yeah. What is the deficit?
        Mr. Lowman. Ma'am, I am not familiar with the current
    deficit.
        Senator Blackburn. Okay.
        Mr. Lowman. I would have to----
        Senator Blackburn. I think we want to get that number,
    because it is billions in backlogged projects.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        Mr. Lowman. It is my understanding that the fiscal year
    2021 estimate of the Department's FSRM backlog was
    approximately $121 billion.

        Senator Blackburn. Do you think it is an issue of priority
    or under-resourcing that DOD has acquired such a backlog?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you again.
        I understand, Senator, that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
    has created a new position, Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    installations, energy, and the environment. So, this particular
    FSRM topic is no longer in the ASDS sustainment portfolio;
    however, if confirmed, I would be happy to work with the ASD
    EI&E to better under the issue and to ensure that you get
    answers to your questions.
        Senator Blackburn. Well, it is a portfolio that has grown
    so large that it takes the attention of more than one----
        Mr. Lowman. Yes, ma'am.
        Senator Blackburn.--at this point, and it is, it does have
    an impact, as you are aware, on recruiting, on retention, and
    on the programs that are being implemented and the projects
    that are being carried out inside those facilities.
        So, I would like a commitment from you that if you are
    confirmed, that you will visit Arnold Engineering Development
    Center in Tennessee with me. This is an Air Force Base and at
    Arnold, they are carrying out our hypersonics testing; that is
    where we have our Air Force wind tunnels. It is where
    autonomous vehicles are being tested for the Air Force. Its
    importance is growing because of Space Force location in
    Huntsville, Alabama, which is in cash flows proximity to Arnold
    on the Tennessee side of the line. So, it is quite important to
    us.
        Do I have your commitment?
        Mr. Lowman. You do, ma'am.
        Senator Blackburn. Thank you, I appreciate that.
        Mr. Beshar, welcome. How does the Air Force balance this
    initiative that Secretary Austin has started with a working
    group on countering extremist activities?
        This is something that, from our families of enlisted men
    and women, I am hearing a good bit about this, because you have
    got to hit a balance with that so that you, and you have to
    look at how it impacts the rights of the person in uniform and
    their personal beliefs and the role that the Department is
    going to have there in protecting these civil liberties. So,
    how do you do that?
        Mr. Beshar. Senator Blackburn, I think the overwhelming
    majority of airmen and guardians, and, indeed, the two-million-
    plus members of the total force serve this country with honor
    and dignity and consistent with their oaths.
        There is the working group that has been established to try
    to provide guidance around the contours of prohibited
    activities, and, if confirmed, trying to strike the very
    balance that you have spoken about between First Amendment
    rights and the need for good and order and discipline would be
    a priority.
        Senator Blackburn. Thank you.
        Mr. Storch, I want to come to you on this COVID vaccine
    issue that we have with DOD. At Fort Campbell, we have heard a
    little bit about this, as you can imagine.
        By the way, Mr. Chairman, I notice that we have a series of
    letters from Senator Johnson in his capacity.
        Have these been submitted to the nominees or submitted to
    the record for discussion?
        Chairman Reed. Excuse me, ma'am?
        Senator Blackburn. Okay. I am referencing the letters.
        Chairman Reed. There are a series of letters that Senator
    Tuberville----
        Senator Blackburn. Yes. Have they been submitted to----
        Chairman Reed. They have not been submitted for the record
    yet, ma'am.
        Senator Blackburn. Okay. Let's submit them to the record--
    --
        Chairman Reed. Without objection.
        Senator Blackburn.--and questions for response. I think
    that would be important to you, Mr. Storch.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Blackburn. I would like to know where your views
    are on implementing the vaccine mandate on civilian personnel
    and on our DOD contractors, and then with our men and women in
    uniform, how the consideration is given for their medical and
    religious procedures, how we are addressing natural immunity,
    which is stronger than the immunity received from a vaccine
    over time. So, let's do all of that for the record. That gets
    you off the hook right now.
        Dr. Martinez----
        Mr. Storch. I have the answer ready to go.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Blackburn. Well, okay.
        Mr. Chairman, can he give his answer?
        Chairman Reed. A brief answer, please, for Senator
    Blackburn.
        Mr. Storch. Yes, Senator.
        All I was really going to say is that, you know, IGs are
    authoritative when we speak based upon our work, and so I am
    aware that the DOD IG is doing some work in the areas you have
    discussed and as I indicated previously, if there is additional
    work to be done after I am confirmed, we will look into that,
    as well. I can't make that assessment now.
        So, that is it; yes, ma'am.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Blackburn.
        Could I ask the witnesses to move their microphones closer.
    That will help us all hear you much better. Thank you very
    much.
        Now, let me recognize Senator Blumenthal, please.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to second the remarks made by Senator Shaheen about
    the importance of combatting pollution from PFAS. It is very
    important to Connecticut, where some of the runoffs from our
    military bases have threatened civilian populations. But PFAS
    is only one of the chemicals that seems to be emanating from
    bases around the United States, maybe around the world.
        I am sure that my colleague Senator Hirono has focused on
    the Navy's Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility in Hawaii in
    preparation for this hearing.
        Camp Lejeune in North Carolina has, literally, hundreds,
    maybe thousands of families severely, adversely affected by
    toxic water that caused cancer and other very serious health
    issues for thousands of veterans and their families.
        My colleagues and I, Senator Tillis and I have led an
    effort to give those families a measure of justice. It is
    called the ``Camp Lejeune Justice Act; bipartisan legislation
    that would correct unfair legal barriers and enable people
    affected by toxic exposure at Camp Lejeune to present evidence
    of exposure before a Court, which right now, they can't
    practically do.
        I have called on the Department of Defense to provide a
    national audit of all military installations to determine where
    contaminants are present.
        Mr. Lowman, will you commit to doing a national audit of
    all military installations to determine where contaminants are,
    what can be done to stop them and how to provide justice to
    families and veterans affected?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you.
        So, our servicemembers deserve to serve on installations
    free of contamination, and so, if confirmed, what I can commit
    to is working very closely with the new Assistant Secretary of
    Defense for installations, environment, and energy to ensure
    that we gain an understanding of where those contaminants lie--
    I am sorry for tripping on that word, Senator--so, where those
    contamination areas are on our installations and then
    initiating the appropriate actions to remediate that
    contamination.
        Senator Blumenthal. Well, don't you think that a national
    audit of military installations is a good idea?
        I know that you are going to work closely with the new
    Secretary and so forth and so on, but you, personally, don't we
    need to do it?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, I do believe that we need to identify
    where those areas of contamination are and what is driving the
    contamination and then taking on the necessary and appropriate
    actions to remediate those, as necessary. Our servicemembers
    absolutely deserve a clean environment to live on and operate
    from.
        Senator Blumenthal. Well, I really think that a systemic
    change here is required. Appointing a new Assistant Secretary
    maybe will help, but what is really needed is action in this
    area.
        I would like to ask you, do you support the right of
    individuals exposed to toxic water at Camp Lejeune since 1953
    to bring legal action against the United States Government, as
    would be provided in the Camp Lejeune Justice Act?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, I am not familiar with that particular
    issue, but believe strongly that wherever contamination occurs
    and personnel that have been contaminated, that there is
    redress available to those servicemembers and that that be
    addressed appropriately.
        I will commit to working closely within the Department,
    within the senior Army leadership, and certainly with the legal
    channels to better under that issue. If confirmed as the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, wherever
    sustainment activities are contributing to that contamination,
    developing the necessary policies and processes to remediate
    that as quickly as possible.
        Senator Blumenthal. Well, I appreciate that answer. I will
    be following up with more questions for the record.
        Mr. Storch, you and I talked at some length about your
    record at NSA, which I thought was commendable for emphasizing
    transparency and I hope that you will cooperate with this
    committee in trying to move toward declassifying more
    information that the public needs and deserves; particularly,
    for example, on civilian casualties of drone strikes, where IG
    reports, I think, could be extremely informative and valuable
    to public understanding of the, perhaps, unforeseen and
    unintended effects that have to be avoided in the future. So, I
    appreciate your commitment to transparency and I believe we
    have your commitment to continuing it.
        Mr. Storch. Senator, I believe very strongly that a core
    function of IGs is to promote transparency in the work that we
    do and I am going to do everything I can, if I am confirmed, to
    continue that.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
        Senator Cotton, please?
        Senator Cotton. Dr. Martinez, I want to speak about the
    Defense Health Agency. When it was founded a few years back,
    one concern that we heard is that services might pull back
    staffing from joint medical billets if they perceive higher
    needs in their own commands.
        This was enough of a concern for the committee that in the
    most recent NDAA, we passed a provision that required the
    services to maintain an 85 percent of the manning requirements
    from the 2016 joint table of distribution at joint hospital and
    clinic settings.
        I am concerned that what we heard at the time when the DHA
    was founded, it may be coming to pass. I know you have been out
    for a few years. As you prepared for the hearing, prepared to
    take on this responsibility, is this a concern that you have
    heard that services may be pulling back, somewhat, from these
    joint medical billets to make sure their own facilities are
    fully staffed?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, as I am coming in, the number
    one issue I am concerned about is the readiness of the force.
    So, if I am confirmed, I will work with the team to understand
    better your question and the particulars of detriments or plus
    ops, whatever is required.
        But the litmus test must be, are we going to create an
    environment that encourages readiness, so, or are we taking
    away from that?
        If the answer is we are taking away from that, we have to
    relook. If the answer is we are going in the right direction, I
    will reinforce that issue.
        So, if confirmed, again, I commit that that will be my
    driving force and I hope that I can bring a positive change to
    the military health system.
        Senator Cotton. Well, thank you. I look forward to working
    with you on that. Like I said, I know you have been out for a
    while, so I don't expect you to have all the details ready at
    your fingertips.
        Maybe after you have been on the job, after confirmation,
    in 30 days, we can talk about where the manning stands at all
    the joint medical facilities and especially at the crown jewel,
    at Walter Reed up the road.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, it would be my honor.
        Senator Cotton. Another issue that I have heard some
    concerns about in recent years is the amount of time that it
    takes to authorize military healthcare for all government
    employees who are experiencing symptoms from what has been
    called ``anomalous health incidents,'' also known as the
    ``Havana Syndrome.''
        This is not a question or a concern about the source of the
    so-called Havana Syndrome symptoms or who may or may not be
    responsible for them; I know that has been in the media a lot
    lately. This is simply about those people who are experiencing
    those symptoms and making sure that they get timely care.
        Again, we were concerned enough about it on this committee
    that in the most recent NDAA, we directed the Secretary of
    Defense to provide timely access for an assessment, subject to
    space and availability at the National Intrepid Center or any
    other appropriate military, medical treatment facility, and to
    furnish that care to all U.S. Government employees and their
    family members who may experience these symptoms.
        If confirmed, can you ensure that government employees and
    their family members who experience anomalous health incident
    symptoms can get timely access to evaluation and treatment at a
    military hospital or at the National Intrepid Center?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, I will work with the other
    departments and agencies and, yes, I will work hard to
    streamline the access to those that require it.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        I think it is really important; obviously, these incidents
    are centered mostly around our embassies, where we do have
    uniformed servicemembers as Defense attaches or other
    positions. But Americans who are serving in those positions,
    whether at State or another government agency, also need the
    benefit of the expertise, I think, that the military brings to
    bear.
        Mr. Lowman, a question for you. I have recently introduced
    bipartisan legislation with Senator Kelly called the REEShore
    Act that would secure the supply chain for rare-earth elements
    and several other critical minerals.
        It has recently come to my attention that the Defense
    Logistics Agency's National Defense Stockpile has been
    dangerously underfunded for years. I am greatly concerned that
    we rely too heavily on Chinese processing facilities to refine
    the raw materials necessary for our systems.
        If confirmed, can you commit to me to making sure that the
    National Defense Stockpile's budget and authorization requests
    match the requirements that are set forth by law?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, there will be no greater advocate in
    the Department for the necessary materials and the resources
    needed; one, to sustain readiness, but, two, to mitigate and
    build resiliency within our national defense supply chains.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you. I appreciate it.
        I just want to stress it again, this is a solvable problem.
    The irony about rare-earth elements is that they are anything
    but rare. You could probably go out on the National Mall and
    dig up most of them. What is rare is the actually mining and
    the manufacturing processing of it, which we foolishly
    outsourced to China over recent decades and it is vital that we
    get that production out of China, back into the United States,
    and I also encourage our partners to produce those minerals and
    refine them as well.
        Thank you.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Cotton.
        Senator Hirono, please?
        Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Welcome and congratulations to all of our nominees.
        Normally, I start each nomination hearing with a series of
    questions related to a nominee's fitness for service; however,
    based on the severity of the ongoing water contamination crisis
    on Oahu, I am going to submit those questions for the record.
        I am not sure how familiar you are with Red Hill. It is a
    massive underground fuel storage facility, consisting of 20
    massive World War II tanks, located 100 feet over Oahu's
    aquifer that holds 250 million gallons of fuel to support
    military operations across the Indo-Pacific. The storage
    facility has contaminated the Navy's water system, displacing
    almost 4,000 families since December. As a result, the State of
    Hawaii has directed the Navy to de-fuel the tanks.
        The Department of Defense estimates the cost of the crisis
    response, alone to date, is almost $500 million and that does
    not include de-fueling the tanks or the cost of upgrades to do
    so safely.
        The Navy must immediately resolve the drinking water crisis
    and the Department of Defense must develop a long-term plan for
    strategic fuel storage. The people of Hawaii deserve a
    resolution to the Red Hill crisis as quickly as possible,
    including a decision regarding the potential closing of Red
    Hill.
        The fastest way to do this is through the State of Hawaii's
    ongoing hearing to determine whether to provide or deny a
    permit to operate Red Hill. At the end of the day, the health
    and safety of the people of Hawaii and the military members and
    their families is my top priority; a goal shared by the
    Secretary of Defense. The fundamental component of health and
    safety is access to clean drinking water; a goal we should all
    be focused on.
        A question for Mr. Storch. In November, I led the effort,
    along with my colleagues from the Hawaii delegation, in calling
    for the DOD Inspector General to start an independent
    investigation into Navy oversight and operation at the Red Hill
    bulk fuel storage facility. Even if the State of Hawaii
    declines to give Red Hill a permit, it is imperative that
    investigation continues. The people of Hawaii deserve answers
    about what happened in order to mend the distrust of the
    military that has resulted from this crisis.
        Mr. Storch, if confirmed, will you continue the current IG
    investigation into Red Hill with the urgency it deserves?
        Mr. Storch. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        I am aware of the pendency of an evaluation. I am not
    familiar with the current status of it. But if I am confirmed,
    certainly, I will work with the term at the OIG to ensure that
    it is appropriately followed through on and any appropriate
    recommendations made and those are followed through on, as
    well.
        If I can, I would just mention, with regard to Senator
    Gillibrand's question, I don't think I answered it very
    articulately, but it would essentially be the same answer, that
    I am not aware, as the IG of NSA, of the current status of
    pending evaluations at other offices, but if I am confirmed, I
    will make sure that we follow through, as appropriate. Thank
    you.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you.
        Mr. Lowman, a long-term concern I know the military has
    with respect to Red Hill is the national security impact that
    de-fueling and shutting down the facility could have.
        I have spoken with Deputy Secretary Hicks several times
    about this concern. She has launched a thorough review of the
    facilities long-term future to include the option of
    permanently de-fueling Red Hill and is analyzing the
    distribution of fuel reserves for operations in the Pacific
    theater.
        You mentioned already in your testimony that you indicate
    that the Indo-Pacific needs, which is, of course, a huge AOR,
    and the supplies that will be required, that includes fuel, so
    that is something that you have already acknowledged. The
    Department needs a storage and logistics solution for the
    strategic fuel reserves and this is an issue that will likely
    require extensive funds and direction from Congress.
        Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, you will be responsible for
    overseeing the fuel requirements for the Department. Very
    briefly, how do you intend to approach this issue?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you.
        I am aware of a couple of ongoing initiatives. One you
    referenced already, the DSD's sponsored study of the strategic
    positioning of petroleum supplies in the Indo-Pacific at
    echelon and whether any changes in the positioning of that fuel
    can be made.
        The second one, ma'am, are establishing an end-to-end
    common operating picture of our petroleum supplies using
    advanced data analytics and AI, where appropriate, so that we
    can better manage the flow, the consumption, and the overall
    transportation requirements.
        So, if confirmed, I will work very closely with the DLA,
    USTRANSCOM, the COCOMs, and the services to ensure that, one,
    these initiatives have the appropriate oversight at the
    Department and, two, that they remain records and on track for
    successful conclusion.
        Senator Hirono. Mr. Chairman, with regard to Red Hill, it
    is highly likely that the State of Hawaii will not grant a
    permit for the continuing operations of Red Hill and,
    therefore, we are going to need to address how we are going to
    meet the fueling needs of the Indo-Pacific AOR. I have some
    other questions that I would like to submit for the record.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Hirono.
        Senator Tillis, please?
        Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I will defer to Senator Sullivan.
        Chairman Reed. Senator Sullivan, please?
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to my friend Senator Tillis.
        Gentlemen, congratulations on your nominations. You know,
    as the chairman of this important committee knows, Alaska
    constitutes three pillars of America's military might. We are
    the cornerstone of Missile Defense for the whole nation. All
    the radar ground-based missile interceptors are almost all in
    Alaska.
        We are the hub of air combat power. By the end of this
    year, we will have over 100 fifth-generation fighters in, based
    in Alaska. No place on the planet Earth has 100 fifth-gen
    fighters in one location.
        We are a platform for expeditionary forces to deploy
    anywhere in the world on a moment's notice. We are very close
    to a lot of the hotspots in Asia; much closer than anyplace in
    the United States, even places, much closer than places like
    Australia. A lot of people don't know that.
        So, whether you have been to Alaska or not, I would like to
    get a commitment from each of you, early in your tenure, to
    come up to Alaska, either with me or with your team, to see
    firsthand, the critical importance of my state to the national
    security of our Nation.
        Mr. Storch?
        Why don't we just go down the line?
        The answer is yes----
        Mr. Storch. Yeah. No, I am trying to make sure my mike is
    on.
        Senator Sullivan.--to a really easy question.
        Mr. Storch. Yes, I would be, I have never been to Alaska. I
    know it is an important place. I would be honored to visit
    there and understand the issues.
        Senator Sullivan. All right. So, you are committing to come
    to Alaska?
        Mr. Storch. Sure.
        Senator Sullivan. Yes. Okay. Great.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Sir, the answer is yes.
        Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you. Good.
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, Alaska is critical and it is
    positioned uniquely on the globe, so I would commit to, one,
    coming to Alaska to better understand the unique environment
    and challenges that exist there. I want to work with the ASDA,
    as well as my staff and the services, to ensure that the
    sustainment capabilities in Alaska are up to the task to
    maintain readiness and ensure that combat power. So, yes, I
    will come and visit.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
        Mr. Beshar?
        Mr. Beshar. Yes.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
        I want to follow-up on Senator Hirono's talk about Red
    Hill. I was recently out in the INDOPACOM AOR and I will tell
    you, I mean, I don't have to, she is doing a great job, but
    this is a huge issue and I certainly want to work with her and
    this committee.
        When we talk about strategic location, Mr. Lowman, I would
    actually like to get your commitment. As you are really looking
    at the really complex issues here, and they are complex, but it
    is logistics in the INDOPACOM theater.
        One area that hasn't gotten a lot of discussion on this,
    the U.S. Navy has been thinking strongly about warming up the
    very strategically located naval base, formal naval base of
    Adak, Alaska. It is further west than Hawaii. It is way out in
    the Aleutian Islands chain, bit is a big former base with
    massive fuel storage capabilities. I am not sure it is the
    answer, but it is certainly something that should be looked at,
    as this really complicated and difficult issue in Hawaii is
    being addressed.
        Can I get your commitment, Mr. Lowman, to just take a look
    at that as one potential part of the solution?
        As Senator Hirono mentioned, having the logistics and
    fueling capability in the INDOPACOM region is enormously
    important, especially to our Navy fleet. This is one element of
    a potential solution that hasn't been looked at, and I think it
    should be looked at.
        Can I get your commitment to look at that?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, I think all options, in this case,
    should be on the table, and so, if confirmed, I will work with
    TRANSCOM, DLA, and the other OSD stakeholders to, one,
    expeditiously complete the review and the study and make the
    appropriate recommendations.
        Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you.
        I do want to work with Senator Hirono on this, as well.
        Mr. Storch and Mr. Beshar, one issue that I have been
    focused on, because I think it has been misreported, and to be
    perfectly honest, I think it has been a blight, unfortunately,
    from some members of this administration, on the military force
    itself, is this issue on extremism. We don't want any extremist
    actions, actors in our military.
        Unfortunately, I think when Under Secretary Kahl came
    before this committee, he said that stamping out systemic
    racism in the ranks was one of his top priorities. I asked him,
    wow, that is a pretty broad statement.
        Do you have any data on that?
        He had no data, of course.
        The media wildly reports this as some kind of giant crisis
    in the military. We had a member here who actually said
    estimates are 10 percent of the force would be, could be
    branded as extremist or racist.
        When the military actually did the study, finally, they
    found that less than 100 cases in a force of over 2 million
    were undertaking prohibited, extremist activities. Now, look,
    we want--we don't--we want zero, but that is .005 percent of
    the force.
        So, can I get your commitment as you are looking at these
    issues to make sure that you are reminding people that, as Mr.
    Beshar said, these are the best and brightest in the country,
    and wild claims that the Washington Post and other media
    constantly throw out there--they are clueless--really
    besmirches the men and women in the force who do what less than
    1 percent of people in our country do, which is raise their
    hand and volunteer to protect the Constitution and their fellow
    Americans.
        So, Mr. Storch and Mr. Beshar, can I get your commitment on
    that issue to make sure you are looking at it with the data and
    not with these wild claims?
        Under Secretary Kahl was no help on this. But it is a
    really important issue and a lot of members are feeling kind of
    like these accusations are directed at them. It is really
    outrageous.
        Can I get a comment from both of you on this?
        Mr. Storch. Senator, as you are now doubt aware, the OIG is
    doing work in this area currently. I certainly can tell you
    that if I am confirmed, I will ensure that we are following the
    facts, wherever they are, and reporting them out as
    appropriate. Absolutely.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
        Mr. Beshar. Senator Sullivan, you have my commitment to
    study the issue closely with the type of balance that you just
    articulated.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, gentlemen.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Sullivan.
        Next, I would like to recognize Senator King, via Webex.
        Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Starting with Dr. Martinez-Lopez, there is an epidemic
    within the military and within our military veteran community
    and that is suicide. I call it is a disease of despair.
        We have taken various steps, but I hope that this,
    attending to this matter and working on prevention, the
    identification of high risks, how to intervene properly to
    prevent it will be one of your priorities, because this is
    literally killing both, active-duty military members and,
    particularly, veterans.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, thank you very much for
    championing this cause.
        One suicide is too many. It is a daughter. It is a husband,
    brother, sister. I have been on the receiving end, as a
    physician, where I have dealt with this and it is devastating
    not only to the families but devastating to the who force.
        So, I come with energy, if confirmed, to tackle this issue.
    We need to bring new eyes. I will bring eyes from academia,
    from other places. We need to bring about new technology, no
    ways of looking at ways to mitigate this. We need to look at
    expanding the mental health services in such a way that they
    hit the mark and really prevent this awful occurrence. So,
    again, if confirmed, I commit to really work hard, initially,
    on this issue, sir.
        Senator King. Thank you. I really appreciate that.
        This is not strictly related, but this is not a medical
    issue, but a software issue. We continue to have this
    frustrating problem of a lack of interoperability between the
    Department of Defense medical record system and the Veterans
    Administration.
        Will you give me a commitment to really dig into this,
    because this is, as I say, this is software; this isn't, we are
    not trying to, you know, cure all the world's diseases here. We
    are just trying to have two systems talk to one another. Please
    take this on, also, as a project.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, the electronic health record
    is key to many of the new ways to deliver healthcare, right.
    So, it is a critical component to not only the servicemember,
    but the veteran.
        So, if confirmed, you have my commitment that I will work
    with the Department of VA to promote this and make sure that
    not only the employees in the Department of Defense but the
    lessons learned from the Department of Defense are transferred
    to the Department of Veterans Affairs, because we owe that to
    our servicemembers and we owe that to the veterans that have so
    proudly served.
        Senator King. It also relates back to the suicide issue. I
    have met with veterans and people working on this issue, and it
    appears that a significant percentage of the suicides takes
    place in the first 2 or 3 years after separation from active-
    duty. So, again, this handoff should be seamless and not
    tangled up in software confusion in terms of conveyance of
    records. So, I appreciate your attention to that.
        Mr. Lowman, in terms of readiness, one thing I would urge
    you to do is to benchmark our performance in the Department of
    Defense against the private sector, whether it is the private
    airlines, for example, in terms of their readiness of their
    aircraft, commercial shipping compared with the Navy. One of my
    mottos is, does it work and how do you know?
        Benchmarking is one way to achieve that kind of knowledge.
    I hope this is something that you will focus upon in your work
    on readiness.
        Mr. Lowman. Thank you, Senator.
        This will be a priority for me, if confirmed. One thing the
    Department has spent quite a bit of time on over the last
    decade is the introduction of prognostics; things like
    Condition Based Maintenance Plus sensors, the ability to
    develop very precise and very finite datasets to understand
    where our readiness issues are. So, that ability, coupled with
    advanced data analytics, give us the ability to begin
    benchmarking to common platforms in the commercial sector and
    differentiate any deltas in performance, given the uniqueness
    of military missions.
        However, if confirmed, I will work with my staff to
    continue the momentum in that area.
        Senator King. Well, I am out of time. I am going to submit
    a couple of questions for the record. One is, ubiquitous 3-D
    printing capability on our ships and at our bases and also the
    issue of the allocation of KC-46s in terms of the aerial
    refueling capacity.
        I thank you all for your testimony. Congratulations on your
    nominations.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator King.
        Senator Tillis, please?
        Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations, Gentlemen, on your nominations. I may not
    be able to ask all of you questions, but you can leave the room
    knowing that you have my vote for confirmation.
        Mr. Storch, I want to start with you. Once you are
    confirmed, what would you do to investigate the planning,
    execution, and aftermath of the withdrawal from Afghanistan,
    the DOD's role in it?
        Mr. Storch. So, the OIG has jurisdiction over all programs
    and operations of the Department and, additionally, as I am
    sure you are aware, it serves as the lead IG for Operation
    Freedom's Sentinel. So, while I am not in a position to, you
    know, forecast any particular reviews or the like, if I am
    confirmed, I would look forward to meeting with the team at the
    OIG, to consulting with the Department of State and the USA ID
    IGs, and also, coordinating, as appropriate, with SIGAR, with
    the special investigative IG for Afghanistan reconstruction, to
    determine what oversight would be appropriate. I would very
    much welcome the opportunity to engage with the committee, as
    to its thoughts in the area.
        Senator Tillis. You know, one of the things that I--thank
    you for that answer.
        I was personally involved in August with trying to get
    families and SIV holders, United States citizens out of
    Afghanistan.
        We were successful, but we only scratched the surface of
    the number of cases that my office is tracking.
        One of the things that became very apparent to me is that
    we were providing that incremental information to the State
    Department and to the DOD on SIV holders; I mean, literally,
    capturing paperwork and documentation that you would have
    thought would have just been in the normal course of business,
    how we keep track of those who are working alongside of our
    servicemembers in combat situations.
        So, I think that that needs attention; we need to systemize
    it. We have taken a little bit of a hit, reputationally, for
    how we have handled some of the SIV holders, how thousands of
    people are still in Afghanistan.
        So, I think I would be very interested in understanding the
    system that is in place and why on Earth at 2:30 in the
    morning, am I discussing the transmission of documents from
    unit commanders and pictures of SIV holders to an agency that
    you would have thought would have had some of that information
    readily available. I think it would have probably expedited
    some of their departures. So, that is another aim.
        Then, finally, on an interagency perspective, I think I saw
    wheels kind of get sand in them with the interagency handoff. I
    don't know how that works, because that swims outside of your
    lanes, but it seems like there has to be an analysis of the
    interagency interaction and how we can do a better job if, God
    forbid, we ever find ourselves in a situation like we did in
    Afghanistan last year.
        So, thank you for that.
        Dr. Martinez, I know that you have been supportive of the
    Center for Regenerative Medicine. My friend Dr. Atala down at
    Wake Forest, that program in your past role, you have been
    supportive of it.
        Once you are confirmed, can I expect that you will continue
    to support that and other similar efforts in your new role?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, the readiness of the force's
    medical is critical to what we do. Part of that is bringing in
    new solution sets to questions that we want to answer and
    questions that we don't even know we need to ask; that is how
    research works.
        So, if confirmed, I will continue the effort across the
    broad spectrum of research, medical research to bring solution
    sets that our servicemembers so deserve.
        Senator Tillis. Well, I think that what we are doing at
    Wake and across research institutions nationwide is very
    promising and something that I hope we can continue to support
    and fund and encourage.
        I just want to echo what, I want to take a slightly
    different tack on the electronic health record. I am on the VA
    Committee. We have been working on that implementation.
        We have to understand that that is still several years away
    before it is fully implemented within the VA.
        But I was glad to hear the Secretary of the VA is starting
    up a joint office with the DOD so that they can start tracking
    and making sure that we have that seamless transfer of data, at
    the right time, so that we can get to a more precise analysis
    of a servicemember once they transition, have the sorts of
    interventions and things that we need in place, and the medical
    record is going to be critically important.
        So, do I have your commitment that you will be working with
    the VA to make sure that as they implement, we don't miss that
    opportunity to have that seamless transition, and long-term
    cooperation so that these platforms continue to be
    interoperable?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, yes.
        Senator Tillis. Thank you.
        Now, Mr. Lowman, just very briefly, give me an idea of what
    you think about the current reforms that we have seen,
    acquisition reforms. This is an area where I spend a lot of
    time.
        I think that there is still gold on the floors for
    additional reforms and efficiencies there. Tell me a little bit
    about your perspective on the current reforms that have been
    implemented and go-forward strategy.
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, I think the reforms that have been
    implemented are helping. We have got some more work to do.
        I will tell you that in the product support manager's role
    in the early development of the sustainment strategies, before
    you begin producing the end item, is critical to containing
    life-cycle cost. That will be one, if confirmed as the ASDS,
    one of my focus areas will be to make sure that the product
    support managers have the appropriate authorities, they have
    the data and analytic tools, and they are at the table,
    developing, along with their acquisition brethren, developing
    the contract frameworks and the organic industrial base
    strategies that will help to contain sustainment costs, but
    also produce the readiness the Department needs.
        Senator Tillis. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Tillis.
        Senator Warren, please?
        Congratulations to all of our nominees and welcome to your
    families who are here or watching remotely.
        Mr. Lowman, you have been nominated to be the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, and that means that for
    now, you will be overseeing the military's housing program for
    servicemembers. Now, no one, no one should have to live with
    black mold, leaking and collapsed roofs, or exposed electrical
    wires in their home.
        It is indefensible that that was the case for military
    families. A Department of Defense Inspector General Report last
    year found that the Department is dragging its feet on two
    major reforms that Congress passed to address these deplorable
    conditions: creating a public complaint database for tenants
    and a tenants' bill of rights. Two years in and neither of
    these have been done.
        So, Mr. Lowman, I know these things take time to stand up,
    but will you make sure that a publicly available complaint
    database is created this year, I mean, 2022?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you.
        So, I couldn't agree more that our servicemembers deserve
    the right to live in housing that is safe, that is suitable,
    and it is healthy.
        Senator Warren. Good. Thank you.
        I just want a commitment here. Am I going to get this
    database in 2022?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, the DSD just created a new position
    and that is Assistant Secretary of Defense for the environment,
    energy, and installations. So, that portfolio has been removed
    from the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment's
    portfolio.
        What I can commit to, if confirmed, is working with the ASD
    EI&E for a smooth and deliberate transition of resources and,
    as well as the policies and personnel, to make sure that
    these----
        Senator Warren. But you can't put your name behind getting
    this done?
        It is a database, a complaint database. This is not rocket
    science. We are in year 3 of people who want to be able to tell
    you about things like rat infestation and black mold. I would
    think that the military would want to know about this.
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, I agree, and I will work very closely
    with the ASD EI&E to make sure that that organization makes
    progress on this.
        Senator Warren. Well, I would like to hear you make your
    commitment on this.
        The same is true for a tenant's bill of rights, is this
    also just a lateral pass to somebody else?
        Mr. Lowman. No, ma'am. I will commit to my personal
    involvement and a better understanding the issues surrounding
    the----
        Senator Warren. I appreciate the involvement.
        I want a commitment to get it done. We are in year 3. This
    is not hard.
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, I certainly understand your question,
    and if confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Sustainment, I will do everything in my authority to make sure
    that these two things get completed this year.
        Senator Warren. Well, I am not doing great here, but I have
    got more requests, but I will put those in my QFRs.
        Let me ask another line of questions here. Mr. Storch, you
    have been nominated to serve as the DOD Inspector General,
    which makes you the Pentagon's top watchdog. Your job,
    obviously, is going to be shine a light on waste and misconduct
    and abuses of power and also to tell us when officials or
    organizations are thwarting your investigations or trying to
    hide your findings from the public.
        There are a lot of ways that that might happen, but I want
    to talk to you about the one that is keeping me up at night
    right now. I am becoming very concerned about how much the
    Pentagon is keeping from the public through pseudo-
    classification; that is, classifying something that doesn't
    need to be kept secret, classifying it just so that there is
    less public scrutiny.
        Mr. Storch, do you commit to notifying this committee if
    you believe that your work is being wrongfully restricted or
    pseudo-classified or over-classified?
        Mr. Storch. Senator, this is an area in which I do have
    some experience; not necessarily with pseudo-classification,
    but when I came onboard as the NSA IG, we weren't doing any
    public reporting at all at our office. As I said, we basically
    just had a page on the agency's site, which didn't have any
    content.
        We have worked hard to advance transparency in our
    oversight work there in the ways that I discussed in my opening
    statement and worked very well with the agency to make sure
    that that happens. I have got to say we have gotten good
    cooperation with agency leadership, so I am going to work on
    that.
        I would work with the agency to make sure that it is done
    right and if I have any problems, I absolutely wouldn't
    hesitate to come to the committee.
        Senator Warren. That is what I want to hear.
        You know, I want to give you an example of where this
    pseudo-classification hinders the oversight process.
        Numerous investigations by the press, by independent
    analysts, and by civil society watchdogs have shown that our
    investigations into civilian casualties are seriously flawed,
    and that is probably too kind a statement.
        It is a broken system. The DOD IG has looked into this as
    well, but many of the DOD IG's findings about these failures
    are completely redacted. Not because they are classified, but
    because they are marked ``for official use only.''
        I suspect that more oversight from DOD IG would help us fix
    this broken system, but it is not going to happen unless we
    enhance transparency significantly. So, I appreciate your
    comments on this. I anticipate you are going to be a partner in
    getting this done. If you have problems, you are going to come
    talk to us and we will get it straightened out. We have a right
    to know. The public has a right to know.
        Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Hawley, please?
        Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congratulations to all the nominees. Thank you for being
    here.
        Mr. Storch, let me start with you. The special IG for
    Afghanistan, SIGAR, has provided invaluable reporting on
    Afghanistan reconstruction efforts and activities through
    audits, through inspections, through investigations, and in my
    view, an unyielding commitment to transparency.
        Now, that office, unfortunately, has not been well-
    supported, I don't think, by this committee; in fact, various
    members have tried to shut it down multiple different times.
        Let me ask you this, in the aftermath of the botched
    withdrawal from Afghanistan, it is my view, it is more
    important than ever, that SIGAR be able to perform its duties
    in an independent manner, and I underline and emphasize
    independent, without interference.
        So, do I have your commitment to ensure that SIGAR is able
    to continue doing its work, free from interference from
    anybody, including your office, if you are confirmed?
        Mr. Storch. Senator Hawley, I am not familiar with all the
    background that you described, but I can tell you that I have
    spent my entire time in the IG community working with other IGs
    collaboratively to try to advance oversight.
        So, whether that is with SIGAR or other IGs who might have,
    you know, interest in that very important space, I would
    anticipate working collaboratively, as appropriate.
        Senator Hawley. That is not quite the answer I am looking
    for. I want a commitment from you that SIGAR will be able to do
    its work, free from interference from your office, if you are
    confirmed.
        Mr. Storch. I don't believe any IG should interfere with
    the work of another IG and, certainly, if I am confirmed, I
    will make sure that that doesn't happen. I would do everything
    I could to ensure that we are working collaboratively and
    cooperatively, as appropriate.
        Senator Hawley. Okay. So, that is a yes; you will not, if
    you are confirmed, you will not in any way interfere or
    undermine the independence of SIGAR, who does not report to you
    under current----
        Mr. Storch. Well, that is, I am sorry, that is what I am
    trying to get at is they don't report to me, so I don't have
    any jurisdiction over them.
        Senator Hawley. Good.
        Mr. Storch. But I certainly----
        Senator Hawley. You won't try to absorb them. You won't try
    to take away their----
        Mr. Storch. I am not familiar with any issues like that,
    Senator, about jurisdiction.
        So, my understanding is----
        Senator Hawley. Well, I am not asking if you are familiar
    or not; I am asking you what your intentions are.
        What I would like to hear, and would hope to hear, this
    should be an easy question, is that you will not interfere with
    SIGAR in any way. You will let them continue to be independent.
    You will not engage in any mission-creep from your office that
    would seek to undermine SIGAR's independence and authority.
        Can you say yes to that?
        Mr. Storch. I certainly would not do anything, yes, that
    would interfere with the independence and operations of another
    IG.
        When you talk about mission-creep, I just want to be
    completely clear, there are many times in the IG community, are
    issues regarding who is going to work on what, right?
        So, what I am committing to you to do is that if there are
    such issues, I would work with the other IG with my team and
    with their team to determine what the right result is. So, that
    is, I am not in a position to give you any more of a specific
    answer, but that is the way I have always worked in the IG
    community and if I am confirmed, it is the way I will work.
        Senator Hawley. Let me ask you this, do I have your
    commitment to support this committee's efforts and others'
    efforts to fully investigate DOD's role in the disastrous
    Afghanistan withdrawal, including by, this is the important
    part, conducting your own investigations, sharing data, and any
    other relevant measures, would you commit to working with us?
        Mr. Storch. So, I would be pleased to work with the
    committee to identify any and all areas for appropriate
    oversight and will certainly report robustly to the committee
    regarding the results of that.
        I can't, and I am not in the position to identify
    particular areas, at this time, but both, in our roles as the
    lead IG for OFS and, generally, with jurisdiction over all
    programs and operations of the Department, we would examine any
    appropriate issues.
        Senator Hawley. Let's come back to SIGAR for a second.
        Mr. Storch. Yes, sir.
        Senator Hawley. SIGAR has long reported that DOD has
    overclassified information regarding the Afghan Force's
    performance and other aspects of the Afghanistan restructuring
    effort, including limiting SIGAR's ability to provide the
    American people with a full account because of this.
        Do you share SIGAR's concerns about overclassification
    related to the Afghanistan restructuring effort, and now that
    that effort has ended, would you support efforts to declassify
    as much of that information as possible?
        Mr. Storch. Sir, I am not familiar with specific concerns
    in that area. I will tell you, as a general matter, I have
    worked very hard to promote transparency and to do everything I
    can to fight overclassification.
        I don't think things should be marked E for embarrassing or
    anything like that; as I have said, we have gotten good support
    at NSA in our oversight work there, and if I am confirmed, I am
    going to keep working to promote transparency.
        Senator Hawley. So, when it comes to SIGAR's specific
    concerns about overclassification over a period of years and
    decades, you are not familiar with that? You don't have a view
    on that?
        Mr. Storch. No, and nor do I believe it would be
    appropriate for me to express one; I haven't been confirmed.
        But if I am confirmed, I certainly will look into the issue
    and I will commit to you that we will do the right thing. I am
    happy to engage with you on any of these specific issues.
        Senator Hawley. Well, when you say you don't think it would
    be appropriate to express a view, I mean, are you willing to
    express a view on the dangers of overclassification?
        I mean, here is what I am getting at, I have heard multiple
    members of this committee, since the fall of Afghanistan, say
    that it is unbelievable that we didn't know that the Afghan
    Security Forces were so badly prepared. I mean, who could have
    thought that they would have collapsed in the fashion they did?
        I will tell you who could have thought it: SIGAR.
        Why?
        Because they issued report after report saying that the
    Afghan Security Forces weren't appropriately trained, that they
    weren't prepared, that the Pentagon was making it difficult for
    SIGAR to get any information, that DOD kept changing the
    metrics by which to assess the readiness of the Afghan Security
    Forces.
        SIGAR has warned for years that what would happen in
    Afghanistan is exactly what did happen. So, I think it is
    important that that entity be able to get the information it
    needs and actually report to the American people, because,
    frankly, I think the American people were pretty much lied to
    for years by multiple administrations, unfortunately.
        Multiple administrations of both parties, unfortunately.
        So, I am pretty concerned about this issue, but what I
    would like to hear from you is a commitment to say that you
    think that over-classifications are a problem, that you are
    going to work with SIGAR to make sure that they can get the
    classified material that they need, and that, ultimately, we
    make as much of this material available to the American public.
        Can you commit to that?
        Mr. Storch. Senator, I am committed to doing everything I
    can in my current job, and if I am confirmed, in a future job,
    as the DOD IG, to fighting overclassification and ensuring that
    all appropriate information is out.
        What I was trying to say, respectfully, is, I don't have
    the information currently as the NSA IG regarding the nature of
    information at DOD IG or SIGAR. But what I can tell you is that
    if I am confirmed, I will do everything appropriate to fight
    overclassification and ensure that appropriate information is
    made public.
        Senator Hawley. My time is expired. I will have some
    additional questions for the record for the rest of you.
        Thank you for being here.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Hawley.
        Now, let me recognize, via Webex, Senator Manchin, please.
        Senator Manchin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank all of
    you for your willingness to serve.
        Let me start with Mr. Storch. Mr. Storch, the Office of
    Department of Defense Inspector General has consistently
    reported on problems DOD has in protecting its cyber system,
    its networks, and the data.
        Coming from the National Security Agency, I know you are
    very aware of how important cybersecurity protection is.
        So, if confirmed, what would be your plan for assessing and
    reporting on the effectiveness of controls and processes being
    implemented by DOD intelligence within the agency to protect
    our classified systems from inside and external threats?
        Mr. Storch. Senator, as you say, I have been very involved
    in doing oversight regarding cyber issues as the NSA IG and
    also in my role as the Vice Chair of the CIGIE Tech Committee,
    where we recently started a Cyber Working Group, in which my
    folks are very actively participating.
        These are significant issues across the entire government,
    and if I am confirmed, I would look forward to working with a
    team at DOD IG to identify the areas of greatest risk in the
    cyberspace and ensuring that we are doing robust oversight over
    it.
        At NSA, we have an active cyber and IT group within our
    audit division that does that sort work, and if I am the IG at
    DOD, I will look forward to continuing in that.
        Senator Manchin. Mr. Lowman, we need to ensure our military
    installations are able to carry out the critical missions, even
    in the event of interruptions to the commercial power grid,
    off-post water supplies, or other challenges surrounding land,
    water, and airspace, whether it comes from bad actors or just
    extreme weather.
        So, if confirmed, how will you make this a priority in your
    portfolio and have you already evaluated or have you all been
    looking at that?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you.
        So, our installations play a critical role in projecting
    power, regardless of where that is required. So, energy
    independence on our installation and building resilience on
    those installations to include alternative energy is critically
    important. That includes, of course, water.
        I understand, Senator that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
    published a memo yesterday, creating, because of the importance
    of this portfolio, a separate Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for energy, installations, and the environment.
        If confirmed, I will work very closely to ensure a
    deliberate transition of personnel, resources, and policies
    needed to achieve these energy-independent goals.
        Senator Manchin. Thank you.
        Mr. Lowman, back to you again. As the military refocuses on
    the great power of competition, we are going to need to
    understand that a future conflict may be fought in an
    environment where access to our logistics networks would be
    contested. Unlike the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that we
    will not be able to necessarily count upon a reliable and
    constant flow of supplies from the United States.
        We kind of saw hints of this predicament during the
    withdrawal from Afghanistan. They are a landlocked nation and
    our important relations with the neighbors complicated our
    efforts to retrograde personnel, material. So, the brunt of the
    retrograde was kind of borne by a limited number of strategic
    lift assets, such as our 130s, C-130s and C-17s, completing
    multiple, 3,000-mile roundtrips between Kuwait and Afghanistan.
        So, what will you do as Assistant Secretary of Defense to
    ensure the resilience of our global logistics networks and
    prepare the whole force to sustain and fight and win in a
    contested environment?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thanks for that question.
        As you know, global operations require a global supply
    chain, and so this includes not only posture at echelon, where
    we position those supplies, but it also includes the sustained
    readiness of our inter- and intra-theater lift capabilities
    represented by the C-130, C-17, and others, but also, our
    sealift capabilities.
        If confirmed, I will work with the military Departments,
    the ASDS staff to, one, ensure the necessary resources are
    allocated and balanced with the modernization program to
    sustain readiness of those current capabilities, but in the
    sealift fleet, work with the Navy and TRANSCOM to understand
    the recapitalization strategy, to ensure that we are balancing
    the buy new versus recapitalization, buy used, and then,
    finally, Senator, I would work very closely with the services
    and ASD acquisition to ensure that we are balancing the service
    modernization strategies and we are appropriately allocating
    the necessary resources to sustain the readiness of our current
    fleets.
        Senator Manchin. Thank you. I appreciate so much all of
    your input.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Manchin.
        Let me recognize Senator Peters, please?
        Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to each of
    you, congratulations on your nomination. It is good to see you
    all here before us.
        Mr. Storch, as I am Chairman of Homeland Security and the
    Governmental Affairs Committee, and I have been a long advocate
    for reforms that safeguard the integrity of the Inspector
    General; that role is absolutely critical for us to maintain
    integrity of the Government and the independence of IGs is
    particularly important.
        So, certainly, I hope if confirmed, I will continue to
    count on your support for that work, but could you give this
    committee some indication as to how you approach the job as IG,
    particularly, as it relates to the independence necessary to
    perform the job effectively and professionally.
        Mr. Storch. Absolutely, Senator.
        I think that is one of the most critical aspects about our
    IG system is that the IGs are able to independently exercise
    oversight and that is what I think gives our work credibility
    and makes it authoritative.
        Critical to that are a couple of things. One is, I think,
    maintaining the appropriate posture, vis-`-vis, the agency and
    its leadership. It is sort of, you don't want to be too close
    and you don't want to be too far away. You want to be close
    enough so you are getting the information so they understand
    you are going to be an honest broker; you are going to look at
    the information and report things out that will help the agency
    to improve its operations. But, on the other hand, you want to
    get too close and be captured by the mission, particularly,
    places with a compelling mission. So that is really critical. I
    think it is something, I watched IG Horowitz do it justice
    extraordinarily well and I tried to learn from him, and I have
    tried to do that at NSA, and if I am confirmed, I will do that
    at DOD.
        The final thing I will say quickly is I think the dual-
    reporting and the relationship with the Hill is critical to
    maintaining that independence so that the agency understands
    that we not only keep the agency fully and timely informed, but
    we also keep the Congress fully and timely informed.
        Maintaining both of those lines of communication is
    critical to ensuring the independence that we need.
        Senator Peters. You know, I am also very committed to
    ensuring that whistleblowers are protected. They play an
    incredibly valuable role for us to identify potential waste,
    fraud, and abuse all across all levels of the Federal
    Government.
        But in 2019, a GAO report found that the Department of
    Defense IG and the military service IGs did not meet timeliness
    and quality goals for handling whistleblower complaints.
        So, my question to you, sir, is, if confirmed, will you
    commit to making whistleblower protection a top priority in
    your office and implementing the GAO's recommendations, as soon
    as possible, if confirmed?
        Mr. Storch. Senator, if I am confirmed, whistleblowers and
    their rights and protections will be amongst my very highest
    priorities. It always has been and it always will be; as you
    say, they are critical to our system.
        I will also examine the results of the GAO report and make
    sure if they are not implemented, that we are implementing any
    necessary measures to not only meet, but to exceed, and ensure
    that we are doing everything we can in that area.
        Senator Peters. Very well. Thank you.
        Mr. Lowman, the recent tensions with Russia have certainly
    reminded our country how critical it is to ensure cybersecurity
    for critical infrastructure, especially energy-related
    infrastructure.
        If confirmed, your office will clearly play a significant
    role in reducing cyber risks to ensure that we can maintain
    reliable power for critical Defense missions.
        So, I would like you to tell the committee how you believe
    the Department of Defense should approach ensuring
    cybersecurity for Department of Defense energy systems.
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, let me first start by commending the
    members of this committee and the Congress for your interest in
    this area. A couple of years ago, the Congress passed section
    1647 and 1650, which required the Department to develop a
    process to routinely assess vulnerabilities, not only in our
    weapon system platforms, but also in our installation control
    systems.
        So, speaking from experience, in my last job as performing
    the duties of Under Secretary of the Army, the Army has taken
    this challenge on, and, if confirmed, I will work very closely
    with the other services and my staff to ensure that the
    necessary resources, policies, and processes are in place, such
    that the services can routinely scan their installation control
    systems, identify those vulnerabilities, and then rapidly
    address the vulnerabilities and mitigate them.
        Senator Peters. Very good.
        Mr. Lowman, the pandemic also demonstrated how vulnerable
    our supply chain are to global disruptions and the drawback to
    the fact that we have offshored too much of critical
    manufacturing and other sources of supplies. This was
    especially apparent at the beginning of the pandemic when we
    struggled to get PPE equipment in the hands of first responders
    all across the country and other front-line workers. So much of
    that production had moved to China.
        So, my question to you is, if confirmed, how will your
    office work with the Department and with private sector
    partners to shore up our supply chains that are absolutely
    critical to the national defense; certainly, things such as
    PPE, but also pharmaceuticals and other industrial supplies
    that are important, not just for the Department of Defense, but
    for the civilian sector, as well.
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, resilient supply chains, especially in
    the national defense arena, are critical to our ability to
    prosecute global operations.
        So, if confirmed, I will work with the interagency
    community to, one, to develop the policy necessary to promote
    domestic competition, but also work with our commercial
    partners and the services to build resiliency in our domestic,
    commercial supply chains, as well as increase capacity.
        In some cases, this will necessitate onshoring capability
    back into the nation.
        Senator Peters. Good. Well, if confirmed, I look forward to
    working with you on that critical issue.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Peters.
        I would now like to recognize, via Webex, Senator
    Duckworth.
        Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would congratulate all the participants today on your
    nominations.
        I would also like to thank Mr. Lowman for our call last
    week. A combat, credible, logistics backbone is crucial to
    deterring our adversaries and I appreciated our discussion on
    how to strength and mature this capability.
        I would like to start off with the balance between
    modernization and maintaining readiness rates of our current
    assets. Our military remains reliant on 1980s, and in some
    places, 1970s technology. A 2020 GAO report reviewed annual
    readiness rates for 46 different aircraft from 2011 to 2019 and
    only three of these aircraft hit their annual readiness goals
    for all 9 years and 24 of them did not meet their goals in any
    of the years covered; this is types of aircraft, not individual
    aircraft.
        Yet, we must also remain ready today to mobilize and
    respond to a global crisis, which we are seeing play out now
    with our need to transfer thousands of troops to the European
    theater. While I understand that there is an art to balancing
    current mission readiness needs with modernization, I am
    concerned that the Department does not have a strong glide
    slope and transition plan for key mobility and logistical
    assets, in particular.
        Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, how will you work with the
    program offices, services, and combatant commands to build
    strong transition plans that roll out much-needed modernized
    assets, without divesting of legacy platforms so quickly that
    we create a near-term capacity gather that endangers mission
    accomplishment?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, thank you for that question.
        So, it is really a balance, as you rightly note, between
    modernization and sustainment and the need to appropriately
    allocate the resources to sustain our currently capabilities,
    especially in the inter- and intra-theater lift, as you noted,
    but also, to modernize those fleets in a sustainable fashion
    over time.
        The second balance, Senator, that you didn't mention, but I
    think is important to note here, is the balance across the
    active and reserve components to make sure that the resources,
    the reserve components need to sustain their fleets and that
    have the sufficient lift capability built into the COCOM
    logistics plans, so that the Department not only sustains the
    lift capability that they need, but also modernizes it over
    time.
        Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
        I am glad that you brought up the reserve forces. I hope
    that we are not going to be modernizing, for example, active-
    duty Air Force, at the expense of the Air National Guard, in
    particular.
        I do want to move on to another issue, another source of
    our readiness issues. In that same 2020 GAO report, it was
    noted that in addition to aging aircraft, a noteworthy factor
    in our low-readiness rates is lack of parts.
        I am interested in opportunities to collaborate with
    commercial industry to reduce the wait times and the cost of
    parts. One approach is to take advantage of used, serviceable
    material from commercial derivative aircraft.
        Under this program, the FAA provides the Department of
    Defense certified, overhauled parts from 737 and 767 aircraft
    at a reduced cost. The initial estimates for material savings
    over the next 7 years at around $1 and a half billion. Not
    insignificant.
        This program also reduces the supply chain lead times. The
    program already exists within the DOD, but it is not
    standardized across all programs and services. I have seen
    reports where purchasing officers have a program F function on
    their keyboard, F7, where they just hit a function and it
    populates a form and they can buy brand-new parts, but it is
    multi-steps to use this program that exists for used parts.
        Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, what will you do to require or
    incentivize program offices of services to take advantage of
    proven programs like used serviceable materials, and are there
    any barriers to this collaboration that Congress can work to
    remove to encourage its use?
        Mr. Lowman. Senator, so part of addressing supply chain
    risk and building resilience is identifying alternative sources
    of supply. The USM program, as you accurately note, is used by
    industry today, and in some components, I am aware it is used
    within the Department of Defense.
        If confirmed, I will work closely with the services, and
    the ASDF staff to make sure there are no policy barriers to use
    of the USM, and I would work with the interagency community
    and, particularly, the FAA, to make sure that the necessary
    airworthiness documentation is available to guarantee the life
    of the part, the repair history, for example, the hours
    currently consumed by that particular part. So, I look forward
    to taking this on.
        Senator Duckworth. Wonderful.
        I don't think the pacing item here is the lack of
    documentation on the life, the serviceable life of the parts; I
    think it is resistance within DOD and program offices and the
    services to using the program and using these parts, because it
    is just easier to buy new every time.
        But I am happy to work with you on this. I look forward to
    it.
        Mr. Lowman. Thank you.
        Senator Duckworth. I have two additional questions that I
    will submit for the record.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Duckworth.
        Now, via Webex, I would like to recognize Senator Rosen.
        Senator Rosen. Well, thank you, Chairman Reed, and, of
    course, Ranking Member Inhofe, for holding this hearing.
        I want to thank all the nominees for your testimony today
    and, really, for your willingness to serve and all the service
    you have given already to this country.
        I want to talk a little bit today about affordable housing
    for servicemembers. So, Mr. Storch, last year's NDAA included
    one of my provisions to hold the Pentagon accountable for not
    yet utilizing existing authorities to support our most junior
    servicemembers, when transitioning off-base to private housing.
    The provision requires the Secretary of Defense to brief
    Congress on DOD's plan to provide partial dislocation allowance
    payments to junior enlisted troops who are forced out of
    military-provided housing, due to shortages and they have to
    incur moving costs and the like, before they are eligible to
    receive their basic allowance for housing, the BAH.
        So, Mr. Storch, if confirmed, can we count on you to hold
    the Pentagon accountable for developing and executing a plan to
    provide our most junior servicemembers with the dislocation
    allowance they earn as they are authorized to do under existing
    law?
        I have heard this time and time again at Nellis and Creech,
    as I do roundtables with young, enlisted members,
    servicemembers. This is one of the number one things that they
    are concerned about.
        Mr. Storch. Thank you, Senator.
        I am aware that housing is one of the top management
    challenges that was identified by the DOD and its DOD IG in its
    recent assessment of the top challenges. If confirmed, I would
    work with the team at the OIG to assess the issues that you
    have identified and do all appropriate oversight to make sure
    that the agency is following the law and providing the housing
    that servicemembers deserve.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you. I sure appreciate that.
        I want to move on to something else I have been hearing
    about, which is maternal health for our servicemembers and
    their families.
        So, Dr. Martinez-Lopez, Nellis Air Force, of course, in
    Nevada, offers some of the most robust maternity-care services
    compared to military installations the nation. But because some
    installations can't provide that wide array of maternity
    services that we offer at Nellis, the TRICARE enrollees often
    pursue such services through a community provider.
        So, Dr. Martinez-Lopez, what improvements can we make to
    maternity-care services offered to TRICARE enrollees and how
    would you approach that, if confirmed, and do you believe that
    you have the existing authorities to allow the Department to
    make such improvements?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, the health of all
    servicemembers and family members entrusted to us is the reason
    why the military health care system said that maternal health
    for both, servicemembers and family members, has to be of the
    most importance and we have to make sure that the quality of
    the care and the quality of the service, how we deliver that,
    is right on target.
        So, if I am confirmed, I commit to work with my team and
    look at ways that we can bring parity in such a way that
    servicemembers and family members can rest assured that they
    will get the best care, either inside the medical treatment
    facility or outside in the TRICARE, you know, service area.
        Senator Rosen. So, if confirmed, would you consider
    conducting a DOD-wide satisfaction survey for servicemembers
    who have either recently or are currently receiving maternity
    care through TRICARE?
        That might help guide us into some of the things that we
    have to do. Will you commit to working on that with me, please?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, getting feedback from the
    people we serve is critical, so if I am confirmed, I will work
    with you, not only to get feedback regarding maternal
    healthcare, but we need to get feedback regarding all
    healthcare we deliver, inside and outside, so yes, ma'am.
        Senator Rosen. I am just going to build on that a little
    bit, because with military retirees, because we want to be sure
    they have full and equal access to the healthcare that they
    have really earned over the course of their service. There are
    about 30,000 military retirees in my state; unfortunately, our
    retirees, they just face the anxiety of the potential rollback
    of these health service available to them, and, like now, the
    Defense Health Agency, their current plan is to right-size the
    military health system. Moving 200,000 TRICARE beneficiaries to
    private medical networks, closing a bunch of the Department of
    Defense military treatment facilities.
        So, what steps will you take to be sure that our military
    retirees have the full access to the quality healthcare that
    they deserve and have earned?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, I am one of those retirees,
    so, you know, first and foremost, the important thing is that
    we keep readiness, so that is the reason that we have a
    military health system; as well as, we also have to honor what
    we tell the servicemembers, family members, and retirees that
    we are going to care for them.
        So, as we finish transformation, which is probably, is it
    one of my priorities, to finish out the intent of the Congress
    and the execution of a military health system transformation, I
    will never lose sight of the fact that we need to honor that.
    So, as we transfer care to the civilian, to the TRICARE
    network, I need to make, I personally need to make sure that
    those retirees and servicemembers and family members are cared
    for.
        If not, how can we close that gap? We cannot disengage just
    to disengage. We owe them better and if I am confirmed, I will
    work really hard to honor that commitment.
        Senator Rosen. Thank you. I appreciate that.
        My time has expired.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Rosen.
        Senator Kelly, please?
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
    holding this hearing.
        Thank you, all of you, for being here today.
        I want to follow-up on Senator Duckworth's questioning
    about parts, but, specifically, with a connection to Arizona.
    Mr. Lowman, the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration
    Group, AMARG, located at the Davis-Monthan Air Force Base is a
    major component of our organic industrial base, commonly
    referred to as the ``Bone Yard.'' The 309th provides not just
    storage and preservation, but aerospace depot, maintenance, and
    modifications, as well as aircraft regeneration. It also
    provides some spare parts for the fleet.
        A few years ago, the 309th was able to regenerate a B-52
    that has been in the Bone Yard for nearly 10 years and return
    it to service after the Air Force lost one of its bombers; a
    truly remarkable fleet.
        In the 1990s, I dropped off an A-6 Intruder at the Bone
    Yard, but that has been now 25, maybe over 25 years ago. I am
    not so sure that one is coming back.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Kelly. But the 309th is also able to salvage parts
    to contribute to important research and innovation work within
    our military, including modernizing the B-52 fleet and as a
    supply of parts when we can't find one. This capability that,
    it is a capability that we have to continue and it needs to be
    preserved.
        So, if confirmed, how will you work with this committee to
    ensure that our Nation's organic industrial base is properly
    resourced?
        Mr. Lowman. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator, you rightly note that the organic industrial base
    is a critical component of the overall industrial base in this
    nation and the AMARG is a great example of a capability
    resident within that organic industrial base to not only
    regenerate capability, but also, to provide long-term storage,
    repair capability, and, in some cases, parts reclamation.
        I can tell you in the late 1980s, as a young marine
    stationed at Yuma, I spent a little bit of time up at Davis-
    Monthan, recovering parts for an A-4 Skyhawk, also long out of
    service.
        So, Senator, if confirmed, I will work with the services. I
    will work with my staff and this committee to make sure that
    the organic industrial base capabilities, resident within all
    the services, are modernized and capable of continuing
    sustainment of our fleets as we modernize those fleets. That
    includes training personnel. That includes new plant and
    equipment to sustain these new capabilities, such as directed
    energy, hypersonics, fifth-generation fighters, onward, and so
    forth. So, this is a priority for me.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Lowman. I look forward to
    working with you and your team.
        Dr. Martinez, last year, I introduced bipartisan
    legislation aimed at bringing TRICARE plans in line with
    private insurance plans. The Healthcare Fairness for Military
    Families Act would allow the children of servicemembers to stay
    on their parents' health insurance, TRICARE, until they are 26
    years old.
        I remain very concerned about the fact that military
    families don't have the same healthcare coverage that other
    Americans enjoy, and the disparity is even more troubling as we
    continue to battle this pandemic and its detrimental impact on
    health and employment.
        I believe this common sense proposal will help countless
    military families as we come out of this pandemic and it will
    help our economy recover, which is why I pushed for it to be
    included in the NDAA.
        What are your thoughts on expanding TRICARE coverage to
    military dependents until the age of 26?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Senator, I think, you know, the
    healthcare of our servicemembers and family members is
    critical. So, if I am confirmed, I am going to be looking at
    ways to bring parity, healthcare parity.
        So, we should be offering, you know, insurance coverage
    just like the rest of America is seeing. So, I commit to
    working with my team to try to close the gap and maybe have to
    come back and get some help, but you will get my commitment
    that I will strive for that healthcare parity.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Dr. Martinez.
        It just seems like also just a fundamental question of
    fairness, you know, that, you know, dependents of members of
    the military get the same treatment as folks in the civilian
    world. So, thank you.
        I have another question for you I am going to submit for
    the record.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Kelly.
        Gentlemen, thank you for your testimony today. Thank you
    for your distinguished public service and your commitment to
    serve again, and with that, let me call this hearing adjourned.
    Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
                                    ------

        [Prepared questions submitted to Honorable Robert P. Storch
    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 Inspector General of the Department of Defense
    (DOD IG)?
        Answer. As detailed in the Inspector General Act of 1978, as
    amended (the IG Act), the DOD IG is responsible for conducting
    independent and objective oversight over the programs and operations of
    the DOD and the conduct of its personnel. The IG Act, in section 2,
    lays out the core purposes of the OIGs as, in substance, (1) conducting
    and supervising audits and investigations of the programs and
    operations of the establishments for which they have responsibility;
    (2) providing leadership and recommending policies to promote the
    economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of those programs and
    operations, and to prevent and detect fraud and abuse in them, and (3)
    to keep the head of the establishment and the Congress fully and
    currently informed about the issues uncovered in the OIG's work and the
    need for corrective action to address those issues.
        Section 8 of the IG Act lays out additional provisions that apply
    specifically to the DOD IG in carrying out these core functions, and
    section 8L contains special provisions concerning overseas contingency
    operations that apply to DOD OIG and others engaged in oversight of
    those activities. DOD Directive 5106.01, ``Inspector General of the
    Department of Defense (IG DOD),'' details the structure, functions, and
    responsibilities of the DOD IG within the DOD. Per the DOD OIG's public
    reporting, the DOD IG is responsible for leading a team of more than
    1,800 personnel posted across the world in conducting these critical
    oversight functions, all of which, in one way or another, promote
    positive change throughout the DOD.
        Question. Section 3 of the Inspector General Act of 1978 provides
    that Inspectors General shall be appointed solely on the basis of their
    ``integrity and demonstrated ability in accounting, auditing, financial
    analysis, law, management analysis, public administration, or
    investigations.''
        What background, experience, and ``demonstrated ability'' do you
    possess in the domains of: accounting, auditing, financial analysis,
    law, management analysis, public administration, or investigations?
        Answer. At both the National Security Agency (NSA) IG and, before
    that, as the Deputy IG and in other leadership positions at the
    Department of Justice (DOJ) OIG, I have drawn heavily on my background
    as an attorney and some two dozen years' experience as a federal
    prosecutor that preceded my joining the IG community.
        I am an attorney, having graduated as a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar
    from Columbia University School of Law in 1985. After graduation, I
    worked as a law clerk for United States District Judge William D.
    Keller in Los Angeles, Central District of California, and then in
    general litigation at the law firm of Covington and Burling in
    Washington, DC, before beginning my career as a federal prosecutor at
    the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Middle District of Florida in
    my hometown of Jacksonville, Florida. I handled a variety of cases as
    an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) in Jacksonville, including working on
    a multi-agency Public Corruption Task Force. In the course of those
    prosecutions, I consulted with the Public Integrity Section of the
    Criminal Division of the DOJ in Washington, and accepted an offer to
    become a Trial Attorney there, where I worked on a variety of federal
    public corruption prosecutions across the country.
        Thereafter, I moved with my family to upstate New York, where I
    worked in general litigation at the law firm of Bond, Schoeneck and
    King in Albany before returning to public service at the USAO. Over the
    next 17 years, I served as an AUSA in the Northern District of New York
    (NDNY), handling primarily white collar and public corruption
    prosecutions, as well as federal civil rights, bankruptcy fraud, and
    other cases. I also served in a number of supervisory and other
    positions, including as the NDNY's first Anti-Terrorism Coordinator in
    the wake of September 11 and, later, as the District's Appellate Chief
    and Senior Litigation Counsel. I was selected for and served for
    approximately 11 years as a Legal Evaluator on the DOJ Evaluation and
    Review Staff, joining with other experienced prosecutors in conducting
    evaluations to improve the operations of USAOs across the country. I
    also participated as an instructor in numerous training programs,
    including on multiple occasions at the DOJ National Advocacy Institute
    and at other DOJ and FBI anti-corruption and other programs, both
    domestically and internationally.
        I served on detail for two years as a DOJ Resident Legal Advisor on
    an anti-corruption program sponsored by the U.S. Millennium Challenge
    Corporation and administered by the U.S. Agency for International
    Development in Ukraine, where we provided technical assistance in the
    development of measures to address official corruption (including with
    regard to the establishment of internal investigations units with
    functions similar to OIGs in a number of ministries and agencies). At
    the request of the U.S. Government (USG), I returned to Ukraine in 2014
    to provide technical assistance in the development of what became the
    anti-corruption package of legislation, and I returned at the request
    of the USG on a number of occasions to provide technical assistance
    regarding its implementation. At all three prosecutor's offices where I
    worked, I handled cases from a wide range of investigative agencies,
    including a number of OIGs and Military Criminal Investigative
    Organizations (MCIOs).
        In 2012, I returned to Washington and accepted a position in the
    Front Office of the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector
    General, serving in several leadership positions and, for my last
    several years there, as Deputy Inspector General, working directly with
    and for IG Michael Horowitz in leading the varied operations of that
    important office. I am currently in my fifth year serving as the first
    Presidentially appointed Senate-confirmed (PAS) Inspector General at
    the NSA, where I am honored to lead an outstanding team of auditors,
    evaluators, inspectors, and investigators in carrying out the full
    range of independent oversight activities called for under the IG Act,
    drawing heavily on my background as an attorney and prosecutor in much
    of what I do.
        Question. What leadership and management experience do you possess
    that you would apply to your service as DOD IG, if confirmed?
        Answer. As indicated above, I am honored to serve currently as one
    of approximately three dozen PAS Inspectors General under the IG Act,
    leading the team at NSA OIG in conducting impactful independent
    oversight at a critically important agency. As a result of this work,
    and my prior experience working with and for a truly outstanding IG at
    the DOJ OIG, I believe that I have a good understanding of the duties
    and responsibilities of an IG under the IG Act. Moreover, as an IG at
    an agency within the DOD, I work every day to carry out those duties
    and responsibilities within the structure and under the policies and
    procedures applicable across the DOD, and at a place where the
    integration of military and civilian personnel is of great importance.
    As an IG within the DOD community, I also am a member of the Defense
    Council on Integrity and Efficiency (DCIE) that is chaired by the DOD
    IG, and my team and I interact regularly with the DOD OIG and its staff
    and others across the defense oversight community in carrying out our
    oversight functions.
        In addition to these leadership and management experiences as an IG
    within the defense enterprise, I also am active in the Council of the
    Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), from which I
    have gained a great deal of knowledge and perspective on how IGs across
    the oversight community carry out their responsibilities. I have been
    honored to be selected for a number of leadership positions within
    CIGIE, serving for the past several years as Vice Chair of the
    Technology Committee and Chair of the Emerging Technology Committee,
    both of which I believe deal with areas essential to the conduct of
    effective oversight now and into the future. I also was selected in
    mid-2020 to serve as one of four IGs on the CIGIE Integrity Committee,
    which has the important responsibility under the IG Act of considering
    and supervising investigations regarding allegations of misconduct made
    against IGs or other senior OIG personnel, and most recently, in
    February 2022, I was named as Vice Chair of this Committee.
    Consideration of the matters that come to the Integrity Committee
    requires a high level of understanding of the leadership and management
    functions that are critical to the functioning of an OIG, and I believe
    that, in addition to providing an important service to the larger IG
    community, the insights I have gained through this work would be of
    great assistance to me should I be confirmed to lead the office of the
    DOD IG.
        Additionally, when I first joined the IG community, I was asked by
    IG Horowitz to develop the Whistleblower Ombudsperson Program at DOJ
    OIG, and I founded and led the CIGIE working group that has focused on
    these critical issues, which I have continued to prioritize at NSA and
    within the Intelligence Community. And, both at DOJ and at NSA OIGs, I
    have emphasized the importance of diversity, equity, inclusion, and
    accessibility, being twice recognized for my work in the area at DOJ
    OIG, and continuing to prioritize it through the establishment of and
    support for our outstanding Diversity and Engagement Committee at NSA
    OIG.
        During my time as a federal prosecutor, I also have had a number of
    important positions that have given me valuable leadership experiences,
    including as mentioned above, coordinating my District's efforts in
    response to the events of September 11, which involved bringing
    together representatives from a wide range of Federal, state, and local
    law enforcement and intelligence entities to address that important
    area. Later, I was selected by the U.S. Attorney to lead our District's
    appellate practice, which involved not only representing the USAO
    before the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, but working to
    develop and train other prosecutors in writing appellate briefs and
    conducting oral arguments, skills that I believe have served me well in
    working collaboratively with my colleagues to enhance the quality of
    our work product at DOJ and NSA OIGs. At the USAO, I also served as
    Deputy Criminal Chief, supervising prosecutions out of the Albany and
    Binghamton USAOs, and for a time as Acting Criminal Chief, supervising
    them across the District, and as Counsel to the U.S. Attorney--
    positions that required the exercise of judgment and discretion on a
    range of legal and management issues.
        In all these positions, and those I have held at DOJ OIG and now
    NSA OIG, I have followed the basic belief that it is one of my most
    important responsibilities as a leader to provide the best possible
    environment for my team to learn, grown, and develop, which enables
    them to do their best work and is the right thing to do for our people.
    If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I would hope to bring that same
    approach to the leadership of that critically important office.
        Question. In your view, are there any steps you need to take to
    enhance your ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of the
    DOD IG?
        Answer. One of the things that I have found to be very valuable
    during my time as the IG at NSA is that I established from the outset
    that I would have regular and open communications with Agency
    leadership. We agreed upon a schedule for regular meetings with the
    Director and Deputy Director, and engage on a regular and ongoing basis
    at other times as issues have warranted. Additionally, I have found it
    very valuable to engage on a regular basis with leaders across the
    extended enterprise, to inform them of our activities and, perhaps more
    importantly, to hear from them regarding the operations within their
    purview and their interactions with the OIG.
        And I believe it is important to interact broadly with my
    colleagues throughout the office so as to learn about their activities
    and the challenges they perceive in achieving the office's joint
    mission.
        I also have been gratified by the opportunities I have had leading
    up to my confirmation hearing to meet with the Members and staff of the
    SASC and, if I am confirmed, I hope to engage in robust communications
    with the Committee on an ongoing basis to hear from its Members and
    staff regarding the most critical issues that they believe are faced by
    the Department. I am firmly committed to the dual reporting lines
    reflected in the IG Act's direction that IGs keep both the head of the
    establish and the Congress fully and currently informed regarding their
    findings and the need for corrective action to address them. At NSA
    OIG, I have worked with my team to foster communications with the
    Congress, and as with Agency leadership, I think it is essential that I
    and my team understand the perspectives and concerns of the Congress
    with regard to our efforts and the establishment that we oversee.
        Question. If confirmed, what duties and responsibilities would you
    assign to the Principal Deputy Inspector General of the Department of
    Defense?
        Answer. With any entity as large and complex as the DOD OIG, I
    would anticipate that the Principal Deputy Inspector General (PDIG)
    would play a critical role in helping to lead and direct the operations
    of the office. Having served as a Deputy IG myself, I understand the
    importance of that role in helping to ensure the successful operations
    of the office, as well as acting to carry on the smooth continuation of
    such operations in the absence of the IG. If I am confirmed, I would
    intend to rely heavily on the experience and advice of the PDIG and
    other senior leadership of the OIG, and to work with them to ensure
    that the leadership structure of the office is well positioned to
    conduct impactful independent oversight across the defense enterprise.
        Question. If confirmed, what duties and responsibilities would you
    assign to the Assistant Inspector General of the Department of Defense
    required by section 554 of the Fiscal Year 2021 NDAA, as amended,
    charged with duties relating to oversight of DOD policies, programs,
    systems and processes related to diversity and inclusion, and
    supremacist, extremist and criminal gang activity? What will be your
    role with respect to these issues?
        Answer. I believe that the issues of diversity and inclusion, and
    supremacist, extremist, and criminal gang activity within the DOD are
    of great importance. I have had the opportunity to hear presentations
    from the Deputy IG for Diversity and Inclusion and Extremism in the
    Military and, if confirmed, I would intend to engage with her and her
    team to make sure that the OIG is doing everything it can to maximize
    its impact in these areas of critical importance for the DOD's military
    and civilian workforces.
        Question. Are there any additional authorities or resources that,
    in your view, would enhance your ability to perform the duties and
    functions of the DOD IG, if confirmed?
        Answer. I am not currently in a position to address whether there
    are authorities or resources that would enhance my ability to perform
    the duties and functions of the DOD IG. If confirmed, I would intend to
    consult with the team at DOD OIG to ascertain whether
        such gaps exist and then would welcome the opportunity to engage
    with the Department and the Congress to find the best path forward to
    address them.
                        major challenges and priorities
        Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
    challenges you would face if confirmed as the DOD IG?
        Answer. I believe that people are everything, and OIGs, like the
    rest of government, face a significant challenge in attracting and
    retaining the diverse and talented workforce that is essential to doing
    our best work. Based on my experience at both the NSA and DOJ OIGs, I
    also believe that oversight of complex, multifaceted entities is
    inherently challenging, and conducting comprehensive and impactful
    oversight of a Department of the size and complexity of the DOD would
    be particularly so as it has both an overarching national security
    mission and, because of the size and diversity of the Department, it
    performs virtually every function of government in order to achieve it.
    As IGs reflect the departments and agencies they oversee, this gives
    the DOD OIG the task of conducting effective, independent oversight
    over all of those myriad, extensive, and critical programs and
    operations, and the military, civilian, and contractor personnel who
    conduct them throughout the United States and around the world.
        Question. If confirmed, what plans do you have for addressing each
    of the challenges you identified, and on what timeline?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would intend to meet with the human
    resources team at DOD OIG to learn about the efforts to recruit and
    retain a diverse and talented workforce and to discuss with them how we
    can optimize our efforts in that critical area. I also would meet early
    and often with the leadership team and others at the OIG headquarters,
    and at its offices across the enterprise, to gather their perspectives
    and discuss how we can ensure that we are conducting the most impactful
    audits, evaluations, investigations, and reviews. In that regard, while
    it takes time away from the office, I always found that traveling as
    the Deputy IG with the IG to our field offices at DOJ OIG, and more
    recently with my senior leaders at NSA OIG, was remarkably worthwhile
    in gaining insights that helped in establishing the direction and focus
    of our office's oversight efforts.
                                civilian control
        Question. In its 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.''
        What is your view of the essential role of the DOD IG in promoting
    civilian control over the military?
        Answer. Civilian control of the military is, of course, a central
    principle going back to the founding of our democracy, and its vitality
    is critically important to our system of government. Section 8(a) of
    the IG Act itself provides that no member of the Armed Forces, active
    or reserve, shall be appointed as the IG at the DOD, which I believe is
    consonant with the more general tenant of civilian control over the
    military and critically important for establishing the role of the OIG
    in promoting the same. Through the conduct of independent and objective
    audits, evaluations, and investigations, I believe that the DOD OIG
    furthers this fundamental principle, including through investigations
    of misconduct by senior officials, oversight over the activities and
    investigations conducted by the Service IGs and the MCIOs, and the
    conduct of audits and evaluations that examine the activities of, and
    make recommendations to improve the economy, efficiency, and
    effectiveness of military programs and operations across the defense
    enterprise.
        Question. How do the military department and other component
    Inspectors General, many of whom are senior military officers, fit into
    the framework of civilian control, in your view?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Military Department and
    other component IGs report to their Secretaries, who are required to be
    civilians, and that those individuals, in turn, report to the Secretary
    of Defense, who is also required to be a civilian.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
    that your tenure as DOD IG epitomizes the fundamental requirement for
    civilian control of the Armed Forces embedded in the U.S. Constitution
    and law?
        Answer. If I am confirmed as the IG at the DOD, I will work with my
    team to ensure that we conduct objective independent oversight over the
    programs and operations of the DOD that fully upholds the core
    principle of civilian control of the Armed Forces, including the
    investigative and other oversight activities describe above. As I do as
    the IG at the NSA, I would regularly emphasize the independent and
    nonpartisan nature of our work and, should we receive any allegation or
    evidence that implicates the core principle of civilian oversight over
    military activities, I will ensure that we take prompt action to
    address and report on same as appropriate.
                relationships with component inspectors general
        Question. What is your understanding of the duties and
    responsibilities of the component Inspectors General, including the
    Inspectors General of the military departments?
        Answer. It is my understanding and belief that the component IGs,
    including the IGs of the Military Departments, perform an important
    role in the oversight of the entities over which they have purview, and
    in serving as essential force multipliers for the DOD IG's oversight
    over the larger defense enterprise. The duties and responsibilities of
    the DOD component IGs are detailed in DOD Directive 5106.04. These
    include, in substance, providing advice to their commander or director
    on all IG matters; reporting on the state of the command; performing
    investigations, inspections, assistance, audit, and teaching and
    training functions; recommending actions to correct deficiencies and
    monitoring progress toward addressing them; promptly reporting to the
    DOD IG allegations made against senior officials; and conducting
    inquiries that are referred to them by the DOD Hotline.
        It is my understanding that the Military Department IGs draw their
    responsibilities from various laws related to the branches they
    oversee, including functions such as, in the case of the Army IG,
    inquiring into and reporting on the discipline, efficiency, and economy
    of the Army; periodically proposing programs of inspection and
    recommending additional inspections and investigations as appears
    appropriate; performing other duties as prescribed by the Secretary or
    Chief of Staff, and cooperating fully with the DOD IG in the
    performance of the its duties and functions.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    build and sustain a collaborative and cooperative relationship with
    these Inspectors General?
        Answer. I believe strongly in the importance of a collaborative and
    cooperative relationship between Inspectors General in a manner that
    promotes the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of our own
    oversight activities. As the NSA IG, I have worked to further what I
    this of as the ``three Cs''--communication, coordination, and
    cooperation--with our counterparts within the defense enterprise and
    beyond. That same principle has been a key motivator in my involvement
    in the broader IG community through CIGIE.
        If I am confirmed as the IG at DOD, I would look forward to
    learning more from my team at the OIG regarding the relationship that
    the office has with each of the component and military IGs, to meeting
    with those individuals, and to working together with them to ensure
    that we have a good working relationship that ensures the proper
    operations of our offices and that the various reporting mechanisms and
    channels of communication are operating properly. I also would hope to
    work through the DCIE and otherwise to ensure robust communication,
    coordination, and cooperation across the defense enterprise.
        In one example of what I have been able to do in my current
    position, I was pleased to be able to partner with the Acting DOD IG to
    enable the members of the DCIE, including the component and Military
    Department IGs, to participate in the CIGIE Emerging Technology
    Subcommittee's 2021 symposium on emerging technology, as I believe it
    is important to collaborate and share information and best practices
    for the benefit of the larger oversight community. If confirmed, I
    would hope to help lead the DOD OIG to foster such sharing and
    collaboration across the defense oversight community.
        Question. What are your views on the component Inspectors General's
    ability to maintain their independence in conducting administrative
    investigations?
        Answer. As indicated above, it is my understanding that, as is the
    case at NSA OIG, all allegations of misconduct made against senior
    officials received by the component IGs have to be promptly reported to
    the DOD IG, and that the DOD IG then decides whether it is appropriate
    to retain such investigation or to refer it back to the component IG
    for investigation. It is further my understanding that, where a matter
    is referred back to the component IG, the DOD IG retains oversight
    responsibility over the matter. I am not personally aware of instances
    where this approach has been insufficient to ensure the appropriate
    independence of the investigation but, if confirmed, I would consult
    with the team at DOD OIG and ensure that such matters are addressed
    promptly and appropriately.
        Question. What is your understanding of the value of the ``teach
    and train'' mission undertaken by the military department Inspectors
    General?
        Answer. It is my understanding that ``teach and train'' refers to
    the process whereby IGs within the military conduct inspections and
    other oversight activities that result in recommendations, which in
    turn result in actions to address the identified deficiencies. This
    process--independently and objectively identifying issues, making
    recommendations for corrective action, and ensuring that actions are
    taken sufficient to meet the intent of those recommendations--is a core
    function of all IGs. On inspections at NSA OIG, our teams often partner
    with appropriate counterparts from the Military Department IGs to
    ensure that these functions take place efficiently and effectively, and
    that the resulting benefits for the programs and operations of the
    facilities are achieved.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your plan for working with
    and overseeing the component Inspectors General and their internal
    audit, investigation, and inspection units, with a view to avoiding
    duplication of effort in inspector general operations and activities?
        As indicated above, I believe strongly in the importance of
    communication, coordination, and cooperation to ensure the economy,
    efficiency, and effectiveness of oversight activities. If I am
    confirmed, I would consult with the team at DOD IG as to how we can
    best ensure that we are engaging in a robust fashion with the component
    IGs, including ensuring appropriate coordination of our oversight plans
    and activities to avoid duplicative or inconsistent oversight
    activities, which can waste taxpayer dollars and detract from the
    impact of our work in improving the programs and operations of the
    entities within our areas of responsibility. I also believe that the
    DCIE can play an important role in institutionalizing such efforts
    across the defense oversight community.
        18. What is your understanding of the relationship between the DOD
    IG and the IGs of the Defense intelligence agencies--the National
    Security Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National
    Geospatial Intelligence Agency, and the Defense Intelligence Agency?
        Answer. Under the IG Act, each of the four listed defense
    intelligence agencies has its own IG, who is responsible for conducting
    oversight over the programs and operations of their agency and the
    conduct of agency personnel. Each of these agencies is part of the
    larger DOD, which has its own larger IG who is responsible for
    conducting objective and independent oversight of programs and
    operations and the conduct of personnel across the entire Department.
        As the NSA IG, I helped to lead the development with the then
    Acting DOD IG and the other defense intelligence IGs of a memorandum of
    understanding (MOU), as called for in the Senate Armed Services
    Committee's Report to accompany the NDAA for fiscal year 2015 (Report
    Number 113-176, 2 June 2014), which details our respective
    responsibilities and authorities under the IG Act and DOD policy. This
    MOU also reflects the importance of communication and coordination in
    carrying out those oversight functions so as to avoid duplicative or
    inconsistent oversight. The defense intelligence agency IGs have
    reporting requirements to DOD IG, such as that for allegations of
    senior official misconduct referenced above. As the NSA IG, I have
    worked to foster collaborative efforts between our various offices
    where those make sense--for instance, my office currently is conducting
    a publicly announced joint evaluation with the DOD OIG assessing the
    NSA's integration of artificial intelligence into signals intelligence
    activities in accordance with DOD and Intelligence Community (IC)
    guidance. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I will continue in that role
    to promote communication, coordination, and collaboration to ensure
    that oversight activities are conducted economically, efficiently, and
    effectively across the defense enterprise. In furtherance of that, all
    of the defense intelligence agency IGs are participants in the DCIE,
    which, under the leadership of the DOD IG, has an important
    coordinating function.
        Question. What is your understanding of the relationship between
    the DOD IG and the Intelligence Community IG with respect to the DOD
    intelligence agencies?
        Answer. The IC IG has important coordinating functions across the
    intelligence community, including with regard to the defense
    intelligence agencies and the other departments and agencies that
    comprise the Intelligence Community, including the DOD. The IC IG also
    has jurisdiction to conduct oversight over the exercise of intelligence
    activities that are conducted under the authority of the Director of
    National Intelligence, which it generally has exercised collaboratively
    with the IGs of other Intelligence Community department and agencies. I
    do not have firsthand knowledge regarding the relationship between the
    DOD IG and the IC IG, but I and my office at NSA OIG have an excellent
    working relationship with the IC IG and, if I am confirmed as the DOD
    IG, I will work the team at DOD OIG to ensure that we have an excellent
    relationship with the IC IG as well.
        Question. What is your understanding of the roles of inspectors
    general assigned to the personal staffs of commanders and civilian
    leaders in headquarters and field commands across the DOD, and if
    confirmed, what would be your relationship with these inspectors
    general?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the roles of these inspectors
    general are similar to those described above with regard to advising
    their commands and conducting activities that promote their programs
    and operations. As indicated above, I believe that the DOD IG has an
    important role in leading the defense oversight community, and in
    conducting oversight over the work of other IGs as necessary and
    appropriate to ensure the quality and consistency of such work. If
    confirmed, I would work with these IGs through the DCIE and otherwise
    to ensure that we are coordinating effectively to meet this essential
    requirement.
        Question. In your view, how can the DOD IG and the military
    department Inspectors General work in unity of effort with military
    department audit agencies, criminal investigative organizations,
    internal review offices, and other functional staffs, to fulfill their
    oversight obligations?
        Answer. As indicated above, I am a proponent of communication,
    coordination, and cooperation. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I will
    engage with the team at the OIG to assess our relationships with all of
    these other oversight entities, and to develop and implement any
    necessary measures to ensure that we are leading the defense oversight
    community to operate with the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness
    that the entities we oversee demand and deserve.
        Section 1611 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act
    (NDAA) for fiscal year 2011 provides that the DOD IG, as well as the
    Inspectors General of the military departments ``shall treat the sexual
    assault prevention and response program as an item of special interest
    when conducting inspections of organizations and activities with
    responsibilities regarding the prevention and response to sexual
    assault,'' and that the inspection teams comprised for these purposes
    must ``include at least one member with expertise and knowledge of
    sexual assault prevention and response policies related to a specific
    armed force.''
        Question. What is your understanding of the designation of the
    sexual assault prevention and response program as an ``item of special
    interest''?
        Answer. I have been informed that this designation requires that
    there be focused management attention on the program, including
    requiring the OIG to collect and report on relevant data related to it.
        Question. How does the DOD IG exercise appropriate oversight of the
    actions of the military department Inspectors General in this regard?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the investigation of
    allegations of sexual assault are generally conducted by the MCIOs, and
    that the DOD IG exercises oversight jurisdiction over those important
    matters. I also understand that the DOD OIG has, in the past, conducted
    an evaluation of the MCIOs' handling of these matters, and the DOD
    OIG's Fiscal Year 2022 Oversight Plan reflects that another such
    evaluation currently is ongoing. I further understand that the
    collection of information regarding the handling of sexual assault and
    misconduct allegations is also within the purview of the newly
    established Deputy IG for Diversity and Inclusion, and Extremism in the
    Military. If I am confirmed, I would intend to work with the team at
    the DOD OIG to ensure that we are conducting oversight jurisdiction
    these important matters appropriately. Separately, it is my
    understanding that the DOD OIG itself conducts investigations regarding
    allegations of reprisal against whistleblowers in sexual assault cases.
        Question. What role should the DOD IG play in consolidating for
    review, analysis, and dissemination, best practices and trend data
    derived from inspections of the sexual assault prevention and response
    programs of the military departments?
        Answer. I believe that the DOD IG can play an important role in the
    review, analysis, and dissemination of best practices and trend data
    from inspections of the sexual assault prevention and response programs
    of the Military Departments. In my own experience, my office at NSA OIG
    recently released a trends report examining issues identified on
    inspections over the prior six-year period. I believe that this sort of
    compilation and analysis can provide very useful lessons and enhance
    the impact of individual oversight activities. Additionally, I am aware
    that the DOD OIG has a robust data analytics effort that I believe
    would be of great assistance in such work. If confirmed, I would look
    forward to working with various involved parts of the DOD OIG and the
    other IGs within the defense establishment to determine how we can best
    develop and provide this important information.
        Question. Section 2784 of title 10, U.S. Code, charges the DOD IG
    and the Inspectors General of the military departments to perform
    periodic audits to identify potentially fraudulent, improper, and
    abusive uses of DOD government purchase cards.
        If confirmed, what would you do to ensure that misuses of DOD
    government purchase cards are identified and brought to the attention
    of senior DOD leaders?
        Answer. Detecting and deterring the misuse of government purchase
    cards is a focus of OIGs across the community. I have had experience
    with these sorts of audits and, if confirmed, would meet with the team
    at the DOD OIG to discuss the office's handling of them and how best to
    ensure that the results of such audits are brought to the attention of
    senior DOD leaders and acted upon in a timely manner. I also would
    explore with the communications personnel at the OIG how to most
    effectively disseminate messaging across the defense enterprise
    regarding this topic.
        Question. If confirmed, what programmatic improvements would you
    recommend to prevent the misuse and abuse of the DOD government
    purchase card program?
        Answer. I am not currently in a position to know what programmatic
    improvements I would recommend in this area. If confirmed, I would
    review the prior work conducted by the OIG and consult with the team on
    how to make the maximum impact in addressing this issue. As on many
    other topics, I would welcome the opportunity to hear from the
    Committee regarding any particular concerns it might have in this area
    as well.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you recommend to ensure
    that servicemember and DOD civilian employee cardholders who misuse
    their government purchase cards are held appropriately accountable?
        Answer. Again, I do not have the information necessary to identify
    specific actions that I would recommend if confirmed to ensure
    appropriate accountability in this area. However, I certainly
    understand and believe that accountability is essential, and I have
    worked first as a prosecutor and, more recently, within the IG
    community to ensure that personnel who engage in misconduct are, in
    fact, held appropriately accountable. In fact, at NSA OIG, the first
    underlying report for which we released an unclassified version was on
    our Audit of the Agency's Travel Card Program, in which we indicated
    that we had referred a number of instances of potential card misuse to
    the NSA OIG Investigations Division. If investigations are to act as an
    effective deterrent, there also need to be consequences for
    substantiated misconduct and, if confirmed, I would work with the team
    at the DOD OIG to understand the situation there and take appropriate
    action.
                              executive privilege
        Question. In your view, would an assertion of executive privilege
    from the White House with regard to a matter relating to the Department
    of Defense prevent the DOD IG from accessing information that has been
    shielded from Congress?
        Answer. Under the IG Act, IGs operate within and are a part of the
    departments and agencies that we oversee. As a result, I do not believe
    that an assertion of executive privilege from the White House with
    regard to a matter relating to the Department of Defense would prevent
    the DOD OIG from accessing information to which it would otherwise be
    entitled under the Act, even if that information has been shielded from
    Congress.
           dod business practice performance and affordability reform
        Question. The DOD Reform Management Group (RMG) was established in
    2017 as a governance body to manage and oversee reform efforts across
    nine lines of business.
        However, in January 2021, the Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a
    memorandum stating, among other things, that the Reform Management
    Group would be disbanded and its related ongoing actions transferred to
    the Defense Business Council. DOD claimed a total of $37 billion in
    savings from fiscal year 2017 through fiscal year 2021 from its reform
    efforts in its annual budget materials and other reports.
        What role should DOD IG have to audit or otherwise validate the
    savings claimed?
        Answer. The DOD IG has jurisdiction to conduct oversight over all
    programs and activities of the Department. If I am confirmed, I will
    examine this issue with the team at the DOD OIG to determine our
    purview in this area and what oversight may be appropriate. I also
    would welcome the opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding
    any concerns it may have in this area.
        Question. If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what efforts would you
    undertake to assess the continued effectiveness of DOD reform
    initiatives?
        Answer. A basic function of OIGs is to conduct audits, evaluations,
    and other reviews that assess the economy, efficiency, and
    effectiveness of Department programs and operations. If confirmed, I
    would welcome the opportunity to engage with the Congress to understand
    any concerns it may have, and would consult with the team at the OIG to
    determine where and how we might most effectively conduct oversight
    regarding DOD reform initiatives in this area.
        Question. In your view, are there business process reforms that the
    DOD IG could undertake internally that would contribute to the
    Department's achievement of its savings goals?
        Answer. As with the establishments we oversee, all OIG activities
    are conducted with taxpayer funds, and I believe that we have an
    obligation to ensure that we meet the standards to which we hold the
    departments and agencies we oversee, and that our own activities are
    conducted economically, efficiently, and effectively. I am not in a
    position to ascertain whether there are business process reforms that
    the DOD OIG could undertake internally that would contribute to the
    Department's achievement of its savings goals but, if confirmed, I
    would meet with the team at the DOD OIG to gain greater understanding
    as to the office's internal operations and any reforms that might
    contribute to the Department's achievement of its savings goals and,
    more generally, ensure that we are operating economically, efficiently,
    and effectively with the taxpayer's dollars.
                          independence and objectivity
        Question. One of the primary purposes of the Inspector General Act
    of 1978 was to create independent and objective units to conduct and
    supervise audits and investigations in DOD.
        32. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to maintain
    the independence and objectivity of the Office of the DOD IG?
        Answer. The independence and objectivity of OIGs are the
    cornerstone of our work--without it, our reports would not be
    authoritative or credible at the establishments we oversee, with the
    Congress, or with the public. I believe that maintaining independence
    and objectivity can be particularly difficult but is particularly
    important at places like those where I have worked and, if confirmed,
    where I will work, where the department or agency in question carries
    out a particularly compelling mission. Fortunately, as the Deputy IG at
    the Department of Justice, I had the opportunity to observe daily how a
    truly outstanding IG conducted himself and led the office to maintain
    unquestioned independence and objectivity, all while handling some of
    the most sensitive matters within the government. I tried to learn from
    IG Horowitz every day, and am very pleased that I and my office have a
    good, but appropriately independent and objective relationship with the
    leadership at the NSA. Maintaining the right balance--being close
    enough that your work is valued and that leadership is valued and
    others within the establishment seek out your office's independent
    assessment and credit its results, but not so close that you jeopardize
    the reality or the appearance of independent objectivity--can be one of
    the most difficult things for an OIG. One thing that I have done at
    NSA, and would anticipate continuing if I am confirmed as the IG at
    DOD, is to engage in constant and consistent reinforcement of these key
    principles--including that the IG is independent of the Department's
    leadership structure, that we have dual obligations to keep the
    Department leadership and the Congress fully and currently informed,
    and that we are resolutely nonpartisan. At NSA OIG, I worked to revise
    our office's governing policy and many of our procedures to ensure that
    they fully reflected our office's independence and, if confirmed as the
    DOD IG, I would work with the team at the OIG to review the office's
    policies and procedures and make any necessary adjustments to ensure
    same.
        In this area, I believe that communications with establishment
    leadership are key and, at NSA, I changed the interactions with Agency
    leadership from the practice of prior IGs, who attended staff meetings,
    to establish separate meetings with the Deputy Director and the
    Director. While, as discussed earlier, I believe that interactions and
    positive working relationships with others in Department leadership are
    very important, there can be no question as to the level at which the
    IG reports as an essential component of the office's independence. More
    recently, I was pleased last spring to have the Director issue a
    message to the entire workforce supporting the independence of the IG,
    and encouraging people to report wrongdoing to us.
        And, ultimately, it comes down to the work. I always tell my team
    that the NSA has compelling missions--both signals intelligence and
    cybersecurity--but those are not our missions as an OIG. In my view,
    the mission of an OIG ultimately is to conduct objective, impactful
    oversight over the Agency's conduct of its mission and its personnel
    that promotes positive change. If I am confirmed, I will communicate
    the expectation of such independence and objectivity throughout the OIG
    and work with the team to carry it out.
        Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it would
    be appropriate for the DOD IG to consult with DOD officials outside of
    the Office of the Inspector General before issuing an audit,
    investigation, or inspection report, regarding the findings and
    recommendations set forth in that report?
        Answer. With regard to audits and inspection, pursuant to
    applicable standards such as the Government Auditing Standards (known
    as the ``Yellow Book'') for audits and the CIGIE Quality Standards for
    Inspection and Evaluation (known as the ``Blue Book''), as well as
    common practice in the IG community, it is standard and appropriate to
    provide advance drafts of reports of audits, inspections, and
    evaluations to appropriate Department officials for the purpose of
    factual accuracy review and to provide the Department's response to
    recommendations made in the report, which response is reflected in the
    report along with any OIG analysis of the same. Having reviewed and
    been responsible for many reports over my time in the IG community, I
    believe that these interactions with department or agency officials are
    entirely appropriate and, in fact, increase both the accuracy of the
    work and the acceptance of it within the entity being overseen, which,
    in turn, helps to prompt timely efforts to take actions to address the
    issues identified in the report.
        For administrative investigations, it similarly is common practice
    and, I believe, entirely appropriate to provide the subject against
    whom the OIG intends to substantiate wrongdoing an opportunity to
    review at least the tentative conclusions and an opportunity to
    respond, which generally should be documented and, as warranted,
    addressed in the report of investigation. All of this, of course, is
    entirely distinct from any effort by Department officials from outside
    the OIG to have undue influence on the findings or recommendations of a
    report, which, if confirmed, I would never countenance.
        Question. To the extent you believe it appropriate, how would you
    conduct such consultation so as to maintain the independence and
    objectivity of the DOD IG, and to ensure perceptions of IG independence
    and objectivity are not compromised?
        Answer. While I am not familiar with the specific procedures at the
    DOD OIG, I believe that all IGs have procedures for carrying out and
    documenting the consultations referenced above to ensure that they are
    appropriate. If confirmed, I would familiarize myself with DOD OIG's
    procedures and discuss any areas for possible improvement with the team
    and, as appropriate, Department leadership. I have found at NSA, and I
    would anticipate at DOD, that there is a good understanding from senior
    leadership that OIG oversight is most valuable when its objectivity and
    independence is respected and preserved, and I would engage as
    necessary to ensure that occurs in all instances.
        Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it would
    be appropriate for a senior official to request that the DOD IG not
    audit, investigate, inspect, or review a particular matter?
        Answer. As an independent oversight entity, it is up to the OIG to
    determine its oversight plan, and what matters it will or will not
    audit, investigate, inspect, or evaluate. I believe that OIGs are well
    served by consulting with the leadership of the establishments they
    oversee, as well as with the Congress as discussed above, regarding
    areas of particular concern that may merit audits, inspections, or
    evaluations, and it is not uncommon for agency or department leadership
    to turn to the OIG for an independent review of a particular matter.
    This is appropriate so long as it is understood and respected that,
    absent a statute requiring particular action, it is the OIG, and
    ultimately the IG, who has the independent authority and responsibility
    for deciding what oversight projects the office will or will not
    undertake.
        OIGs typically carry out this task utilizing a methodology to
    assess relative risks across various priority areas, with the
    acknowledgement that all work plans are living documents and
    circumstances may arise that warrant taking or deferring action in a
    particular area. Ultimately, only the Secretary of Defense has the
    authority under section 8(b) of the IG Act to prohibit the IG from
    initiating, carrying out, or completing any audit, investigation,
    inspection, or review, based on a determination that such prohibition
    is necessary to preserve the national security interests of the United
    States. It is my understanding that this authority has never been
    exercised but, if it were, I would report to Congress as provided for
    in the Act.
        Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it would be
    appropriate for a senior official to request that the DOD IG not issue
    a report on a particular matter?
        Answer. Apart from a determination by the Secretary of Defense in
    an extraordinary circumstance as described above, I cannot think of any
    circumstances where it would be appropriate for a senior official to
    request that an IG not issue a report on a matter we have reviewed, or
    in which we would honor such a request.
        Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it would
    be appropriate for a senior official to request that the DOD IG alter
    findings, recommendations, or other pertinent material in a report on a
    particular matter?
        Answer. As discussed above, it is appropriate and common for
    management to review and provide comments on draft OIG reports, which
    may include requests to alter findings, recommendations, or other
    material believed by the department or agency to be inaccurate. Such
    requests should be appropriately documented and their disposition is
    solely that of the OIG. It never would be appropriate for a senior
    official or anyone else to request that an OIG report be changed
    because it is embarrassing for the Department. Additionally, subjects
    of administrative investigations are typically and appropriately
    provided an opportunity to provide comment and response on tentative
    conclusions of misconduct; again, those inputs should be documented and
    their disposition is solely up to the OIG.
        Question. If confirmed, what action would you take if a senior
    official sought to prevent you from ``initiating, carrying out, or
    completing'' any audit, investigation, or inspection within the
    jurisdiction of the Office of the DOD IG?
        Answer. As detailed above, only the Secretary of Defense has
    authority for the reasons and under the procedures outlined in section
    8(b) of the IG Act to prevent the IG from initiating, carrying out, or
    completing any audit, investigation, or inspection within the
    jurisdiction of the DOD OIG. If anyone else tried to do so, I would
    report that to Department leadership and, as appropriate, the Congress.
    Depending on the nature of the action, I also would confer within the
    OIG to determine whether such action constituted obstruction or an
    attempted obstruction that would warrant administrative, or even
    potentially criminal, investigation.
                    supervision by the secretary of defense
        Question. Section 3 of the Inspector General Act of 1978 provides
    that the head of an agency, shall exercise ``general supervision'' over
    the agency's Inspector General, but shall not``prevent or prohibit the
    Inspector General from initiating, carrying out, or completing any
    audit or investigation, or from issuing any subpoena during the course
    of any audit or nvestigation.''
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your relationship with the
    Secretary of Defense?
        Answer. I would make every effort to have a good, working
    relationship with the Secretary of Defense that respects our relative
    roles and the independence of the OIG in conducting its oversight
    functions. I have had the great advantage of witnessing how that
    relationship was conducted during my time as the Deputy IG at the DOJ
    OIG, and am pleased to have a similar good, independent working
    relationship with the Director at the NSA.
        Question. What would be your relationship with the Deputy Secretary
    of Defense and how would it differ from your relationship with the
    Secretary?
        Answer. The IG Act provides in section 3(a) that the IG shall be
    under the general supervision of the head of the establishment, which
    can be delegated to the officer next in rank, but it cannot be
    delegated further. If I am confirmed, I would intend to consult with
    both the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary on what they believe would
    be the most productive schedule for our regular interactions. Based on
    my experience at NSA OIG and, before that, at DOJ OIG, I would
    anticipate that might include regular meetings with the Deputy
    Secretary to inform her about some of the key findings in our work and
    to discuss operational matters relating to our office and its
    relationship with the larger enterprise, as well as periodic meetings
    with the Secretary to discuss the most significant findings and issues.
    Whatever the periodicity of such regular meetings, it is critical that
    the IG have direct and prompt access to the head of the establishment
    when necessary for any purpose pertaining to the performance and
    functions of the OIG as provided for in section 6(a)(6) of the IG Act.
        Question. What is your understanding of the general supervisory
    authority of the Secretary of Defense over the DOD IG, in view of the
    language provided by sections 2 and 3 of the Inspector General Act?
        Answer. Section 2 of the Inspector General Act sets forth the
    general purposes of the OIG as discussed earlier, and section 3
    provides for the general supervision of the IG by the head or next in
    rank at DOD, the Secretary and Deputy Secretary. However, it is
    fundamentally important that section 3 then goes on to make explicit
    that neither the head nor the next in rank shall prevent or prohibit
    the IG from initiating, carrying out, or completing any work, or
    issuing any subpoena, with the only ability to do so vested in the
    Secretary based upon the finding and with the notification set forth in
    section 8(b). In practice within the IG community, this effectively
    means that establishment leadership does not have the authority to
    direct or interfere in the oversight work of the OIG, though the office
    remains part of the department or agency for some other purposes.
        Question. Section 8 of the Inspector General Act of 1978 provides
    that the DOD IG shall ``be under the authority, direction, and control
    of the Secretary of Defense'' with respect to certain audits or
    investigations which require access to information concerning sensitive
    operational plans, intelligence matters, counterintelligence matters,
    ongoing criminal investigations by other administrative units of the
    Department of Defense related to national security, or other matters,
    the disclosure of which, would constitute a serious threat to national
    security.
        Question. What is your understanding of the procedures in place to
    effectuate the authority and control of the Secretary of Defense over
    the matters delineated in section 8 of the Act?
        Answer. Section 8(a)(3) of the IG Act provides that, if the
    Secretary of Defense exercises the authorities outlined in sections
    8(a)(1) or (2) as described above, the IG shall submit a statement
    concerning such exercise within thirty days to the designated
    congressional committees.
        Question. What is your understanding of the extent to which the DOD
    IG has, as a matter of practice, initiated, conducted, and reported on
    audits or investigations covered by section 8 differently from other
    audits or investigations?
        Answer. I am not aware of any differences in the way that the DOD
    IG has, as a matter of practice, initiated or conducted, and reported
    on audits or investigations covered by section 8 as compared to other
    audits or investigations. While this is not within my direct knowledge,
    based on my experience as the NSA IG, I assume that the manner in which
    such matters are reported might well differ to the extent they involve
    classified or sensitive information, and this is something on which, if
    confirmed, I would consult with the team at the DOD OIG to ensure we
    are proceeding appropriately and as transparently as possible.
        Question. What changes, if any, do you believe are needed in the
    practices of the DOD IG for initiating, conducting, and reporting on
    audits or investigations covered by section 8?
        Answer. I am not in a position to assess what, if any, changes are
    necessary in the practices of the DOD OIG in this area. If confirmed, I
    will discuss this with the team at the DOD OIG and implement any
    changes that may be warranted.
        Question. Sections 4 and 8 of the Inspector General Act of 1978 set
    forth various duties and responsibilities of Inspectors General in
    addition to the conduct of audits and investigations.
        What is your understanding of the supervisory authority exercised
    by the Secretary of Defense with regard to these additional duties and
    responsibilities?
        Answer. In addition to its functions with regard to the conduct of
    audits and investigations, the OIG has responsibility under section
    4(a) of the IG Act to review existing and proposed legislation and
    regulations and to make recommendations on the same in our semiannual
    reports (SARs); to recommend policies and activities to promote economy
    and efficiency and to prevent and detect fraud and abuse in DOD
    operations; and to recommend policies regarding the relationship
    between the DOD and other governmental entities. Similarly, section
    8(c) provides, inter alia, that the DOD IG shall be ``the principal
    advisor to the Secretary of Defense for matters relating to the
    prevention and detection of fraud, waste, and abuse in the programs and
    operations of the Department.''
        I do not have any direct knowledge as to the extent to which the
    Secretary of Defense has exercised supervisory authorities over these
    functions--as a general matter, to the extent they involve
    recommendations to the Secretary, I would think that the OIG would make
    them independently and it would then be the province of the Secretary
    as to whether or how to address them. If confirmed, this is a matter
    that I would review with the team at the OIG and ensure that we are
    proceeding appropriately.
     keeping congress informed and responsiveness to congressional requests
        Question. Section 2(3) of the Inspector General Act of 1978
    provides that one of the purposes of establishing the DOD IG was to
    keep the Secretary of Defense and Congress ``fully and currently
    informed'' of problems and deficiencies in the administration of DOD
    programs and operations and the ``necessity for, and progress of
    corrective action.''
        If confirmed, specifically what steps would you take to ensure that
    the Armed Services Committees of the Senate and the House of
    Representatives are ``fully and currently informed'' of problems and
    deficiencies in DOD programs and operations?
        Answer. I am, as reflected above, firmly committed to the
    importance of the dual reporting lines as set forth in the IG Act. I
    believe that this is of central importance in ensuring the independence
    of our offices, and that it also enables us to provide valuable
    information to inform and assist the Congress in both its legislative
    and oversight capacities. As the NSA IG, I have worked to enhance our
    reporting to Congress, both through the content and accessibility of
    our SARs and underlying reports and through our interactions with
    Members and staff. If confirmed, I would meet with the team at the DOD
    OIG to review our reporting, discuss our interactions with the SASC and
    HASC, and identify any areas for improvement. To inform those
    discussions, I would look forward to engaging directly with Members and
    staff to hear from their perspective how we might enhance our reporting
    consistent with the IG Act. I would make myself available for hearings
    as requested, and myself and my team for briefings on oversight work
    that the office has conducted consistent with the IG Act and applicable
    policies and procedures.
        Question. Congressional Committees and individual Members of
    Congress frequently request that the Office of the DOD IG audit,
    investigate, or review matters of public interest.
        What is your understanding of the manner in which the Office of the
    DOD IG addresses such requests?
        Answer. Requests from Congress to audit, investigate, or review
    matters of public interest are common and appropriate across the IG
    community. I do not have direct knowledge regarding the procedures in
    place at the DOD OIG for handling such requests, but I assume that they
    are reviewed and considered consistent with the independence and
    nonpartisan nature of the office.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes, if any, would you make in the
    current policies and practices of the Office of the DOD IG for
    responding to congressional requests?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will meet with the team to review the
    procedures at the OIG with regard to such requests, informed by my own
    experiences in the IG community, and identify any areas for
    improvement. In doing so, I would welcome input from the Congress,
    though of course, all such procedures must be carried out consistent
    with the independent and nonpartisan nature of the OIG.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the
    timeliness of Office of the DOD IG responses to congressional requests?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would meet with the team at the OIG to
    ensure that we have procedures in place to ensure timely and
    appropriate responses to congressional requests.
        Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it would
    be appropriate for the Office of the DOD IG to redact certain
    information contained in a report it provides to a congressional
    committee or individual Member of Congress?
        Answer. As a general matter, OIGs provide their reports to the head
    of the establishments they oversee and to the Congress. As far as I am
    aware, redactions in a report provided to a congressional committee or
    Member would only be made when legally required. If confirmed, I would
    consult with the Counsel to the IG and others within the OIG to ensure
    that we handle such matters appropriately.
        Question. In your view, does the independence of the DOD IG, as
    guaranteed in the Inspector General Act of 1978, include independence
    from Congress?
        Answer. OIGs are established under the IG Act as ``independent and
    objective units''--in carrying out our oversight responsibilities, it
    is important that we conduct our oversight responsibilities
    independently both of the establishments we oversee and of Congress,
    which I believe is a critical factor in the authoritativeness and
    credibility of our work. If confirmed, I would hope to have a robust
    relationship with the committees of jurisdiction that respect and
    benefit from the OIG's statutory independence.
        Question. Are there certain categories of audits, investigations,
    or other inquiries that, in your view, are better conducted by the
    Government Accountability Office in its role as a component of the
    legislative branch? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. GAO performs a wide range of important oversight activities
    across the Federal Government. Both of the OIGs at which I have worked
    have enjoyed an excellent working relationship with GAO, and I would
    make every effort to ensure that continues should I be confirmed as the
    IG at DOD. Because its jurisdiction is not defined by any one
    establishment, I believe that GAO plays a particularly important role
    in informing Congress with regard to cross-cutting issues.
    Additionally, inherent in its nature, it has been my experience that
    GAO sometimes may be able to be more directly responsive in responding
    to immediate legislative needs and requests than OIGs, which, as
    discussed above, must independently develop their oversight plans based
    on a variety of factors, including their independent risk assessments
    and the availability of staffing and resources, to conduct a wide range
    of important oversight activities.
     directorate of investigative oversight and special investigations and
                                reviews (iosir)
        Question. What is your understanding of the function of the IOSIR?
        Answer. I have been informed that the IOSIR within the DOD OIG
    develops investigative policy and conducts oversight over the MCIOs,
    including the office's prior review of the tragic shootings in Texas
    and the pending evaluation of the MCIOs' handling of sexual assault
    allegations.
        Question. If confirmed, how will you utilize the IOSIR? Will you
    modify its current responsibilities? If so, how and why?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will examine the use of the IOSIR and
    develop and implement any necessary modifications. In doing so, I would
    intend to consult with the team at the OIG and would welcome any input
    from the Congress regarding any particular concerns.
                         senior official investigations
        Question. The Office of the DOD IG plays a key role in the
    investigation of allegations of misconduct by senior military officers
    and civilian employees of the DOD. The Senate Committee on Armed
    Services has a particular interest in investigations concerning senior
    officials who are subject to Senate confirmation, and relies upon the
    Office of the DOD IG to ensure that these investigations are accurate,
    complete, and accomplished in a timely manner.
        What is your understanding of the definition of ``DOD senior
    official'' for purposes of the DOD IG?
        Answer. Pursuant to DOD Directive 5505.06, ``Investigation of
    Allegations Against Senior DOD Officials,'' a DOD senior official is
    defined as an Active Duty, retired, Reserve, or National Guard military
    officer in grades O-7 and above, and an officer selected for promotion
    to O-7 whose name is on the O-7 promotion board report forwarded to the
    Military Department Secretary; a current or former member of the Senior
    Executive Service (SES); a current or former DOD civilian employee
    whose position is deemed equivalent to that of a member of the SES; or
    a current or former Presidential appointee.
        Question. What is your understanding of the circumstances in which
    a suspicion or allegation against a DOD senior official must be
    reported to the DOD IG?
        Answer. Pursuant to DOD Directive 5505.06, all allegations of
    misconduct against a DOD senior official must be reported to the DOD
    IG.
        Question. If confirmed, what factors would you consider in
    assessing whether a DOD IG investigation should be initiated in
    response to a report of suspicions or allegations against a DOD senior
    official?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would consult with the team at DOD OIG to
    review the factors that are considered in assessing whether an
    investigation should be initiated in response to a report of suspicions
    or allegations against a DOD senior official. Based on my own
    background and experience, such investigation generally would be
    appropriate where there is sufficient evidence to believe that there
    may have been a violation of law, rule, regulation, or policy. Each
    case is different, of course, and I believe that my background as a
    career federal prosecutor and in the IG community would assist me in
    working with the investigative team at DOD OIG to ensure that we
    handling these important matters properly.
        Question. What factors would you consider in determining to refer a
    report of suspicions or allegations against a DOD senior official to a
    military department Inspector General for review and action?
        Answer. Again, this is a matter that I would review with the team
    at the DOD OIG, but as a general matter and based on my perspective as
    a current IG within the DOD, I believe that such factors typically
    would include the nature of the allegation, the military rank and
    assignment of the accused, and the ability of the Military Department
    IG to handle the matter in a timely fashion. I am informed that the DOD
    OIG does not refer such matters and instead investigates them itself
    when the allegations cross Service lines, the subject outranks the
    Service IG, or the Service IG encounters an impediment to their
    independence. If confirmed, I would review these practices with the
    team at DOD OIG and make any revisions as are appropriate.
        Question. If confirmed, what will be your process for determining
    whether to open an investigation of allegations against a senior
    officer?
        Answer. As indicated above, my career as a federal prosecutor and
    then in the supervision of two OIGs has taught me that each case has to
    be evaluated on its own merits, and that starts with the determination
    of whether to open an investigation of allegations of misconduct. If
    confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to review the process
    for determining whether to open an investigation against a senior
    officer and make any modifications as are warranted.
        Question. Do you believe that the current allocation of
    responsibility for senior official investigations between the DOD IG
    and the Inspectors General of the military departments ensures fair and
    impartial outcomes--regardless of which Inspector General conducts the
    investigation? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. Whoever conducts an investigation, it must result in a fair
    and impartial outcome. I am not currently in a position to assess
    whether the current allocation of responsibility for senior official
    investigations between the DOD IG and the Inspectors General of the
    Military Departments is sufficient to ensure that that this occurs in
    all cases, but if confirmed, I will review this with the team at DOD
    OIG and make such modifications as may be deemed appropriate regarding
    the referral and oversight of these important matters.
        Question. If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what steps would you take
    to oversee and ensure the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of
    senior official investigations conducted by a military department
    Inspector General?
        Answer. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I would meet with the team at
    the DOD OIG to review the procedures for conducting oversight over
    senior and other investigations conducted by a Military Department IG
    to ensure that they are sufficient to ensure that all investigations
    result in a fair and impartial outcome.
        As the NSA IG, I have established several categories of priority
    matters, including but not limited to senior official investigations,
    in which I review all reports of investigation and discuss them with my
    team to ensure, based on my own background and experience, that we have
    performed all necessary investigation and reached the right result. If
    confirmed as the DOD IG, I would anticipate that my review of the
    office's procedures in these cases might well include reviewing at
    least some reports of investigation received from the Military
    Department IGs to further familiarize myself with the work product and
    inform future discussions within the OIG and with the Military
    Department IGs regarding it.
        Additionally, I would review the level and nature of the training
    and guidance that is provided by the DOD OIG and otherwise made
    available to the Military Department IGs, and seek information from
    those entities regarding gaps or areas where additional training or
    guidance would be helpful. As discussed earlier, if confirmed, I
    further would explore opportunities to enhance communications among the
    various IGs within the defense enterprise, including utilizing the DCIE
    and other opportunities to conduct training, share best practices, and
    otherwise ensure the quality of the work performed by everyone, and I
    would explore opportunities to make more training from across the IG
    community available. I would seek detailed information from the OIG
    team regarding the timeliness of the conduct of the investigations in
    these matters, and work with the Military Department IGs to implement
    any measures that would improve same.
        Question. Under what circumstances would it be appropriate, in your
    view, for the DOD IG to change the findings of a military department
    Inspector General in regard to a senior official investigation?
        Answer. Not having served in the role of conducting such oversight
    review, I am not in a position to definitively or comprehensively state
    the circumstances under which it would be appropriate for the DOD IG to
    change the findings of a Military Department IG in regard to a senior
    official investigation. As a general matter, it would seem to me such
    action might be appropriate, generally after consultation with the
    Military Department IG and after having provided an opportunity to
    correct a clear error of fact or law. I would think it appropriate in
    such a circumstance to notify the Military Department IG of the matter
    and give that office an opportunity to correct or amend the report but,
    if that does not occur and I still believe the matter is wrong, it
    would be my responsibility as the IG to ensure that the investigation
    is correct.
        Question. If confirmed, what process improvements would you
    consider to expedite appropriately the completion of Inspector General
    investigations of DOD senior officials?
        Answer. Timeliness is an important consideration for investigations
    and, if confirmed, I would work with the team at the DOD OIG to
    evaluate this matter, including the expectations in place for the
    progress of investigations and the manner in which the office tracks
    same. I also would emphasize the importance of prompt reporting and the
    resolution of any hurdles to the timely completion of the
    investigations.
        Question. At what point in an investigation, and based on what
    criteria, would you take action to ensure that a ``flag'' or suspension
    of favorable personnel action is initiated against a senior military
    official?
        Answer. I have been informed that each service has an office that
    is responsible for ensuring that favorable personnel actions do not
    occur while a General or Flag Officer is under investigation by the DOD
    IG or their Service IG. I further understand that the OIG informs the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness when such an
    officer is under investigation so that they may suspend a favorable
    personnel action until the Service has removed the flag.
        Question. In your view, to what extent should a senior official
    investigation conducted by the DOD IG or a military department
    Inspector General automatically be released to the public, to a
    congressional committee, or to an individual Member of Congress?
        Answer. As is the case with other OIGs, the release of a report of
    a senior official investigation by the DOD IG or a Military Department
    IG is subject to federal law, including the Privacy Act and the Freedom
    of Information Act. Under those statutes, certain types of information,
    including information implicating personal privacy, legal advice, and
    deliberative process are exempt from public release. Release
    determinations involve balancing the public interest in disclosure
    against any protectable privacy interest of the subject(s),
    complainant(s), witness(es), and others, while protecting privileged
    information from release.
        With regard to release to congressional committees or to an
    individual Member of Congress, the Privacy Act and the Freedom of
    Information Act, as well as guidance from DOJ and, I am informed, DOD,
    authorize the release of most official use information to Congress in
    response to an official written request in certain circumstances.
    Generally, release to individual Members of Congress who do not
    otherwise meet the criteria for release is not authorized. If
    confirmed, I would intend to meet with the legislative team at DOD OIG
    to review the office's practices in this area, and would welcome the
    opportunity to engage with the Congress regarding them.
        Question. Do you believe current military department procedures and
    practices for reviewing the records of officers pending the President's
    nomination for promotion or assignment are sufficient to enable fully-
    informed decisions by the Secretary of that Military Department, the
    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and
    the President?
        Answer. I am not currently in a position to assess the procedures
    and practices for reviewing nominations for promotion or assignment. If
    confirmed, I will review this issue with the team at DOD OIG and make
    recommendations for any improvements.
        Question. In your view, are these procedures and practices fair to
    military officers proceeding through the promotion or assignment
    process? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. It is important to ensure that these procedure and
    practices are fair. Again, I do not currently have the information to
    assess this but, if confirmed, I will work with the team at DOD OIG to
    do so.
        Question. Maintaining high ethical standards and ensuring
    appropriate accountability for any misconduct is critical to the
    mission of the DOD. Ethical misconduct can undermine the American
    public's trust in DOD, as well as DOD's ability to secure congressional
    support and funding.
        In your view, how can the DOD IG contribute to promoting ethical
    conduct across the Department? What more could the DOD IG do in this
    regard?
        Answer. If I am confirmed, I will work with the team at the DOD OIG
    to ensure that we are availing ourselves of every opportunity to
    promote ethical conduct at the DOD and, therefore, the public's trust
    in the Department. IGs play an important role across the Federal
    Government in ensuring that public officials act in ways that are
    consistent with applicable laws, rules, and regulations, including but
    not limited to the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the
    Executive Branch, and in investigating instances of all manners of
    ethical misconduct. OIGs further these investigations, and the
    confidence of the workforce and the public, by encouraging personnel to
    come forward with what they reasonably believe to be evidence of
    wrongdoing, and by fully and fairly investigating allegations that they
    have suffered reprisal for doing so.
        Additionally, the DOD OIG's Top DOD Management Challenges for
    Fiscal Year 2022, issued October 15, 2021, highlights the importance of
    promoting ethical conduct, identifying preserving trust and confidence
    in the DOD as one of the ten top challenges currently facing the
    Department. Among the areas discussed in this report are the important
    challenges facing the DOD in preventing and responding to sexual
    harassment and addressing extremism in the military, two of the
    priority areas discussed earlier and as to which, if confirmed, I would
    work with the team at the DOD OIG to focus our efforts, including but
    not limited to the prioritization placed in this area through the
    program led by the Deputy IG for Diversity and Inclusion and Extremism
    in the Military. Another important issue identified in the Top
    Management Challenges is discrimination and disparate treatment in both
    the military and civilian ranks. OIGs can play an important role in
    conducting audits, evaluations, and reviews in such critical areas to
    identify deficiencies and make recommendations for improvement, as well
    as conducting investigations of related misconduct. And, of course,
    OIGs and the IGs who lead them must reflect the highest standards of
    ethical behavior in all that we do.
        Question. Integrity, Reliability and Completeness of Information in
    Inspector General Case Management Systems
        What is you understanding of the myriad purposes for which
    Inspector General case management systems are queried in support of
    personnel actions across the DOD?
        Answer. While I do not have personal knowledge of the use of the
    case management system at the DOD IG, I am informed that it is used for
    purposes typical across the IG community, including ascertaining
    whether a particular individual has adverse information that could be
    relevant to a variety of personnel actions, such as nomination,
    appointment, promotion, and retirement.
        Question. What is your understanding of the myriad purposes for
    which Inspector General case management systems are queried for
    purposes of tracking complaints of and analyzing trends in misconduct
    across the Department?
        Answer. Again, while I do not have personal knowledge, I am
    informed that the DOD OIG case management system is frequently
    utilized, as we do at NSA OIG, for a variety of purposes, including to
    identify and evaluate trends, for reporting in the OIG's SAR and
    otherwise, and for internal performance evaluation purposes.
        Question. Are all components of the DOD in compliance with
    requirements established by the DOD IG for data entry in Inspector
    General case management systems? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the team at DOD OIG to
    evaluate this area, and to develop and implement any measures for
    improvement.
                            whistleblower protection
        Question. What is your understanding of the role played by the DOD
    IG and the military department Inspectors General in investigating
    complaints of reprisal against members of the military, DOD civilian
    employees, and DOD contractor employees, who raise allegations
    concerning fraud, waste, and abuse?
        Answer. A core function of IGs is the receipt and investigation of
    whistleblower complaints from employees and others who reasonably
    believe that they have evidence of waste, fraud, abuse, or other
    categories of protected disclosures. This principle is enshrined in
    section 7 of the IG Act, as is the prohibition against taking or
    threatening any personnel action as a reprisal against those who
    perform this important public service.
        I have, as outlined earlier, been particularly engaged on
    whistleblower issues during my time in the IG community, leading the
    DOJ OIG Whistleblower Ombudsperson Program and founding and leading the
    CIGIE Whistleblower Ombudsperson Working Group, and I have continued to
    champion these important issues as among my highest priorities as the
    NSA IG. I am aware from interactions with the DOD OIG over the years
    that the office has an active whistleblower protection program, with
    what is now referred to as a Whistleblower Protection Coordinator to
    educate personnel regarding their rights and protections as
    whistleblowers, as well as how they can seek review of reprisal
    allegations through the OIG and other relevant federal entities. I also
    am aware that the DOD Hotline provides a means whereby military and
    civilian personnel from across the defense enterprise can report
    suspected wrongdoing, whether they choose to identify themselves or
    report anonymously, and through unclassified or classified mechanisms
    as appropriate to the subject matter of the disclosure. The DOD Hotline
    also sponsors a widely attended annual conference on these issues, at
    which I have been a guest speaker in the past, as well as other
    training opportunities for investigators across the defense enterprise.
        Other OIGs, such as the NSA OIG, report reprisal allegations to DOD
    OIG per established policies and procedures, and it either investigates
    such matters itself or retains oversight jurisdiction over them.
    Additionally, as referenced above, it is my understanding that the DOD
    OIG itself investigates all allegations of reprisal in sexual assault
    cases.
        Question. Some military department Inspectors General have in
    recent years suggested that the whistleblower system is being
    ``weaponized'' within the military as the number of reprisal
    allegations have grown substantially, including in some cases as an
    apparent attempt to insulate the effects of misconduct.
        What is your view of this suggestion, and do you believe that the
    DOD Inspector General system has the ability to triage or otherwise
    dispose of baseless complaints while ensuring the full protection that
    whistleblower statutes afford to military members, Federal civilian
    employees, and contractors?
        Answer. I am aware of this suggestion having been made, and it is
    obviously very troubling. I believe strongly that IGs should make every
    effort to encourage personnel to come forward to report suspected
    wrongdoing through appropriate channels, including to the OIG.
        Question. If confirmed, what level of priority would you accord to
    your whistleblower protection responsibilities?
        Answer. If I am confirmed, whistleblower protection would be of the
    utmost priority for me as the DOD IG, just as it has been during my
    tenure as the NSA IG, and before that, as Deputy IG and Whistleblower
    Ombudsperson at the DOJ OIG.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
    in educating servicemembers, DOD civilian employees, and DOD contractor
    employees about the whistleblower protection program?
        Answer. As the NSA IG, I have been very active in this area, naming
    at the outset of my tenure a Whistleblower Protection Coordinator to
    provide information to personnel who may have questions about their
    rights and protections in coming forward, and greatly expanding the
    information on this subject available on our internal website and the
    public-facing website that we established after I came on board.
        I also advocated for and assisted in the development of a new
    training program at NSA, which I was pleased the Director agreed to
    make a mandatory annual requirement for all employees. I helped to
    prepare and participated in a training video that we created jointly
    with the Director, again available on both our internal and public
    websites, in which he joined me and some of my team in what I hope was
    a memorable way to encourage NSA personnel to come forward to report
    wrongdoing.
        If I am confirmed as the IG at DOD, I will work with the
    Whistleblower Protection Coordinator at DOD OIG to ensure that we are
    doing everything possible to educate everyone across the multifaceted
    defense enterprise about their rights and protections, and the
    important role that they play when they come forward with evidence of
    wrongdoing.
        Question. What is the average age of the investigation at closure
    of DOD IG whistleblower reprisal investigations? What is the average
    age of the investigation at closure of whistleblower reprisal
    allegations investigated by component Inspectors General?
        Answer. I do not currently have access to the information that
    would enable me to answer this question. However, as a former
    Whistleblower Ombudsperson and an IG who is fully committed to
    protecting whistleblowers, I realize that people cannot be expected to
    come forward to report suspected wrongdoing if they suffer reprisal for
    doing so. If I am confirmed as the IG at the DOD, I will obtain the
    latest information regarding the age of these investigations at closure
    for that office and for the component IGs and work with the team at the
    OIG to develop measures to ensure that the DOD OIG and the OIGs across
    the defense enterprise are doing everything possible to investigate
    these important matters in a timely fashion.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to improve the timeliness
    of DOD IG whistleblower reprisal investigations?
        Answer. Consistent with my prior answer, I cannot offer any
    particular measures at this point but, if confirmed, I would work with
    the team at the DOD OIG to assess where we are and pursue all
    opportunities for improvement.
        Question. How does the Office of the DOD IG ensure the accuracy,
    completeness, and timeliness of whistleblower reprisal allegations
    undertaken by component Inspectors General?
        Answer. As an IG within the defense enterprise, I am aware that
    component IGs provide reports of reprisal investigations to the DOD OIG
    for its oversight review. The DOD OIG then has the ability to reach
    back out to the component IG to direct that additional investigative
    work be done, which I believe is an important guarantee of the
    thoroughness and consistency with which these important matters must be
    handled. Additionally, as referenced above, I am aware that the DOD OIG
    provides a range of training opportunities to investigators with the
    other OIGs within the defense enterprise. I also am aware that the DOD
    OIG tracks timeliness on whistleblower reprisal matters, and that it
    has implemented a program to conduct process reviews of Military
    Service IGs. If I am confirmed, I will work with the team at DOD OIG to
    assess the office's efforts in this area and to identify and implement
    opportunities for further action.
        Question. What is your understanding of the different burdens of
    proof applicable under the military, Federal civilian, and contractor
    whistleblower protection statutes? Do you believe these standards are
    appropriate for the communities these statutes protect?
        Answer. While I have not personally handled military whistleblower
    reprisal matters, I understand that there has been concern that the
    burden of proof can be higher for military members than civilian or
    contractor employees, and that military whistleblower reprisal
    complaints must be submitted no more than one year after the date the
    servicemember became aware of the personnel action that constitutes the
    alleged reprisal. I recognize the importance of this issue and, if
    confirmed, I look forward to examining it further and would welcome the
    opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding it.
        Question. What is your understanding of the applicability of the
    whistleblower protections under section 1034 of title 10, United States
    Code, to members of the reserve components? Specifically, do you
    believe those protections attach only to actions taken against such
    members while they are performing military duties, including inactive
    duty for training?
        Answer. Again, while I have no direct experience with this issue, I
    have been informed that there are concerns regarding whether there
    essentially is a gap in protection for members of the Reserve
    Components when they are not actively performing military duties.
    Again, this is not an issue on which I have sufficient background or
    experience to opine at this time but, if confirmed, I will explore it
    with the team at the OIG and would welcome the opportunity to engage
    with the Committee regarding this matter to ensure that everyone who
    makes a protected disclosure is appropriately protected from reprisal.
        Question. Under what conditions, if any, would section 1034 not
    apply to a member of a reserve component, in relation to a prohibited
    personnel action?
        Answer. Consistent with my prior answer, I really am not in a
    position to opine on this at the present time but, if confirmed, I look
    forward to working with the team at the DOD OIG and welcome engagement
    with the Committee regarding this matter.
        Question. What is your understanding of the respective
    responsibilities of the Office of the DOD IG and the Office of Special
    Counsel with respect to DOD civilian employee whistleblower complaints?
        Answer. While I have not worked with the Office of Special Counsel
    (OSC) as the NSA IG, given that the Intelligence Community is one of
    the areas that is exempted from OSC's jurisdiction, I did have
    significant contact with OSC during my time at the DOJ OIG and
    particularly as the DOJ OIG Whistleblower Ombudsperson and Chair of the
    CIGIE Whistleblower Ombudsperson working group. As described on its
    website, OSC's primary mission is ``to safeguard the merit system by
    protecting federal employees and applicants from prohibited personnel
    practices, especially reprisal for whistleblowing.'' As noted,
    employees of the Intelligence Community, as well as employees of the
    FBI, are exempted from OSC's jurisdiction, which also does not extend
    to allegations related to a security clearance or access to classified
    information. Employees of the IC or those alleging reprisal in
    connection with actions affecting a security clearance or access to
    classified information can be addressed by DOD IG pursuant to
    Presidential Policy Directive-19 (PPD-19). It is important that OIGs
    coordinate effectively with OSC given their closely related areas of
    jurisdiction.
        Question. If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what would be your
    relationship with the Special Counsel?
        Answer. I have been pleased to have a good working relationship
    with OSC and, if confirmed, I would work with the team at the DOD OIG
    to maintain that good working relationship at DOD OIG. Given the close
    jurisdictional relationships, I believe that such communication and
    coordination is particularly critical to avoid overlapping or
    inconsistent efforts and to ensure that the whistleblowers, wherever
    their claims are heard, have the full and fair review of their claims
    that is warranted.
        Question. What is the role of the DOD IG with respect to
    Intelligence Community whistleblowers?
        Answer. The DOD OIG has jurisdiction over Defense Civilian
    Intelligence Personnel System (DCIPS) personnel, who are appropriated
    fund personnel serving in the IC. The DOD OIG either investigates or
    provides oversight jurisdiction over component investigations of all
    reprisal allegations made by civilian appropriated fund employees,
    including DCIPS employees. The MOU between the DOD OIG and the defense
    intelligence agency IGs that I participated in developing provides
    procedures for the referral of whistleblower reprisal matters received
    by the defense intelligence agency IGs to the DOD OIG for a
    determination as to whether the DOD OIG elects to exercise jurisdiction
    over a matter or refer it back to the defense intelligence agency IG
    for investigation and, in the latter cases, for provision of the report
    of investigation to the DOD OIG and for coordination regarding any
    additional action that the DOD OIG review may determine is appropriate.
    The DOD IG is a member of the IC IG Forum, and is one of the IGs who
    can be appointed by the IC IG to serve on an External Review Panel
    (ERP) under PPD-19 to consider a claim of reprisal by an IC employee or
    regarding access to classified information that has been rejected by
    the component IG.
        Question. If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what would be your
    relationship with the Inspector General of the Office of the Director
    of National Intelligence with respect to Intelligence Community
    whistleblower complaints?
        Answer. As stated above, the DOD IG is a member of the IC IG Forum,
    which is chaired by the IC IG, who serves as the Inspector General for
    the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The Forum meets,
    generally on a quarterly basis, to discuss matters of interest across
    the IC, including with regard to the establishment of policies and
    procedures for Intelligence Community whistleblower complaints. I
    previously participated in some Forum activities when serving as the
    Deputy IG at DOJ, and I am an active participant as the NSA IG. If
    confirmed as the DOD IG, I would intend to continue maintain a strong
    working relationship with the IC IG to ensure the appropriate handling
    of all Intelligence Community whistleblower complaints within the ambit
    of the DOD.
        Question. Do you perceive a need for further legislation to ensure
    that members of the military, DOD civilian employees, DOD contractor
    employees, or Intelligence Community personnel are appropriately
    protected from reprisal for whistleblowing?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will confer with the Whistleblower
    Protection Coordinator and others at DOD OIG to consider the need for
    further legislation in this critical area, and would look forward to
    engaging further with the Committee regarding this matter.
        Question. What is your understanding of the prevalence across DOD
    of unlawful actions to restrict communications by servicemembers, DOD
    civilian employees, or DOD contractor employees with an inspector
    general or with Congress?
        Answer. It is difficult to think of action more harmful to
    oversight than the restriction of civilian and military members from
    coming forward to report suspected wrongdoing. We have investigated
    restriction cases during my time as the NSA IG and, if confirmed as the
    DOD IG, I will work with the team at DOD OIG to ensure that we are
    handling these important cases in an appropriate fashion. While I have
    no independent basis for assessing the overall prevalence of unlawful
    actions to restrict communications by servicemembers, civilian
    employees, or contractor employees at the DOD, the DOD OIG's most
    recent SAR for the six-month reporting period ending September 30, 2021
    reports that the DOD Hotline received 25 such allegations during the
    period, and further that, of 120 military restriction investigations
    closed by the DOD OIG and Service and Defense agency OIGs during the
    period, 2 substantiated military reprisal. This is, of course, one area
    where one case is too many and, if confirmed, I will work with the team
    at the DOD OIG to take every available step to deter restriction from
    occurring and, when such allegations are received, to prioritize them
    appropriately.
        Question. What do you perceive to be the most effective tools
    available to the DOD IG to prevent and respond to incidents of unlawful
    restrictions of communications by servicemembers, DOD civilian
    employees, or DOD contractor employees with an inspector general or
    with Congress?
        Answer. While I cannot speak to the situation across DOD generally,
    based on my experience as a prosecutor and in the IG community, and as
    the IG at a defense intelligence agency, I believe that outreach and
    messaging are critical in this area. If confirmed as the IG at DOD, I
    would work with the team at DOD OIG to ensure that we are availing
    ourselves of every opportunity to promote the importance of people
    coming forward and, conversely, delivering a clear and consistent
    message to Department and military leaders across the DOD and to the
    civilian and military workforces conveying the prohibition against in
    any way attempting to restrict authorized reporting. The message is,
    and in my view needs to be, that reporting suspected wrongdoing is an
    important service, and is something to be encouraged so that the matter
    can be objectively considered and any appropriate corrective action
    taken in a timely manner. Based on my experience, I also believe that
    such messaging will only be credible if it is combined with timely and
    appropriate action in instances where unlawful restriction is
    substantiated. If confirmed, I would work with the team at the DOD OIG
    to assess the handling of restriction matters and to develop and
    implement any measures that would assist in addressing them.
        Question. What is your understanding of the propriety and efficacy
    of the Office of the DOD IG Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
    process in resolving certain whistleblower reprisal complaints?
        Answer. I am aware that the DOD OIG has an active ADR process that
    is managed by its Whistleblower Reprisal Investigations Directorate,
    through which neutral third parties facilitate resolution of reprisal
    complaints without going through the full investigative process. The
    most recent DOD OIG SAR reported that 19 cases involving allegations of
    whistleblower reprisal were voluntarily resolved through this ADR
    process during the preceding six-month period, and that there were 36
    such cases pending. Based on my experience with these programs, I
    believe they can be particularly effective where the parties are not
    far apart in terms of potential corrective action, and that they can
    help to free up investigative resources for other priority matters. I
    am not sufficiently familiar with the ADR program at DOD OIG to comment
    on its efficacy but, if confirmed, I will work with the team at the OIG
    to evaluate the program, and I would welcome the opportunity to engage
    with the Committee with regard to any concerns it may have in the area.
        Question. In your view, should the ADR process be expanded to
    additional categories of whistleblowers complainants? Please explain
    your answer.
        Answer. I do not have sufficient information regarding the ADR
    program and how it is implemented at DOD OIG to determine whether it
    should be expanded to additional categories of whistleblower
    complainants. If confirmed, I will work with the team at the DOD OIG to
    consider this as part of the assessment of the program and any
    opportunities for improvement.
        Question. A report of investigation documenting an allegation of
    reprisal substantiated by the DOD IG or a military department Inspector
    General must be referred to the Secretary of the military department
    concerned for review and appropriate action. The Senate Armed Services
    Committee is aware of reprisal cases in which a Secretary's response to
    the Inspector General has been delayed by months or years. Furthermore,
    in some of these cases, the Secretary has responded by advising that no
    corrective or disciplinary action had been taken against the
    perpetrator because of a belief that the Inspector General's
    substantiation of reprisal was erroneous or improper.
        If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what specific actions would you take
    to ensure that the Secretaries of the military departments are
    responsive to whistleblower reprisal complaints substantiated by the
    DOD IG or a component Inspector General?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would seek to engage directly with the
    Secretaries of the Military Departments involved with regard to the
    importance of timely action on substantiated reprisal matters, and of
    timely communications should there be a question regarding the decision
    reached by the OIG. If there were outstanding or particularly systemic
    problems that could not be resolved, I would not hesitate to elevate
    those to the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Defense
    as necessary as, per my prior response, I believe that the credibility
    of the deterrent against reprisal depends in a large measure on there
    being timely and appropriate action taken when it occurs.
        Question. The Office of the DOD IG maintains a ``DOD Hotline'' to
    provide a confidential, reliable means through which any person can
    report: violations of law, rule, or regulation; fraud, waste, or abuse;
    mismanagement; trafficking in persons; serious security incidents; or
    other criminal or administrative misconduct that involves DOD personnel
    and operations, without fear of reprisal.
        What is your understanding of the efficacy and timeliness with
    which DOD Hotline reports are retrieved, reviewed, and addressed?
        Answer. There is a substantial volume of reporting on the DOD
    Hotline contained in the DOD OIG's SARs. If I am confirmed, I would
    meet with the Hotline team to learn about the efficacy and timeliness
    of its work and, based on my own background and experience, work with
    them to address any issues that may exist.
        Question. What is the current DOD Hotline report ``backlog''? If
    confirmed to be the DOD IG, what steps would you take to reduce this
    backlog and on what timeline?
        Answer. In its most recent SAR for the period ending September 30,
    2021, the DOD OIG reported that its Hotline opened 3,328 cases and
    closed 2,938 cases during the prior six months, and that as of the end
    of the reporting period, it had a total of 2,501 open cases that had
    been opened in that or prior periods. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I
    would work with the Hotline team, as well as promote the use of data
    analytics, to assess trends in this area and identify any opportunities
    for improvement. Without conducting that assessment and knowing exactly
    what those actions would be, I cannot establish a meaningful timeline
    for accomplishing them, but I recognize that it is essential in
    encouraging people to come forward that OIGs promptly address their
    complaints, which also makes possible timely corrective action in
    substantiated cases. If I am confirmed, I will work with the team at
    DOD OIG to assess the situation and move forward with any appropriate
    actions.
       the council of the inspectors general on integrity and efficiency
                                    (cigie)
        Question. Section 11 of the Inspector General Act of 1978
    established the CIGIE as an independent entity within the executive
    branch.
        What is your understanding of the mission of the CIGIE?
        Answer. CIGIE is established as an independent entity under section
    11(a) of the IG Act with the dual mission of addressing issues that
    transcend individual government agencies and increasing the
    professionalism and effectiveness of personnel by developing policies,
    standards, and approaches to aid in the establishment of a well-trained
    and highly skilled workforce in the offices of the Inspectors General.
    In practice, this work is carried out through presentations and the
    sharing of information at general membership meetings and through a
    robust committee structure that brings together IGs and OIG personnel
    from across the community to enable the OIGs to develop and implement
    best practices for oversight that can be most effective at the
    departments and agencies over which we have oversight responsibilities.
    CIGIE also operates a Training Academy and offers a wide range of other
    training opportunities to enhance the professionalism of the OIG
    workforce.
        Question. In particular, how has the CIGIE's special focus on
    whistleblower protection benefitted the Office of the DOD IG?
        Answer. I feel strongly that CIGIE's focus on whistleblower
    protection has benefitted the entire IG community. As indicated
    earlier, I was pleased to found and lead the CIGIE Whistleblower
    Ombudsperson Working Group during my tenure at the DOJ OIG, and I
    believe that we were successful in sharing information and best
    practices on a wide range of issues related to whistleblower rights and
    protections. In addition to sharing our own practices and experiences,
    we also brought in a variety of speakers, including from the Congress
    and OSC, who provided valuable insights and assisted in developing
    relationships important to our work. We additionally worked to share
    information with the IG community about potential legislative changes,
    to solicit input from OIGs regarding them, and to engage with the
    Congress, including with the bipartisan Senate Whistleblower Caucus, to
    hear from them regarding their concerns and to ensure that the
    experiences and views of the IG community were understood and
    considered in the legislative process. The DOD OIG was an active
    participant in these efforts from the start, and given the size and
    importance of the DOD, I believe that the DOD OIG's continued
    participation is essential to the ongoing success of the effort. In the
    final analysis, all OIGs, big and small, share a reliance on
    individuals coming forward when they see something they believe it is
    wrong, so it has always made sense to me that this is a core area on
    which we can and should work together to learn from each other and
    share information and practices to improve our operations across the IG
    community.
        Question. In previous roles, you have led efforts within the CIGIE
    to focus on oversight of emerging technology issues, such as Artificial
    Intelligence, that are critical to strategic competition with China.
        How do you envision leading the DOD IG in this area and what are
    the most important near-term efforts for DOD IG audits and evaluations
    on Artificial Intelligence and other emerging technology issues?
        Answer. If I am confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to
    ensure that we are at the forefront in addressing the use of emerging
    technologies across the DOD, and in enhancing the use of such
    technologies in the office's work. I have been pleased to serve for
    several years now as the Vice Chair of the CIGIE Technology Committee
    and as the Chair of the Emerging Technology Subcommittee that we
    founded because of the cross-cutting nature of issues related to
    oversight over and the use of a wide range of emerging technologies. We
    have held two symposia for the oversight community addressing these
    issues with speakers from many government agencies and OIGs, including
    the DOD OIG. All of my work in this area has confirmed my fundamental
    belief that, as the departments and agencies that OIGs oversee
    increasingly use and rely on these technologies, it is essential for
    our work to be authoritative and credible and that we be able to
    conduct meaningful oversight in this area, beginning with oversight
    over the use of the emerging technologies themselves, and inevitably
    maturing to oversight over programs and operations that increasingly
    incorporate such technologies. Additionally, as data continues to
    proliferate and many of the systems and operations we oversee
    increasingly rely on emerging technologies, it will be increasingly
    important for OIGs to be able to effectively utilize such technologies
    in our own work and operations.
        I am aware that the DOD OIG has been active in this area, including
    partnering with my office at NSA OIG on an ongoing joint evaluation of
    the integration of artificial intelligence in signals intelligence
    activities at the NSA. As with everything else, all of this requires
    people, and if I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I would work with the team
    at the DOD OIG to emphasize the need to attract and retain the talented
    workforce that I believe is essential to addressing this growing need
    across the oversight community.
        Question. If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what would be your role
    and relationship with respect to the CIGIE?
        Answer. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I would intend to continue my
    active participation in the activities of CIGIE, and to encourage
    personnel from across the OIG to continue to benefit from its various
    programs and activities.
               use of contractors in support of dod ig functions
        Some Federal Agencies have reacted to limited inspector general
    resources by using contractors to perform some audit, investigation,
    inspection, and evaluation functions.
        Question. Do you believe that the Office of the DOD IG has
    sufficient resources to carry out its audit, investigation, inspection,
    and evaluation responsibilities?
        Answer. I am not currently in a position to assess whether the DOD
    OIG has sufficient resources to carry out its myriad functions. If
    confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to assess this and
    engage with the Department and the Congress with regard to any future
    needs to ensure that the office has the resources necessary to perform
    its full range of oversight functions at a critically important
    Department.
        Question. What is your understanding of the DOD IG's role in
    determining whether the use of contractor resources to perform such
    functions is appropriate?
        Answer. The use of contractors to perform some functions is not
    unusual at OIGs, and is expressly provided for in section 6(a) of the
    IG Act. However, those functions must be determined to be appropriate
    for contractors, including that they not involve inherently
    governmental activities. If confirmed, I would work with the team at
    the DOD OIG to gain more insight regarding the office's use of
    contractor personnel and the process whereby it is determined that such
    use is appropriate.
        Question. Do you believe that the DOD IG functions are inherently
    governmental?
        Answer. As noted above, the IG Act provides for the ability of OIGs
    to retain contractors, but, as with any government employer, those
    contractors cannot be used to perform inherently governmental
    functions. I am aware of the caselaw and criteria that have been
    applied in this area to ensure that government personnel perform those
    functions that are determined to be so connected to the public interest
    that they should not be performed by privately contracted personnel,
    and I have experience in applying them in the context of the work of
    OIGs. While the determination requires a case-specific analysis, it
    generally is clear that some functions, such as those involving
    substantial discretionary decisions in establishing policies or in
    conducting criminal investigations, for example, would be considered
    inherently governmental and, therefore, not an appropriate subject for
    contractor performance.
        Question. Under what circumstances, if any, would the use of
    contractor resources or personnel to perform audit, investigation,
    inspection, and evaluation functions be appropriate, in your view?
        Answer. As noted above, section 6(a) of the IG Act authorizes IGs
    to enter into contracts and other arrangements for audits, studies,
    analyses, and other services with public agencies and private persons,
    and to make such payments as may be necessary to carry out the
    requirements of the IG Act. In practice, I am aware that IGs across the
    community frequently utilize contractor resources or personnel to
    perform non-inherently governmental functions, including but not
    limited to providing particularized subject matter expertise not
    otherwise available to the OIG for input on OIG-led audits,
    evaluations, and reviews; performing financial auditing subject to
    supervision and review by the OIG; augmenting hotline staffing; and
    providing IT or other specialized technical assistance to the staff of
    the OIG. If confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to assess
    the office's use of contractor resources and personnel and make any
    adjustments as deemed appropriate.
                       dod financial management and audit
        Question. The performance of financial audits has consumed a
    growing share of the resources of the DOD IG's Office.
        What is your view of the relative priority of financial audits
    within the Department of Defense, and the resources that should be
    devoted to such audits?
        Answer. Based on my experience in the IG community, I believe that
    financial audits are of the utmost importance, both because they
    properly inform the Congress and the public regarding the
    establishment's use of taxpayer dollars and because they frequently
    uncover and reflect underlying issues in the programs and operations of
    the entities in which they occur. These factors seem particularly
    critical at a Department like the DOD which, per the DOD OIG's report,
    ``Understanding the Results of the Audit of the DOD Fiscal Year 2020
    Financial Statements,'' released in February 2021, is responsible for
    almost half of the discretionary spending of the United States and more
    than three-quarters of our country's assets.
        As the NSA IG, I have emphasized to my financial auditing team that
    I want to be fully informed regarding their work, and have received
    numerous briefings from the team and engaged with Agency leadership on
    any number of occasions related thereto. Based on my experience, I
    believe that it is essential that both the entity being audited and the
    auditors devote sufficient resources to ensure that the financial audit
    process is comprehensive, authoritative, and yields meaningful and
    actionable results.
        It is my understanding that the fiscal year 2014 NDAA required the
    Secretary of Defense to ensure that a full-scope audit is performed
    annually on the Department's financial statements, and that the DOD OIG
    became responsible for conducting the audit in fiscal year 2018. While
    the DOD has yet to achieve an unqualified opinion, it is my
    understanding from public reporting by the DOD OIG that the process of
    going through the financial statement audit has resulted in many
    hundreds of Notices of Findings and Recommendations (NFRs), which are
    critically important in moving the Department forward toward fiscal
    accountability.
        Question. If confirmed, in which specific areas of your duties and
    responsibilities would you expect to coordinate with the Under
    Secretary of Defense (Comptroller/Chief Financial Officer)?
        Answer. The DOD OIG's Top DOD Management Challenges for fiscal year
    2022 cited improving DOD's financial management and budgeting as one of
    the 10 top challenges facing the Department. If confirmed, I would
    anticipate working with the financial auditing team at DOD OIG to
    engage with the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief
    Financial Officer on an ongoing basis in order to address these
    challenges and prompt progress by the DOD in this critical area.
    Additionally, while maintaining the OIG's independent budgetary
    responsibilities, I would anticipate working with the management staff
    at the OIG to engage as appropriate with the Congress and the Under
    Secretary to ensure that the OIG has the resources that it needs to
    conduct its critical oversight work, including the development of the
    OIG's portion of the budget that is submitted annually for inclusion in
    the President's budget as required by the IG Act.
        Question. DOD is the only federal agency unable to complete a
    financial audit in accordance with the law, despite having invested
    billions of dollars over the past 16 years to do so.
        What is the role of the DOD IG in the audit process? If confirmed,
    how would your office help Congress in overseeing and improving DOD's
    financial management so that the department can receive a clean opinion
    by 2027?
        Answer. As described in the DOD IG's report, ``Understanding the
    Results of the Audit of the DOD Fiscal Year 2020 Financial
    Statements''--a laudable effort to enhance transparency in an area that
    is often opaque to the public--the DOD OIG is responsible for the
    Agency-Wide Basic Financial Statements, and the OIG hires independent
    public accounting firms (IPAs) to perform the financial statement
    audits of various DOD components. As is common in such situations, it
    is my understanding that the financial auditing team at DOD OIG is
    heavily involved in monitoring and overseeing the work of the IPAs,
    including participating in discussions regarding ongoing work and
    performing verification to assure compliance with applicable accounting
    principles and requirements.
        My own financial statement auditing team at NSA OIG engages on a
    regular basis with the DOD OIG auditing team as appropriate for our
    work. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I will continued the
    prioritization that I have placed on financial auditing, and work with
    the team at DOD OIG to ensure that the Congress is kept fully and
    timely informed regarding issues uncovered through the process and
    progress made toward the receiving a clean opinion.
        Question. If confirmed as the DOD IG, how would you objectively
    evaluate whether DOD's initiatives to improve financial management and
    business operations are resulting in meaningful progress?
        Answer. Evaluating the effectiveness of initiatives to improve
    operations is a key function of OIGs and, if confirmed as the DOD IG, I
    would work with the financial auditing team at the DOD OIG to
    understand the initiatives that have been developed and the office's
    assessment of their efficacy and means for improvement of same. I also
    have found that issues uncovered through the financial audit process
    can spin off separate reviews or other reporting to help prompt timely
    action to address specific issues, and I would work with the team at
    DOD OIG on an ongoing basis to identify and pursue opportunities to
    have impact in that way as well.
        Question. What challenges are unique to conducting an audit of DOD,
    and how could the DOD IG best assist the Department in continuing to
    make demonstrable progress toward a clean audit opinion?
        Answer. As indicated at the outset of this section, I believe that
    the financial statements audit is a reflection of the operations of the
    establishment where it occurs. As reflected in the DOD public report on
    the financial statements audit released last year, the DOD is the
    largest agency in the Federal Government, then employing approximately
    2.1 million military servicemembers and over three-quarters of a
    million civilian employees across a vast and complex defense
    enterprise, with DOD facilities located in all 50 states, 7 U.S.
    territories, and some 40 foreign countries. The budget of the DOD is,
    not surprisingly, correspondingly vast, reporting the receipt of
    appropriations from Congress totaling over $914 billion in fiscal year
    2020 alone. I know from my own experience and work with the financial
    statement auditing team at NSA OIG that the defense enterprise presents
    complex and unique challenges for auditors that require robust
    communication and coordination to address. Additionally I have learned
    that it is important to keep making progress, and that as progress is
    made, it frequently opens up additional avenues for examination and
    improvement. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I will work with the
    financial auditing team to make sure that the DOD OIG is making every
    effort to keep the Department moving in the right direction and
    progressing toward a clean audit opinion.
        Question. What is your understanding of the DOD IG's role in
    assessing the Department's strategy for remediating the findings of
    recent audit attempts?
        Answer. Keeping in mind the ultimate goal of a clean audit opinion,
    I believe from my own experience that there is substantial value in the
    journey, as the establishment being audited takes action to address
    NFRs and progresses toward a greater state of audit readiness and,
    hence, fiscal accountability. It is my understanding that, like all
    OIGs, the DOD OIG engages with the Department to ensure that such
    actions are taken. In my experience, this requires a great deal of
    communication between the auditor and auditee and, when necessary, I
    would make sure that I am prepared as the IG to step in and engage with
    DOD leadership to ensure such positive movement is taken and
    maintained.
        Question. Do you believe the Department can achieve a clean audit
    opinion through better accounting and auditing, or is a systemic
    improvement of DOD's business systems architecture a prerequisite?
        Answer. I do not currently have the information necessary to make
    this assessment, but it is my general experience that progress on the
    financial statements audit requires both improved accounting and
    internal auditing and systemic improvements to business systems and
    protocols. If I am confirmed, I would work with the financial auditing
    team at DOD OIG to ensure that the OIG is doing everything appropriate
    as independent auditors to keep the Department moving in the right
    direction.
        Question. In your view, what incentives need to be in place to
    ensure senior leaders in each DOD Component--not only the financial
    management community--are fully invested and engaged in the process of
    achieving a clean audit opinion? Are those incentives currently in
    place in the Department?
        Answer. In my experience, it is important to ensure that senior
    leaders, not limited to those involved directly in financial
    management, understand the importance of the financial statements audit
    and are fully invested and engaged in the process of moving toward
    achieving a clean audit opinion. To some extent, this can be promoted
    at an operational level by the OIG, and I would certainly support such
    efforts if confirmed. However, the success of ensuring institution-wide
    engagement and support for the process ultimately requires clear and
    consistent messaging from the leadership of the establishment. It is my
    understanding from public statements I have seen as the NSA IG that the
    leadership of the DOD has expressed strong support for the financial
    statements audit process and the Department's efforts to move toward a
    clean audit opinion. If confirmed, I would work with Department
    leadership, up to and including the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary,
    to ensure that this message is delivered and that appropriate
    incentives are in place so that it is carried out throughout the DOD. I
    am not in a position to assess precisely what incentives would be most
    effective to accomplish this result but, if confirmed, I would consult
    with the financial auditing team at the DOD OIG to consider the issue
    and make any appropriate recommendations to Department leadership.
        Question. What are some specific examples of systemic improvements
    that have resulted from DOD IG reviews of DOD financial management
    processes?
        Answer. The DOD IG's last report summarizing the results of the
    financial statement audit describes a number of the improvements that
    the auditors found in DOD's processes and identifies a number of
    continued material weaknesses that remain to be addressed. I do not
    have the information necessary to independently opine on this
    information, but if I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I will work with the
    team at DOD OIG to assess the progress that has been made and the path
    forward for the Department to make continued progress toward its goal
    of a clean audit opinion.
                          acquisition and contracting
        Question. In 2021, the Government Accountability Office reported
    that DOD weapon systems acquisition and contract management are still
    high risk areas.
        Question. Do you believe that the Office of the DOD IG has the
    resources it needs to conduct effective oversight of the Department's
    acquisition programs and contract management systems?
        Answer. The DOD OIG's Top DOD Management Challenges for fiscal year
    2022 included increasing agility in the DOD's acquisition and contract
    management as one of the 10 top challenges facing the Department, and
    the OIG's Oversight Plan for fiscal year 2022 identifies a number of
    pending and planned projects in this important area. If I am confirmed
    as the DOD IG, I would meet with the team at the OIG to assess the
    sufficiency of the office's resources to conduct effective oversight of
    the Department's myriad acquisition programs and contract management
    systems and seek additional resources as may be necessary to ensure
    that the OIG is conducting robust impactful oversight in this critical
    area.
        Question. In an effort to streamline acquisition oversight and
    field capabilities to the warfighter more rapidly, Congress and DOD
    have initiated numerous acquisition reforms recently.
        What role, if any, do you believe the Office of the DOD IG can play
    in the Department's realization of acquisition reform and use of new
    acquisition authorities?
        Answer. I know from my own experience that contracting and
    acquisitions can be a difficult area for many departments and agencies,
    and that OIGs can play a critical role by conducting audits,
    evaluations, and other reviews that provide an independent assessment
    of acquisition reforms and the use of new acquisition authorities,
    identifying issues and making recommendations to leadership to address
    them. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I will work with the team at the OIG
    to make sure that we are doing this on an ongoing basis. I also would
    welcome the opportunity to engage with the Committee in this area, to
    understand any concerns and to ensure that the Congress if fully
    informed should there be a need for additional legislation in this
    area.
        Question. What specific challenges has the Office of the DOD IG
    identified with respect to the Department's ability to incorporate the
    flexibilities of streamlined acquisition processes while ensuring
    controls are in place to protect the Government's interests?
        Answer. As noted above, the DOD OIG's Top DOD Management Challenges
    for fiscal year 2022 identifies acquisition and contract management as
    a top challenge facing the Department, and the OIG's report at pages
    44-50 details a number of specific challenges that the office has
    identified in this area. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I will work with
    the team at DOD OIG to learn more about challenges faced by the
    Department in incorporating the flexibilities of streamlined
    acquisition processes while ensuring controls are in place to protect
    the government's interests.
        Question. The supply chain is an essential part of DOD's efforts to
    ensure readiness. What tools can the Office of the DOD IG bring to bear
    to deter the provision to DOD of counterfeit, defective, or
    nonconforming parts and to hold fraudulent suppliers accountable?
        Answer. Supply chain risk management (SCRM) is a significant and
    important issue across the Federal Government, including the ability to
    deter the provision of counterfeit, defective, or nonconforming parts
    and to hold fraudulent suppliers accountable. Last year, for instance,
    SCRM was added as a metric by the Office of Management and Budget for
    the annual assessment of compliance with the Federal Information
    Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) that is required to be
    performed by OIGs across the Federal Government, and this is an issue
    that is often addressed through the work of the CIGIE Technology
    Committee and its membership. I believe that the DOD OIG can play a
    critical role in conducting audits, evaluations, and other reviews that
    identify issues with regard to SCRM, particularly in a Department as
    vast and intricate as the DOD, and in making impactful recommendations
    to assist the DOD in closing gaps that may risk wasting significant
    amounts of taxpayer dollars and rendering machinery and equipment unfit
    for use. I also believe that, through the work of the OIG and the
    Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), the DOD OIG can play an
    important role in holding fraudulent suppliers accountable, working
    with the Department of Justice and U.S. Attorney's Offices across the
    country to ensure that appropriate civil recoveries and, where
    warranted, criminal prosecutions are aggressively pursued. I have
    significant experience in these areas and, if confirmed, would look
    forward to contributing it to the leadership of the DOD OIG to help
    address these important issues.
        Question. How would you evaluate DOD's ability to track government
    property as it moves through the supply chain?
        Answer. I am certainly aware of the importance of this issue for
    SCRM and, while I do not currently have sufficient information to
    evaluate the ability of DOD to track government property as it moves
    through the supply chain, if confirmed as the DOD IG, I would work with
    the team at DOD OIG to ensure that we are conducting oversight
    sufficient to identify issues in this area and make recommendations to
    the Department sufficient to address them.
        Question. What is your understanding of the harm to the department
    when DOD does not know what supplies it has ``on hand'' or the
    condition of those supplies?
        Answer. While, again, I do not have firsthand knowledge of the harm
    to the Department when the DOD does not know what supplies it has ``on
    hand'' or the condition of those supplies, I believe that any
    organization would be degraded in its ability to meet its mission by
    such deficiencies. Particularly for a Department with a critical
    national defense and warfighting mission, these issues would seem to be
    of critical importance and, if confirmed, I would work with the team at
    DOD OIG to ensure that we are conducting impactful oversight to address
    them.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
    Army, Navy, and Air Force acquisition officials have proper oversight
    of smaller acquisition category 2 and 3 programs?
        Answer. I have only had an opportunity to briefly research the
    basic parameters of these relatively smaller acquisition categories,
    and do not currently have information sufficient to identify
    authoritatively steps to ensure that Army, Navy, and Air Force
    acquisition officials have proper oversight over these programs. If
    confirmed, I will work with the team at DOD OIG to more fully
    understand this issue and determine what oversight activities might be
    appropriate to address it.
        Question. How does the DOD IG enable the DOD to hold defense
    contractors accountable for delivering services and products on time,
    to standard, and at the agreed price?
        Answer. As a general matter, OIGs help to enable the departments
    and agencies they oversee to hold contractors accountable for
    delivering services and products on time, to standard, and at the
    agreed upon price by conducting audits, evaluations, and other reviews
    of the processes and procedures of contracting programs that identify
    issues in these and other areas and make recommendations to assist the
    contracting entities to address them and, thereby, ensure that they are
    appropriately obtaining the goods and services for which they have
    contracted. Additionally, where warranted, OIGs may work with the
    Department of Justice to pursue civil or even criminal liability in
    particular cases. If confirmed as the IG at DOD, I would work with the
    team at the DOD OIG to ensure that we are pursuing all available
    avenues to enable the Department to hold defense contractors
    accountable.
        Question. How does the DOD IG assist the Department in holding
    contracting officials and contracting officer representatives
    accountable for their actions in making sure that contractors are
    delivering services and products on time, to standard, and at the
    agreed price?
        Answer. OIGs assist the departments and agencies they oversee in
    holding contracting officials and contracting officer's representatives
    accountable through a range of audits, evaluations, and other reviews
    that examine contracting practices and make recommendations for
    improvement. At NSA OIG, we have released unclassified versions of
    several reports in the contracting area, questioning in those reports a
    total of approximately $1.3 billion spent by the Agency. Additionally,
    OIGs may conduct administrative investigations of contracting officials
    or contracting officer's representatives where there is evidence of
    misconduct, and even pursue such matters criminally--for instance, if
    there is evidence of collusion with contractors to defraud the
    government. If confirmed as the IG at DOD, I would work with the team
    at the DOD OIG to ensure that we are pursuing all available avenues to
    conduct oversight that improves the DOD's contracting processes and
    assists the Department in holding contracting officials and contracting
    officer's representatives appropriately accountable for their actions.
        Question. In your view, are additional legislative changes needed
    to ensure that contracting officers have the authority they need to
    require contractors to disclose pricing data for sole-source parts?
        Answer. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I will consult with the
    team at the OIG to determine whether there are additional legislative
    changes needed to ensure that contracting officers have the authority
    they need to require contractors to disclose pricing data for sole-
    source parts. I am aware that there are significant issues in this
    area, including as reflected in the recently released DOD OIG report,
    ``Audit of the Business Model for TransDigm Group Inc. and its Impact
    on Department of Defense Spare Parts Pricing.'' If confirmed, I would
    look forward to learning more about the issues in this area, and would
    welcome the opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding any
    issues and potential legislative changes.
        Question. What is your understanding of your obligation, if
    confirmed, to consult with the Attorney General of the United States
    when an audit, investigation, or inspection under the auspices of the
    DOD IG yields reasonable grounds to believe there has been a violation
    of Federal criminal law--including procurement fraud?
        Answer. Pursuant to section 4(d) of the IG Act, the IG is required
    to report expeditiously to the Attorney General whenever the IG has
    reasonable grounds to believe that there has been a violation of
    Federal criminal law. As reflected in the public version of our SARs
    that we have prepared and posted since I came on board as the NSA IG, I
    am fully familiar with this responsibility and would continue to carry
    it out if I am confirmed as the DOD IG.
        In February 2018 and May 2019, the Defense Science Board and
    Defense Innovation Board issued reports making numerous recommendations
    to DOD to help guide the department's efforts to modernize its approach
    to software acquisition. GAO has subsequently reported that the
    department's efforts to implement more modern software practices are
    still a work in progress and that DOD acquisition programs have yet to
    consistently implement software development leading practices.
        Question. If confirmed, how do you envision the DOD IG's role in
    helping the department move toward more modern software development
    approaches, such as Agile software development and DevSecOps?
        Answer. In my experience, software acquisition is another area that
    can present challenges for federal entities and, if confirmed as the
    DOD IG, I would work with the OIG team to assess the office's work in
    this area and to determine whether there is impactful oversight that
    could be conducted that would assist the Department in moving toward
    more modern and effective software development approaches.
                                dod ig resources
        Question. In a hearing last year, Acting DOD IG Sean O'Donnell
    testified that the DOD IG has a proportionately smaller staff than
    other federal agency inspectors general. As a point of comparison, he
    stated that the larger federal agency inspectors general typically have
    a ratio of departmental staff to OIG staff of between 50 to 1 and 200
    to 1 while the DOD OIG ratio is closer to 1,700 to 1.
        If confirmed, how would you ensure that your resources are deployed
    to address the highest priority missions of DOD?
        Answer. This is a constant challenge for OIGs--like all government
    entities, we have limited resources and, therefore, we have to
    determine how to employ those resources most effectively to maximize
    the impact of our work. To my knowledge, all OIGs--and this was
    certainly the case at both DOJ OIG and where I now work at NSA OIG--
    have risk assessment processes appropriate to the establishments they
    oversee whereby they evaluate potential oversight projects to determine
    where they can have the most impact, including with regard to the scope
    of the activities of the entities they oversee and the severity of
    particular risks those entities are facing in carrying out their
    missions. Both before and during this confirmation process, I have
    observed how the DOD OIG ties its oversight plan directly to its
    assessment of the top management challenges facing the Department,
    reflecting the correlation between the topics on which it expends its
    oversight resources and the areas where it believes the DOD is most
    challenged in achieving its essential mission set. If confirmed as the
    DOD IG, I would look forward to working with the team at DOD OIG to
    gain a deeper understanding of its risk assessment processes and,
    contributing my own experience and insights, work to ensure that this
    important effort at the OIG is as effective as possible in ensuring
    that the office's resources are best deployed to address the highest
    priority missions of the DOD.
        Question. How would you approach, assess, and eliminate DOD IG
    missions that have outlived their usefulness or are not of a high
    enough priority to continue?
        Answer. The mission of the DOD OIG, and all OIGs, is as set forth
    in the IG Act cited near the start of these questions, but essentially,
    in my view, is to conduct impactful oversight that promotes positive
    change at the entities we oversee. That process necessarily involves
    constant reassessment of our own activities to ensure that we, like the
    entities we oversee, are using public resources wisely, and ensuring
    the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of our own activities. That
    has been the approach in which I have been engaged at two OIGs and, if
    confirmed, I would anticipate that I would continue that approach at
    DOD OIG, and I would look forward to working with the team there to
    ensure that we are engaging in the most impactful possible oversight.
               lead inspector general for contingency operations
        Question. Section 8L of the Inspector General Act of 1978, sets out
    special provisions for the designation of a Lead Inspector General for
    Overseas Contingency Operations. When serving in this capacity, the DOD
    IG, in coordination with the offices of the Inspectors General of the
    Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development,
    is required to develop and carry out a joint strategic plan to conduct
    comprehensive, independent, and effective oversight of all aspects of
    any designated contingency operation and of all programs and operations
    of the Federal Government in support of that operation.
        If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what would be your relationship with
    the Inspectors General of the Department of State and the U.S. Agency
    for International Development?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would anticipate a close working
    relationship with the IGs for the Department of State and the U.S.
    Agency for International Development in order to foster the critical
    coordination inherent in the structure for oversight over overseas
    contingency operations (OCOs) as provided for in section 8L of the IG
    Act.
        Question. For how many designated contingency operations does the
    DOD IG serve as ``Lead Inspector General''?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the DOD IG currently serves as
    Lead Inspector General for two OCOs, Operation Inherent Resolve and
    Operation Freedom's Sentinel.
        Question. At what point in time, and under what conditions, do you
    envision that the DOD IG will be in a position to close out its
    responsibilities as ``Lead Inspector General'' for these contingency
    operations?
        Answer. The IG Act specifies that the requirements and authorities
    under section 8L shall cease at the end of the first fiscal year after
    the commencement or designation of the OCO in which the total amount
    appropriated for the OCO is less than $100 million.
        Question. Given the withdrawal of all United States troops from
    Afghanistan, what changes would you plan to make to the DOD IG's
    oversight activities regarding Afghanistan, if confirmed?
        Answer. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I would intend to consult
    with the team at the OIG that leads the office's efforts on OCOs, as
    well as the IGs of the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for
    International Development, in order to determine what changes may be
    appropriate regarding DOD OIG's activities as Lead Inspector General
    for Operation Freedom's Sentinel or otherwise. I also would welcome the
    opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding its views on same.
        Question. What is the role of the DOD IG with respect to oversight
    of the U.S. Government's evacuation of, provision of housing on DOD
    installations for, and provision of other support for Afghan evacuees?
        Answer. The DOD IG has oversight jurisdiction over all programs and
    operations of the DOD. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG, I would intend
    to consult with the team regarding this matter and determine what
    additional oversight may be most impactful and appropriate. I also
    would welcome the opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding
    any concerns it may have in this area.
        Question. What is the relationship of the DOD IG with respect to
    the Inspectors General of the Department of State, U.S. Agency for
    International Development, and Department of Homeland Security with
    respect to oversight of the United States Government's evacuation of,
    provision of housing on DOD installations for, and provision of other
    support for Afghan evacuees?
        Answer. I am not in a position to authoritatively answer this
    question but, if confirmed, I would look forward to working with the
    team at DOD OIG to understand the office's posture in this important
    area and to engage with other OIGs, including but not limited to those
    listed above, as may be appropriate.
        Question. What is your understanding of the relationship of the
    Office of the DOD IG to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan
    Reconstruction?
        Answer. The DOD OIG has oversight jurisdiction over all programs
    and operations of the DOD and as the Lead Inspector General responsible
    for coordinating oversight with the Department of State and the U.S.
    Agency for International Development over Operation Freedom's Sentinel,
    which I understand to be essentially a counterterrorism mission against
    the remnants of al Qaeda and a train, advise, and assist (TAA) mission
    in support of the Afghan security forces. Congress established the
    Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction
    (SIGAR) in the fiscal year 2008 NDAA for the purposes of conducting
    audits and investigations relating to programs and operations for the
    reconstruction of Afghanistan. It is clear to me that, while recent
    events may have changed the issues to be overseen, it is critically
    important that the DOD OIG coordinate effectively with SIGAR to work
    together where appropriate and to avoid duplicative or inconsistent
    oversight in this area.
                   department of defense security assistance
        Question. A key element of the strategic competition with Russia
    and China is the security assistance provided by the Department of
    Defense to the security forces of allies and partners.
        If confirmed as DOD IG, how would you ensure that DOD security
    assistance, including capacity building under 10 U.S.C. Sec.  333 and
    the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, is executed in a reliable
    and timely manner consistent with U.S. national security interests?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to
    assess this area and ensure that we are conducting audits, evaluations,
    or reviews as appropriate. I also would welcome the opportunity to
    engage with the Committee regarding any concerns it may have in this
    area.
      the defense criminal investigative service (dcis) and the military
                  criminal investigative organizations (mcios)
        Question. The DCIS conducts criminal investigations of matters
    related to DOD programs and operations. Over time, the DOD IG has
    sought and obtained increased authority to issue subpoenas and for DCIS
    Special Agents to carry weapons and make arrests.
        Do you believe that the authorities of the Office of the DOD IG and
    the DCIS are adequate in these areas, or would you recommend further
    changes in the law?
        Answer. As a former federal prosecutor and now the NSA IG, I am
    somewhat familiar with the work of DCIS and the MCIOs. I do not,
    however, have information sufficient to opine authoritatively as to
    whether the authorities of the DOD IG and the DCIS currently are
    adequate. I very much appreciate the question and, if confirmed, I
    would intend to consult within the office and would look forward to the
    opportunity to engage with the Committee as may be appropriate in order
    to ensure that the DOD IG and the DCIS have all the authorities
    necessary to appropriately carry out their important responsibilities.
        Question. How do you view the division of responsibility and
    authority between the DOD IG and the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Intelligence & Security with respect to law enforcement and security
    policy?
        Answer. I do not have an independent view as to the current
    division of responsibility and authority between the DOD IG and the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security (USD(I&S)). I
    have other interactions with the office of the USD(I&S) as the NSA IG,
    and it is my general understanding that the USD(I&S) has
    responsibilities within the DOD for establishing law enforcement and
    security policies, including with regard to training requirements for
    law enforcement within the DOD, and that it works with the DOD IG to
    ensure that those policies are appropriate to support the DOD OIG's law
    enforcement activities. If confirmed, I would look forward to engaging
    within the OIG and with the USD(I&S) to learn more about this
    relationship and to ensure that appropriate coordination takes place to
    enable the DOD OIG to carry out its responsibilities in this area.
        Question. How do you view the division of responsibility and
    authority between the DOD IG and the Secretaries of the military
    departments for oversight of their respective MCIOs?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the MCIOs report to the
    Secretaries of their Military Departments. As discussed earlier, the
    DOD IG performs important oversight over the work of the MCIOs, both
    through evaluations of the MCIOs' processes and procedures and through
    oversight jurisdiction over the MCIOs' investigative work products. The
    DOD IG also is responsible under section 8(c) of the IG Act for
    providing policy direction for investigations, and under DOD Directive
    5106.01 for establishing policy, monitoring and evaluating program
    performance, and providing guidance with respect to all DOD activities
    relating to criminal investigation and law enforcement programs,
    including investigations and related activities of the MCIOs. All of
    these activities require communication and coordination and, if
    confirmed as the DOD IG, I would intend to engage in and encourage
    same.
        Question. As the National Security Agency IG, what were the most
    significant challenges you faced regarding investigations into fraud,
    waste, abuse and misconduct, and if confirmed, what lessons learned
    from these investigations would you bring to DOD?
        Answer. As the NSA IG, I have worked to foster a good, independent
    working relationship with Agency leadership, and I believe that support
    from the top has greatly facilitated my office's ability to investigate
    fraud, waste, abuse, and misconduct at the Agency. Getting people to
    come forward and report suspected wrongdoing can be difficult, and my
    team and I have been successful in obtaining explicit support for these
    efforts from Agency leadership, up to and including the Director. I
    believe that it is critical to establish such tone from the top and, in
    this particular regard, the expectation that personnel will report to
    the OIG when they reasonably believe they have evidence of wrongdoing,
    and that retaliation for doing so will not be tolerated.
        Given the size and complexity of the NSA enterprise, we have
    disseminated this important message through various means, including
    the preparation of the video described earlier in which we and, at some
    level, most importantly the Director instruct the workforce about the
    importance of reporting to the OIG. As OIGs, we can make
    recommendations and follow up on their implementation, but ultimately,
    only the leadership of the enterprises we oversee has the authority to
    direct the conduct of their employees. At NSA OIG, we also have worked
    to get out this important message through briefings with leaders as
    part of their preparations for postings across the NSA enterprise and
    through presentations by OIG personnel in senior and other training
    programs. I believe that diverse and sustained outreach has paid real
    dividends for our work at NSA OIG, where we have seen an increase of
    approximately 40 percent in our Hotline contacts over the last few
    years, as reported in the unclassified versions of our recent SARs. If
    confirmed as the DOD IG, I would bring the lessons I have learned
    through our outreach and education efforts at NSA OIG and, before that,
    as the Whistleblower Ombudsperson at DOJ OIG, to ensure that we are
    availing ourselves of every opportunity in this regard.
        In accordance with section 8(c)(5) of the Inspector General Act of
    1978, the Office of the DOD IG has established overarching standards
    for MCIO investigations of adult sexual assaults. In its 4th Annual
    Report, dated March 2020, the Defense Advisory Committee on
    Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed
    Forces (DAC IPAD) affirmed concerns that MCIO investigators lack
    necessary discretion with respect to the conduct of sexual assault
    investigations in the military. The report stated, ``[i]nvestigators
    are taking specific investigative steps not because they believe that
    the actions are warranted by the facts; instead, they are following a
    standard checklist and feel that they are required to do so.''
        Question. If confirmed, how would you balance the imperative that
    MCIOs conduct rigorous investigations of sexual assault allegations
    with the DAC-IPAD recommendation that MCIO investigators exercise
    discretion to tailor the scope of any such investigation to the facts
    of that case, including the ability to close an investigation in a
    timely and appropriate fashion?
        Answer. Given my own background and experience, I have often
    discussed with investigators the importance of conducting rigorous
    investigations that are tailored to the facts of the case, including
    the importance of closing investigations in a timely and appropriate
    fashion. If confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG and the
    MCIOs to consider the IPAD recommendations and how they might be
    addressed in the context of these priority matters.
        Question. What more would you do, if confirmed, to ensure that MCIO
    Special Agents assigned to respond to and investigate allegations of
    sexual assault have received requisite specialized training?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the DOD OIG has engaged and
    currently is engaged in the evaluation of the MCIOs handling of sexual
    assault cases. If confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to
    assess the training that the MCIO Special Agents receive and ensure
    that they receive such specialized training as may be necessary to
    appropriately handle these priority matters.
        Question. What more can be done, in your view, to stamp out
    retaliation against those who come forward as victims of or witnesses
    to, a sexual assault?
        Answer. People who come forward as victims of, or witnesses to, a
    sexual assault should never suffer retaliation. As a federal
    prosecutor, I was directly involved in ensuring the rights of victims
    in the cases I handled and, as the Deputy IG and Whistleblower
    Ombudsperson at the DOJ OIG, and as the NSA IG, I have championed
    whistleblower rights and protections. If I am confirmed as the DOD IG,
    I will meet with the team at the OIG to assess our efforts in this
    area, and ensure that we are availing ourselves of every method to
    communicate to both the military and civilian workforces regarding this
    message, and to appropriately address all reprisal matters in a timely
    manner.
        Question. What is the relationship of the Office of the DOD IG with
    the National Guard Bureau's Office of Complex Investigations?
        Answer. I was not previously aware of the National Guard Bureau's
    Office of Complex Investigations (OCI), but it is my understanding from
    the National Guard's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program
    Fiscal Year 2020 Review, issued in February 2021, that the OCI
    generally seeks to explore opportunities to expand investigative
    capabilities in cases that are not prosecuted locally or where such
    investigation is deemed deficient. If confirmed, I will work with the
    team at DOD OIG to understand the office's relationship with the OCI,
    and take such action as may be appropriate.
                 oversight of the military health system (mhs)
        Question. The MHS is a global, comprehensive, integrated health
    care system that includes a health care delivery system, combat medical
    services, public health activities, medical education and training, and
    medical research and development.
        If confirmed, what is your view of the role of the DOD IG in
    overseeing the operations of the MHS?
        Answer. The DOD OIG's assessment of the Top DOD Management
    Challenges for fiscal year 2022 included protecting the health and
    welfare of servicemembers and their families as one of the top 10
    challenges facing the DOD. As the DOD IG has oversight jurisdiction
    over all programs and operations of the DOD that are expressly
    correlated with these challenges, it is my understanding that the
    office performs robust oversight in this area, including a number of
    planned and pending oversight projects as detailed in the DOD OIG's
    fiscal year 2022 Oversight Plan.
        Question. What are your views of the role that the DOD IG has in
    improving visibility into and assessing the quality of care provided
    through the MHS?
        Answer. The DOD IG, as indicated above, has oversight jurisdiction
    over all programs and operations of the DOD, including those involved
    in the provision of care through the MHS. Additionally, OIGs play an
    important role in furthering transparency in their oversight of the
    entities they oversee. If confirmed, I would work with the team at the
    DOD OIG to determine the role that the office should have in improving
    visibility into and assessing the quality of care provided through the
    MHS. I also would welcome the opportunity to engage with the Committee
    regarding any particular concerns it may have in this area.
        Question. Do you believe the DOD IG currently has the resources and
    expertise to play a more prominent role in assessing the performance of
    DOD health care providers--in both military medical treatment
    facilities and in the TRICARE purchased care system?
        Answer. While I am aware from the DOD OIG's SARs and Oversight Plan
    that it has conducted a range of oversight in this area, I am not
    currently in a position to assess the sufficiency of its resources and
    expertise in assessing the performance of DOD health care providers in
    both military medical treatment facilities and in the TRICARE purchased
    care system. If confirmed, I would work with the team at the DOD OIG to
    assess the resources and expertise of the office in this area and would
    welcome the opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding same.
        Question. What role is the DOD IG playing regarding DOD's
    implementation of the electronic health records system? What role is it
    playing regarding evaluating the integration of the electronic health
    records systems of DOD and the Department of Veterans Affairs?
        Answer. I am aware that the DOD OIG currently has an ongoing joint
    audit with the Department of Veterans Affairs relating to the
    interoperability of both Departments' electronic health record systems.
    According to the DOD OIG's fiscal year 2022 Oversight Plan, the
    objective of the joint audit is to determine whether the DOD is
    developing standards and implementing controls to provide
    interoperability between the health care systems of the DOD, the
    Department of Veterans Affairs, and external health care providers. If
    confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to understand these
    issues more fully, including any findings and recommendations that may
    result from the pending joint audit in this area.
        DOD must continue to implement proactive controls to contain health
    care costs and fight health care fraud--all with a view to maximizing
    the funding available to treat beneficiaries.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Office of
    the DOD IG in identifying and preventing health care fraud against DOD?
        Answer. A core function of all OIGs is to detect and deter waste,
    fraud, and abuse in the programs and operations of the establishments
    they oversee, and it is my understanding that the DOD OIG plays an
    active role in identifying and preventing health care fraud against the
    DOD. This includes conducting audits, evaluations, and other reviews
    that may identify risks and indicators of health care fraud, and
    conducting and participating in civil and criminal investigations that
    may result in the recovery of substantial sums and the prosecution of
    wrongdoers. I also am aware that DOD OIG has developed a substantial
    data analytics capacity that can be of pivotal importance in
    facilitating all of these efforts. As a former federal prosecutor, if I
    am confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to ensure that we
    are robustly engaged in identifying and preventing health care fraud,
    which serves as a drain on the health care system and diverts funds
    from other critical functions.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for the
    Office of the DOD IG in providing oversight of the Third Party
    Collections Program?
        Answer. While I was not previously aware of the Third Party
    Collections Program, I have learned from publicly available information
    that it is the military program established to implement the statutory
    authorization for military treatment facilities to recover the cost of
    providing health care services to covered DOD beneficiaries from third
    party payers. If confirmed, I would explore with the team at DOD OIG
    the appropriate role for the OIG in providing oversight over this
    program.
        Question. In your view, do the Defense Health Agency and military
    medical treatment facilities have the requisite ``in-house'' analytic
    tools and personnel with the training and experience, to monitor and
    take corrective action in high-risk areas, such as preventing improper
    payments and collecting delinquent debt related to DOD-provided
    healthcare services?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the team at the DOD OIG to
    review any relevant work or experience in the office and otherwise
    assess whether the Defense Health Agency and military medical treatment
    facilities have the requisite tools and personnel to monitor and take
    corrective actions in these important high-risk areas, and make any
    recommendations as appropriate. I also would welcome the opportunity to
    engage with the Committee regarding any specific concerns it may have
    in this area.
                             covid vaccine mandate
        Question. What do you believe should be the role of the DOD IG with
    respect to oversight of the processes in place for granting medical,
    administrative, and religious exemptions to military and civilian
    personnel under DOD's COVID-19 vaccine mandate?
        Answer. The DOD OIG has oversight jurisdiction over all programs
    and operations of the DOD. I am aware that the OIG has done some work
    in this area, including a pending audit relating to effectiveness of
    the vaccine distribution plan within the DOD. This obviously has been a
    rapidly changing area, including what I understand to be the suspension
    of the civilian vaccination requirement and exemption process in
    response to pending federal litigation. If confirmed, I would work with
    the team to assess the situation existing at that time and determine
    whether there is additional impactful oversight work that would be
    appropriate with regard to the exemptions process. I also would welcome
    the opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding any specific
    concerns it may have in this area.
                military housing privatization initiative (mhpi)
        Question. In the fiscal year 1996 NDAA, Congress established the
    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 hearings to
    address concerns voiced by military families living in privatized
    housing that the program had been grossly mismanaged by certain 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 to reprisal.
    One such contractor has since entered into a settlement with the
    Justice Department for fraudulent activities with respect to the
    management of its contracts under MHPI.
        What is your understanding of the role of the Office of the DOD IG
    and the military department Inspectors General in addressing
    servicemember and family concerns regarding untenable living conditions
    prevalent in certain privatized housing locales?
        Answer. The DOD OIG's Top DOD Management Challenges for fiscal year
    2022 includes discussion of health and safety management of military
    housing as an important component of the challenge that the DOD faces
    in protecting the health and wellness of servicemembers and their
    families. The report describes numerous oversight products and
    recommendations that have been issued by the OIG over a number of
    years, as well as recent work by GAO in the area. The report further
    identifies reforms that were included and elaborated upon in the NDAA
    for fiscal years 2020 and 2021, and additional evaluations pending and
    planned by the OIG to monitor progress and ensure implementation of
    these reforms. If confirmed, I would work with the team at the DOD OIG
    to review the status of outstanding recommendations and pending and
    planned oversight projects in order to ensure that the office is
    conducting robust oversight that is driving positive change in this
    very important area for military personnel and their families.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to assess the progress
    being made by DOD and the military departments in reestablishing
    oversight of, and accountability for the MHPI program?
        Answer. As described above, it is my understanding that the DOD OIG
    has a number of pending and planned oversight projects in this
    important area. If confirmed, I would work with the team at the OIG to
    understand the status of recommendations outstanding from past
    oversight work, to get up to speed on the status of ongoing work, and
    to consider the need for future work to ensure that the DOD and the
    Military Departments have robust oversight of and accountability for
    the MHPI program. I also would welcome the opportunity to engage with
    the Committee regarding any particular concerns it may have in this
    area.
        Question. If confirmed, what tools would you recommend the Office
    of the DOD IG or the military department Inspectors General bring to
    bear to ensure the accountability of MHPI contractors for strict
    adherence to the terms of their partnership agreements with the
    military services?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the team at DOD OIG to
    understand the situation with regard to the compliance of MHPI
    contractors with their partnership agreements, and then utilize all
    appropriate remedies to address any deficiencies. While my experience
    as a prosecutor and in the IG community has taught me that there is no
    one-size-fits-all solution, the tools that can be brought to bear as
    appropriate include management advisories and other rapid response
    reporting; audits, evaluations, and reviews; and civil and, where
    warranted, criminal prosecutions.
                                  intelligence
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the DOD IG in
    ensuring that intelligence and other sensitive activities within DOD
    are conducted in accordance with relevant legal standards?
        Answer. The DOD OIG has oversight jurisdiction over the programs
    and operations of the DOD, including those in the area of intelligence
    and related sensitive activities. Section 5(x) of DOD Directive 5106.01
    specifically provides that the DOD IG shall ``[a]udit, evaluate,
    monitor, and review the programs, policies, procedures, and functions
    of the DOD Intelligence Components to ensure that intelligence
    resources, including those funded through the National Intelligence
    Program, are properly managed.'' Pursuant to the MOU that I
    participated in negotiating as referenced earlier in these responses,
    the DOD IG and the IGs for the four defense intelligence agencies
    cooperate and coordinate support on audits, investigations,
    inspections, evaluations, other reviews, and oversight matters so that
    each party can more efficiently and effectively fulfill its duties and
    responsibilities without unnecessary duplication of effort and
    resources. The DOD OIG also leads the DCIE, which can play an important
    role in facilitating coordination of oversight in such areas.
        Question. If confirmed, in which areas of DOD IG responsibility
    would you expect to coordinate with the Special Assistant to the
    Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Oversight?
        Answer. DOD Directive 5106.01, section 5(x), also provides that the
    audit and other actions conducted by the DOD IG in this area ``shall be
    coordinated, as appropriate, with the Assistant to the Secretary of
    Defense for Intelligence Oversight to determine respective areas of
    responsibility, in accordance with DOD Directive 5148.11.'' Under the
    later directive, the DOD Senior Intelligence Oversight Official (known
    as the ``DSIOO''), then the Special Assistant to the Secretary of
    Defense for Intelligence Oversight, has responsibility for conducting
    independent oversight of all DOD intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities, including inspecting intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities; developing oversight policy; reviewing in consultation with
    the DOD General Counsel allegations questioning the legality or
    propriety of intelligence or intelligence-related activities;
    monitoring administrative investigations and inspections conducted by
    DOD Components related to intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities, evaluating the findings and, if appropriate, recommending
    corrective action; conducting independent investigations in
    coordination with the appropriate Defense Criminal Investigative
    Organization or Military Counterintelligence Investigative
    Organization; and serving as the lead DOD official for all matters
    associated with the Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB) of the
    President's Intelligence Advisory Board, including DOD reporting to the
    IOB. By memorandum dated September 1, 2021, the Deputy Secretary of
    Defense redesignated the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for
    Intelligence Oversight as the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for
    Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency, known as the ATSD(PCLT),
    and further specifically provided that the previously designated
    official shall continue to serve as the DSIOO. As the NSA IG, I have
    met with and coordinated intelligence oversight activities with the
    DSIOO and, if confirmed, I would anticipate continued coordination in
    furtherance of both office's functions, including with regard to
    inspections of DOD intelligence and intelligence-related activities and
    providing notice of any matters reportable by the DSIOO to the IOB.
                                     cyber
        Question. The Office of the DOD IG has consistently reported on
    problems the DOD has in protecting its cyber systems, networks, and
    data.
        What are your views on whether the Office of the DOD IG has the
    expertise and capacity to adequately assess DOD cybersecurity plans,
    policies, and capabilities?
        Answer. Cybersecurity is a critical issue for all federal agencies,
    and one with which I have developed substantial experience as the NSA
    IG and as Vice-Chair of the CIGIE Technology Committee. If confirmed, I
    would work with the team at DOD OIG to ensure that we have sufficient
    capacity to conduct robust oversight over DOD's cybersecurity plans,
    policies, and capabilities.
        Question. If confirmed to be the DOD IG, what would be your
    priorities for cybersecurity, and where would cybersecurity rank in
    terms of your overall priorities?
        Answer. The DOD OIG's Top DOD Management Challenges for fiscal year
    2022 includes strengthening DOD cyberspace operations and security
    systems, networks, and data as one of the top challenges facing the
    DOD. The OIG's fiscal year 2022 Oversight Plan details a number of
    planned and pending oversight projects in this area and, if confirmed,
    it would remain one of my highest priorities as the DOD IG.
                         general counsel to the dod ig
        Question. What is your understanding of the history and purpose of
    section 907 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2009, regarding the position of
    General Counsel to the DOD IG?
        Answer. It is my understanding that, consistent with the IG Act,
    section 907 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2009 provided for a General
    Counsel to the DOD IG in order to ensure that the IG has independent
    legal counsel to provide advice to the IG regarding the office's
    independent oversight activities separate and apart from the DOD Office
    of General Counsel.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role played by the
    General Counsel to the DOD IG with respect to completed investigations?
        Answer. While I have not been briefed specifically on the role
    played by the General Counsel of the DOD IG with respect to completed
    investigations, it is my understanding that the General Counsel plays a
    role similar to that at other OIGs in conducting reviews of
    administrative investigative reports to ensure their legal and factual
    sufficiency.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you address differences of
    opinion between the DOD IG General Counsel and a DOD IG investigative
    team as to findings of fact and the appropriate weight to be given such
    facts in a completed investigation?
        Answer. It has been my experience over the years as a federal
    prosecutor and in the leadership of two Offices of Inspector General
    that it is not uncommon to have good faith differences of opinion
    regarding findings of fact and/or conclusions in any particular
    investigation. It has been my consistent practice to engage
    collaboratively to discuss such issues when they arise, and thereby to
    reach agreement on the right result. Of course, as the NSA IG and, if
    confirmed, as the DOD IG, the final decision regarding such matters is
    and would be my responsibility.
        Question. If confirmed as the DOD IG, what manner of relationship
    would you expect the General Counsel to the DOD IG to maintain with the
    General Counsel of the DOD, who by law serves as the department's chief
    legal officer?
        Answer. I would expect the General Counsel to the DOD IG to
    maintain a good, professional working relationship with the General
    Counsel of the DOD. In my experience, such a relationship facilitates
    good communication and the appropriate resolution of myriad legal
    issues that inevitably arise as an OIG conducts robust, independent
    oversight.
        Question. What is your understanding of the authority of the DOD IG
    to access for official purposes records of the Department of Defense
    that may be protected by an institutional attorney-client privilege?
        For the independent oversight conducted by OIGs to be effective,
    credible, and authoritative, it is essential that the OIG have access
    to all records available to the
        establishment that it oversees that the OIG--not the
    establishment--determines are relevant to its work. This was the
    fundamental principle underlying the effort, led by IG Horowitz as
    CIGIE Chair when I was at the DOJ OIG, to lead the IG community in
    supporting what became the IG Empowerment Act of 2016. That important
    legislation amended section 6(a) of the IG Act to make explicit,
    essentially, that ``all means all'' when it comes to the IG's access to
    records and information relevant to the programs and operations with
    respect to which the IG has responsibilities under the IG Act (unless,
    of course, Congress were to pass a law specifically referring to the IG
    and restricting such access to the IG). A related and essential aspect
    of the IG Act is that the IG is within the establishment that it
    oversees, which means that it is not subject to having records or
    information withheld from its review by a claim of institutional
    attorney-client privilege. These are bedrock principles that are
    insisted upon across the IG community and, if confirmed as the DOD IG,
    I would ensure that they are scrupulously followed at the DOD.
        Question. What is your view of the authority of the DOD IG to
    access for official purposes--including for purposes of responding to a
    congressional request-- records of the Department of Defense that may
    be protected by executive privilege?
        Answer. Similar to the last question, because the DOD IG is within
    the Department, it is not subject to having access to information
    withheld based on executive privilege.
                           civilian senior executives
        Question. If confirmed to be the DOD IG, you would be in a position
    to select applicants for appointment to positions in the Senior
    Executive Service (SES) in the Office of the DOD IG.
        Question. Given that competent leadership is one of the most
    reliable guarantors of a high-performing civilian workforce, if
    confirmed, what factors and characteristics would be most important to
    you in selecting a candidate for appointment to the SES?
        Answer. I have been a member of the SES and supervised the office's
    senior cadre as Deputy IG at the DOJ OIG, and I have made a number of
    selections for SES and senior leader (known as DISES and DISL)
    positions at the NSA OIG. The Office of Personnel Management sets forth
    Executive Core Qualifications (known as ``ECQs'') that must be met for
    elevation to an SES position, which are: Leading Change, Leading
    People, Results Driven, Business Acumen, and Building Coalitions. There
    is nothing more important to an office than ensuring that it has a
    strong leadership team that values people and is committed to
    excellence in all of the areas covered by the ECQs. In my experience,
    strong SES performers share excellent communication and collaborative
    skills and a strong commitment to the people and mission of their
    office. They also are creative, not satisfied with doing things a
    certain way just because that is how they have always been done, but
    willing to think outside the box to find new and better ways to drive
    their organizations forward. I have been fortunate to attract and
    retain an outstanding group of senior leaders at the NSA OIG, who also
    exemplify the diversity that I believe is critical for any organization
    to most effectively address complex problems.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you go about ensuring that SES
    employees under your authority are held accountable for both
    organizational performance and the performance of their subordinate
    employees?
        Answer. All organizations with SES employees, including OIGs, are
    required to have procedures in place to evaluate the performance of
    their SES employees, with review of the results conducted through
    independent performance review boards. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I
    would work with the management and human resources professionals at the
    OIG to ensure that we are scrupulously following the requirements in
    this area.
        More generally, I believe that, as a leader, it is important to set
    tone and expectations at all levels of an organization, and then to
    follow up to ensure that these are met and to discuss and resolve any
    obstacles to doing so. I have found that this is often best done
    through a combination of formal and informal interactions and regular
    check-ins, identifying and discussing issues as they arise so that
    timely solutions can be developed and implemented. And, of course,
    there is no substitute for letting people know, through your words and,
    more importantly, through your deeds, that you care about them, their
    work, and their professional development. I have found that this has
    been particularly true during the difficult time through which we all
    have gone over the past couple of years, though it has always been the
    way I work with and for the teams I lead and, if confirmed as the DOD
    IG, it will be central to how I work in that organization as well. I
    also think it is important to appropriately and fairly incentivize
    superior performance, as well as to take timely and appropriate action
    to address poor performance, and to be as transparent as possible in
    both respects. If I am confirmed as the IG at DOD, I will work with the
    team at the OIG to make sure that we are performing these critical
    functions properly and as transparently as possible so as to further
    the confidence and the performance of the workforce.
                               sexual harassment
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take if you receive
    or otherwise become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment or
    discrimination from an employee of the DOD IG?
        Answer. There is absolutely no place for sexual harassment or
    discrimination in any workplace. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I would
    work with the team at the OIG to develop and disseminate clear and
    consistent messaging to the workforce in this area. And, should such
    incidents arise, I will ensure that they are handled appropriately,
    including that the victim has timely access to any necessary support
    services and that the perpetrator is investigated and faces
    consequences as appropriate.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
    timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
    electronic communications, and other information from the executive
    branch.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer yes or no.
        Answer. Yes, consistent with the IG Act and other applicable laws,
    policies, and practices.
        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 yes or no.
        Answer. Yes, consistent with the IG Act and other applicable laws,
    policies, and practices.
        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 yes or no.
        Answer. Yes, consistent with the IG Act and other applicable laws,
    policies, and practices.
        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
    yes or no.
        Answer. Yes, consistent with the IG Act and other applicable laws,
    policies, and practices.
        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 yes or no.
        Answer. Yes, consistent with the IG Act and other applicable laws,
    policies, and practices.
        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 yes or no.
        Answer. Yes, consistent with the IG Act and other applicable laws,
    policies, and practices.
        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 yes or no.
        Answer. If confirmed as the DOD IG, I will make every effort to
    ensure that no military member, federal employee, or contractor
    employee is subject to unlawful retaliation.
                                     ______

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]

               Questions Submitted by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
         inspector general assessment of unidentified aerial phenomena
        1. Senator Gillibrand. Mr. Storch, you were asked in your
    confirmation hearing to gain familiarity with the Department of Defense
    Inspector General's ongoing assessment of the response from DOD
    components to the intrusions of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP)
    into controlled DOD airspace, including UAP activity around naval and
    air operations. Do you think that the National Security Agency (NSA)
    has been responsive to the DOD IG's inquiries?
        Mr. Storch. I have confirmed that the DOD OIG publicly announced in
    May 2021 that it was initiating an evaluation of the DOD's Actions
    Regarding Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. The stated objective of the
    evaluation is to determine the extent to which the DOD has taken
    actions regarding unidentified aerial phenomena, and the DOD OIG
    indicated, as I believe is typical, that it might revise the objective
    as the evaluation proceeds and would consider suggestions from
    management for additional or revised objectives. It is my understanding
    that this evaluation is pending. The distribution of the memorandum
    announcing the evaluation included the directors of the defense
    intelligence agencies, including the NSA, and I am not aware of any
    particular issue regarding the responsiveness of the NSA to any DOD OIG
    inquiries in connection with the matter. As NSA is within the DOD and
    the DOD OIG regularly conducts independent oversight work at the NSA, I
    believe that it is well positioned to address any such concerns. I
    would, of course, be prepared to provide any assistance to the DOD OIG
    as may be requested and appropriate consistent with the memorandum of
    understanding between our offices.

        2. Senator Gillibrand. Mr. Storch, if confirmed, do you intend to
    sustain this comprehensive assessment until it reaches an appropriate
    and logical conclusion, including the possibility of follow-on actions,
    such as audits or investigations, if the current assessment suggests a
    need to do so?
        Mr. Storch. Yes, if I am confirmed and this evaluation is pending,
    I would intend to work with the team at DOD OIG to ensure that it
    reaches an appropriate and logical conclusion, including the
    possibility of follow-on actions or investigations if the current
    assessment suggests a need to do so.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
                     question on nominees' fitness to serve
        3. Senator Hirono. Mr. Storch, since you became a legal adult, have
    you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors, or committed any
    verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
        Mr. Storch. No.

        4. Senator Hirono. Mr. Storch, have you ever faced discipline, or
    entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
        Mr. Storch. No.
        management advisories and dod support for relocation of afghan
                                   nationals
        5. Senator Hirono. Mr. Storch, if confirmed, how will you
    prioritize that significant attention is given to the manner in which
    we audit and monitor our ability to assist Afghan refugees stateside?
        Mr. Storch. If confirmed, I will work with the team at DOD OIG to
    ensure that appropriate prioritization is given to oversight of the
    ability to assist Afghan refugees stateside. I note that the DOD OIG
    has done, and is doing, related work in this area, including a recently
    released Evaluation of the Screening of Displaced Persons from
    Afghanistan, a management advisory on identifying and reporting
    possible human trafficking violations and abuse against Afghan Special
    Immigrant Visa applicants, and a number of management advisories
    relating to different locations from the Audit of DOD Support for the
    Relocation of Afghanistan Nationals, as well as what I understand to be
    a number of ongoing projects. If confirmed, I would welcome the
    opportunity to engage with the Committee regarding any specific
    concerns it may have regarding the DOD's ability to assist Afghan
    refugees stateside, and I would work with the team at the DOD OIG to
    ensure that the office is auditing and monitoring such efforts with the
    priority that they deserve.

        6. Senator Hirono. Mr. Storch, what recommendations would you
    provide to those task forces?
        Mr. Storch. At this point, I do not have the information necessary
    to make specific and authoritative recommendations in this important
    area. Consistent with my answer above, if confirmed, I would work with
    the team at DOD OIG to understand the issues as they exist at the time
    and the status of the office's pending and planned oversight
    activities, and I would welcome the opportunity to engage with the
    Committee regarding same.
                                   __________

                Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
                                vaccine mandates
        7. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, if confirmed, do you commit to
    regularly brief Congress as the implementation of DOD's COVID vaccine
    mandate progresses?
        Mr. Storch. I am aware that the DOD OIG recently issued an audit
    examining whether the DOD effectively distributed and administered
    COVID-19 vaccines to the DOD workforce in accordance with applicable
    DOD guidance. Additionally, as indicated in my Advance Policy Questions
    and my testimony at my confirmation hearing, if confirmed, I would work
    with the team at DOD OIG to assess the situation as it exists at that
    time to determine if there is additional impactful oversight that
    should be done in this area, and I would welcome the opportunity to
    engage with the Committee regarding same. I will commit to making
    myself available for briefings and otherwise commit to ensuring that
    the Congress is fully and currently informed about any problems or
    deficiencies uncovered through the OIG's oversight work in this area.

        8. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, how many voluntary and mandated
    vaccinations have been administered to DOD servicemembers using each
    vaccine by month (please include Moderna, Johnson and Johnson
    (Janssen), Pfizer-BioNTech, and Comirnaty)?
        Mr. Storch. The information requested in this question is not
    available to me as the NSA IG. I would respectfully offer that the DOD
    and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to respond to this inquiry.

        9. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, can you provide all orders and
    directives issued to DOD personnel regarding DOD's vaccine mandate?
        Mr. Storch. While I am aware of some DOD issuances that apply at
    the NSA, I am not in a position as the NSA IG to provide a
    comprehensive response to this question. Again, I would respectfully
    offer that the DOD and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to
    respond to this inquiry.

        10. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, what are the guidelines issued
    to DOD personnel regarding DOD's vaccine mandate?
        Mr. Storch. While I am aware of some DOD issuances that apply at
    the NSA, I am not in a position as the NSA IG to provide a
    comprehensive response to this question. Again, I would respectfully
    offer that the DOD and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to
    respond to this inquiry.

        11. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, will DOD provide a vaccination
    waiver acknowledging natural immunity to Active Duty military personnel
    who have been previously infected with COVID-19? If not, why not?
        Mr. Storch. The information requested in this question is not
    available to me as the NSA IG. I would respectfully offer that the DOD
    and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to respond to this inquiry.

        12. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, can you provide the total number
    of Active Duty military personnel who have not yet received a COVID-19
    vaccine and, of those, how many have received a medical or religious
    exemption?
        Mr. Storch. The information requested in this question is not
    available to me as the NSA IG. I would respectfully offer that the DOD
    and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to respond to this inquiry.

        13. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, what are the total number of
    Active Duty military personnel, broken down by branch, who have been
    subject to a discharge procedure for noncompliance with the COVID-19
    vaccine mandate?
        Mr. Storch. The information requested in this question is not
    available to me as the NSA IG. I would respectfully offer that the DOD
    and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to respond to this inquiry.

        14. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, is DOD aware of increases in
    registered diagnoses of miscarriages, cancer, or other medical
    conditions in Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) in 2021
    compared to a 5-year average from 2016 to 2020? If so, please explain
    what actions DOD has taken to investigate the root causes for the
    increases in these diagnoses.
        Mr. Storch. The information requested in this question is not
    available to me as the NSA IG. I would respectfully offer that the DOD
    and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to respond to this inquiry.

        15. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Storch, have registered diagnoses of
    myocarditis in DMED been removed from the database from January 2021 to
    December 2021? If so, please explain why and when this information was
    removed and identify who removed it.
        Mr. Storch. The information requested in this question is not
    available to me as the NSA IG. I would respectfully offer that the DOD
    and/or the DOD OIG may be better positioned to respond to this inquiry.
                                   __________

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
       council of the inspectors general on integrity and efficiency and
                                related matters
        16. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, in December 14, 2020, WilmerHale
    published a report of an independent investigation into allegations of
    misconduct by three employees at the Department of Homeland Security
    (DHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG). This reportedly cost over $1.3
    million to produce and consisted of a 108-page report that was the
    result of 70 interviews and the review of 42,000 documents. Were you or
    anyone else at Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and
    Efficiency (CIGIE) aware of any allegations addressed in the report
    that were referred to CIGIE prior to DHS retaining WilmerHale to
    conduct this investigation?
        Mr. Storch. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation by the
    CIGIE Integrity Committee (IC) related to the subject matter of this
    question, and I would be recused from any such matter due to my
    relationship with a potential witness. As a member of the IC, it would
    not be appropriate for me to further address the underlying issues or
    express any opinions regarding them, and I respectfully would refer you
    to the IC for any additional information.

        17. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, why did CIGIE decline to
    investigate these allegations, many of which were ultimately
    substantiated by the WilmerHale report? Please provide specific case
    numbers and address the merits of these referrals, with particularity.
        Mr. Storch. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation by the
    CIGIE IC related to the subject matter of this question, and I would be
    recused from any such matter due to my relationship with a potential
    witness. As a member of the IC, it would not be appropriate for me to
    further address the underlying issues or express any opinions regarding
    them, and I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional
    information.

        18. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, do you agree with the following
    legal proposition: ``[I]t is a misuse of authority for a Federal
    employee to use his or her public office to interfere with a President
    nomination or the Senate confirmation process for personal gain or any
    other improper purpose. Additionally, Federal employees should not sue
    their government resources, including the email system or access to
    lawmakers or other government officials, for personal gain or for any
    other unauthorized purpose.'' Report on page 24 of the WilmerHale
    report. If not, please explain why with citation to relevant
    authorities.
        Mr. Storch. I agree that Federal Government employees should not
    use their public office to improperly interfere with a presidential
    nomination or the Senate confirmation process. I also agree that
    Federal Government employees should not use government resources for
    unauthorized purposes. For the reasons stated above, I do not believe
    it would be appropriate for me to further address the underlying issues
    referenced in this question or express any opinions regarding how they
    might apply in any particular situation.

        19. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, on page 27 of the report,
    WilmerHale reported its finding that two DHS Office of the Inspector
    General (OIG) employees ``contacted Allison Lerner, Vice Chair of
    CIGIE, to discuss Dr. Cuffari's nomination. Ms. Costello, in her
    capacity as Acting IG [Inspector General], wrote to Ms. Lerner that she
    had `a sensitive matter related to the DHS IG nominee' to discuss. They
    agreed to speak on the phone and, following that conversation, Ms.
    Costello sent Ms. Lerner the link to a report regarding California
    Coast University. During her interview, [redacted] acknowledged that
    she and Ms. Costello spoke to Ms. Lerner about Dr. Cuffari's
    nomination, and state that they were doing so because it was in the
    best interest of the agency. According to [redacted], Ms. Lerner agreed
    that Ms. Ouzts and Ms. Costello had an obligation to protect the
    organization and figure out whether others knew that Dr. Cuffari's
    degree was issued by `a diploma mill.' Ms. Lerner declined our request
    for an interview.'' Report at page 27. Do you have any reason to
    believe that this portion of the report is inaccurate? If not, please
    explain your version of the events with particularity, including by
    reference to relevant documents.
        Mr. Storch. As stated above and consistent with standard practices
    across the investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy
    Act, I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation
    by the CIGIE IC related to the subject matter of this question, and I
    would be recused from any such matter due to my relationship with a
    potential witness. As a member of the IC, it would not be appropriate
    for me to further address the underlying issues or express any opinions
    regarding them, and I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any
    additional information.

        20. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, has CIGIE opened any investigation
    into the allegations contained on page 27 of the WilmerHale report? If
    so, please list all investigations by subject name and case number, as
    well as their dispositions. Please also produce copies of any
    investigations.
        Mr. Storch. As stated above and consistent with standard practices
    across the investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy
    Act, I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation
    by the CIGIE IC related to the subject matter of this question, and I
    would be recused from any such matter due to my relationship with a
    potential witness. I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any
    additional information.

        21. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, are there any other findings in the
    report that you believe are inaccurate? Please identify with
    particularity and provide your version of the events, including by
    reference to relevant documents.
        Mr. Storch. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation by the
    CIGIE IC related to the subject matter of this question, and I would be
    recused from any such matter due to my relationship with a potential
    witness. As a member of the IC, it would not be appropriate for me to
    further address the underlying issues or express any opinions regarding
    them, and I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional
    information.

        22. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, do you believe that it is
    appropriate for individuals to use government resources and their
    official capacity to lobby against the President's nomination of an
    individual to a Senate-confirmed position, while that nomination is
    pending before the Senate?
        Mr. Storch. I do not believe that it is appropriate for Federal
    Government employees to use government resources or their official
    positions to improperly lobby against the President's nomination of an
    individual to a Senate-confirmed position while that nomination is
    pending before the Senate. For the reasons stated above, I do not
    believe it would be appropriate for me to further address the
    underlying issues referenced in this question or express any opinions
    regarding how they might apply in any particular situation.

        23. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, please identify each allegation of
    wrongdoing that CIGIE or its associated personnel received from January
    1, 2019-present, regarding Andrew A. De Mello, Kevin Winters, John
    Kelly, Jennifer Costello, Karen Ouzts, Diana Shaw, and/or Allison
    Lerner; any CIGIE tracking or matter number(s) associated with each;
    the date that each allegation of wrongdoing was first received (and
    please produce a copy of each allegation that was received) by CIGIE or
    its associated personnel; each date that each respective allegation was
    reviewed (and by whom), all dates each was referred from the Allegation
    Review Group to the Integrity Committee (IC), all dates that each
    respective allegation was referred to the IC Chairperson for
    investigation, and all dates that each respective allegation was
    declined for investigation or otherwise closed/disregarded.
        Mr. Storch. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation by the
    CIGIE IC. I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional
    information.

        24. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, please identify whether each
    allegation identified in response to question #17, above, was fully
    investigated (with a report of investigation written--and please
    produce a copy of each) or for which there is an ongoing investigation.
    For each allegation that was not fully investigated or is being
    actively investigated, please identify all reasons each was not
    investigated. Please also provide all reasons and explanations why
    CIGIE IC decided to investigate allegations it so identified in
    response to #17, above, but not other allegations identified in
    response above.
        Mr. Storch. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation by the
    CIGIE IC. I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional
    information.

        25. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, CIGIE IC's annual report for 2020
    identifies that on June 19, 2020, allegation 20-059 was ``opened/
    referred to IC''. As of the time the allegation was opened/referred to
    IC, please identify the allegation of misconduct and describe it with
    detail and particularity (that is, before it was consolidated with
    allegations associated with 20-042). Please identify and describe with
    detail and particularity (1) all reasons why this allegation was not
    immediately investigated and was instead held in abeyance until at
    least April 14, 2021; (2) all reasons this matter was consolidated with
    20-042, which by March 17, 2021, was already in post investigation
    review; (3) all reasons why this allegation was not merged in 2020 with
    20-042 as envisioned by IC Rule 9(c); (4) how many times in the last 5
    years another allegation of misconduct was held open for more than 240
    days and thereafter consolidated with another allegation that was
    already in post investigation review and the matter numbers associated
    with each; (5) all supplemental material that CIGIE IC acquired or
    otherwise obtained regarding 20-059 during the period August 18, 2020
    to April 14, 2021; (6) all evaluations (including the dates thereof)
    regarding the next steps for the investigation of 20-059 during the
    period August 18, 2020 to April 14, 2021; (7) all the reasons why 20-
    059 (which by May 14, 2021 had been consolidated with 20-042) was
    assigned to different investigators than those that investigated many
    allegations that comprised 20-042 and all meetings (and attendees)
    where this decision--to assign it to different investigators than those
    associated with 20-042--was discussed/made; and (8) whether any of
    CIGIE's associated personnel recommended or suggested that an
    investigation of Andrew A. De Mello end, during the period September 1,
    2020-present.
        Mr. Storch. It has been my experience that the members of the CIGIE
    IC, all of whom have significant responsibilities in their own OIGs or
    other offices, work very hard to review all matters that come before
    the IC for consideration. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation by the IC
    or comment on any particular allegations or the manner in which they
    may have been handled. I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any
    additional information.

        26. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, under what circumstances is it
    appropriate for members of the IG community to lobby for or against
    legislation?
        Mr. Storch. I believe that it is entirely appropriate and
    consistent with the duties and responsibilities of Inspectors General
    under section 4 of the IG Act for members of the IG community to
    communicate with Members of Congress and their staffs, including to
    provide our perspectives on proposed legislation that may affect the
    work of our offices. Additionally, CIGIE has a standing Legislative
    Committee, the mission of which, as described on CIGIE's public
    website, includes ``soliciting the views and concerns of the community
    in response to legislative initiatives and congressional requests; and
    presenting views and recommendations to congressional committees and
    staff, the Government Accountability Office, and the Office of
    Management and Budget (OMB) on issues and legislation that broadly
    affect the IG community.'' I am aware and appreciate that CIGIE
    leadership and the Legislative Committee frequently engage with the
    Congress to provide information and represent the views and
    perspectives of the IG community, which I believe helps carry out an
    important role of OIGs in informing the legislative and oversight
    functions of Congress under the United States Constitution. I was
    pleased to participate in similar engagement, including with the
    bipartisan Senate Whistleblower Caucus, when I served as Chair of the
    CIGIE Whistleblower Ombudsperson Working Group, and I believe that
    dialogue served an important function and the engagement between the
    Working Group and the Congress was welcomed and appreciated. I also
    have engaged with the Members and staff of the committees of
    jurisdiction as the NSA IG, including providing my office's perspective
    with regard to potential legislation and, again, I believe that those
    discussions have served an important function and have been well
    received by the Congress.

        27. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, to your knowledge, did any members
    of CIGIE lobby for or against H.R. 2662? If so, please explain the
    extent of their involvement.
        Mr. Storch. It is my general understanding that CIGIE leadership
    and/or CIGIE Legislative Committee members and staff have engaged with
    the Congress regarding a number of pending legislative matters that
    would impact the IG community, and I believe this would include the
    referenced bill. I do not have more information regarding the specific
    extent of their involvement, and respectfully would refer you to CIGIE
    leadership and/or the CIGIE Legislative Committee for any additional
    information.

        28. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, did you lobby for or against H.R.
    2662 or any other bill? If so, please explain the extent of your
    efforts.
        Mr. Storch. I did not lobby for or against H.R. 2662. I have, as
    indicated above, engaged with Members and staff with regard to other
    legislative initiatives over my time in the IG community, particularly
    with regard to issues related to whistleblower protection when I served
    as Chair of the CIGIE Whistleblower Ombudsperson Working Group, and
    more recently with regard to issues related to my office's oversight
    work at NSA.

        29. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, to your knowledge, did anyone at
    CIGIE describe the actions to lobby against Republican amendments as
    equivalent to ``hand-to-hand combat'' to prevent ``bad ideas'' from
    becoming law?
        Mr. Storch. I do not have any knowledge of the matters set forth in
    this question.

        30. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, under what circumstances is it
    appropriate for CIGIE to conduct confidential conversations with career
    civil service employees about presidential nominees?
        Mr. Storch. I am not a member of CIGIE leadership and, without more
    information regarding the individuals who were party to a particular
    conversation, its substance, and its purposes, I am not able to answer
    this question. For the reasons detailed above, it would not be
    appropriate for me to further address any particular underlying issues
    or express any opinions regarding them.

        31. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, what was the extent of your
    involvement in any matter concerning Michael Ellis, formerly General
    Counsel of the National Security Agency?
        Mr. Storch. I had no involvement in the selection of Michael Ellis
    to serve as the General Counsel of the NSA or the subsequent decision
    to place him on administrative leave. The DOD OIG report on its Review
    of the Selection Process and Administrative Leave of the Former
    National Security Agency General Counsel indicated that it ``did not
    examine the conduct of the security inquiry and, therefore, referred
    that matter to the NSA IG for such action as he deems appropriate.''
    There is no further information regarding that referral that I can
    release at this time.

        32. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, why did the CIGIE integrity
    committee delay issuing its report on the investigation of Federal
    Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) IG Laura Wertheimer?
        Mr. Storch. As indicated above, it has been my experience that the
    CIGIE IC works exceptionally hard, on top of all the other
    responsibilities and duties of its membership and staff, to examine,
    evaluate, and report on a significant number of often complex matters
    in a fair, comprehensive, and timely manner. I am not aware of any
    effort to delay issuing the IC's report on the matter referenced in the
    question, and respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional
    information.

        33. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, during your time on the CIGIE
    Integrity Committee (IC), how many allegations did the IC receive in
    2019?
        Mr. Storch. I was not appointed to the IC until mid-2020. I
    respectfully would refer you to the annual report of the IC available
    on the CIGIE website at https://www.ignet.gov/content/integrity-
    committee-reports https://www.ignet.gov/content/integrity-committee-
    reports for publicly available reporting for 2019, and to the IC for
    any additional information.

        34. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, during your time on the CIGIE
    Integrity Committee (IC), how many allegations did the IC receive in
    2020?
        Mr. Storch. I respectfully would refer you to the annual report of
    the IC available on the CIGIE website at https://www.ignet.gov/content/
    integrity-committee-reports https://www.ignet.gov/content/integrity-
    committee-reports for publicly available reporting for 2020, and to the
    IC for any additional information.

        35. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, during your time on the CIGIE
    Integrity Committee (IC), how many allegations did the IC receive in
    2021?
        Mr. Storch. I respectfully would refer you to the annual report of
    the IC available on the CIGIE website at https://www.ignet.gov/content/
    integrity-committee-reports'' https://www.ignet.gov/content/integrity-
    committee-reports for publicly available reporting for 2021, and to the
    IC for any additional information.

        36. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, for each of the years identified in
    questions 33, 34, and 35, how many resulted in investigations?
        Mr. Storch. I respectfully would refer you to the reports of the IC
    available on the CIGIE website at https://www.ignet.gov/content/
    integrity-committee-reports https://www.ignet.gov/content/integrity-
    committee-reports for publicly available reporting for 2019, 2020, and
    2021, and to the IC for any additional information.

        37. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, for those investigations identified
    above, how many of these investigations exceeded 150 days?
        Mr. Storch. I respectfully would refer you to the reports of the IC
    available on the CIGIE website at https://www.ignet.gov/content/
    integrity-committee-reports https://www.ignet.gov/content/integrity-
    committee-reports for publicly available reporting for 2019, 2020, and
    2021, and to the IC for any additional information.

        38. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, is the IC's operational information
    publicly available, why or why not?
        Mr. Storch. There is substantial operational information regarding
    the IC publicly available on the CIGIE website at https://
    www.ignet.gov/cigie/committees/integrity-committee https://
    www.ignet.gov/cigie/committees/integrity-committee, including the IC
    Policies and Procedures (ICP&P), and Guidance and Frequently Asked
    Questions (FAQs). I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any
    additional information.

        39. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, has anyone ever referred an
    allegation against you to the CIGIE Integrity Committee?
        Mr. Storch. As I previously have informed the Committee, I am aware
    of two referrals that have been made against me to the CIGIE IC. In
    both instances, I was recused from consideration of the matter and both
    resulted in a determination by the IC that the matter should be closed,
    without any negative finding.

        40. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, during your time at the National
    Security Agency (NSA), have you become aware of NSA employees or anyone
    in the Intelligence Community intercepting private communications
    between U.S. citizens without proper authority, including presidential
    candidates?
        Mr. Storch. During my time as the IG at NSA, I have not become
    aware of any instances of NSA employees or others in the Intelligence
    Community engaging in such conduct.

        41. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, CIGIE Integrity Committee currently
    has several investigations open into employees of DHS OIG. What is the
    total cost of these investigations over the past 2 years?
        Mr. Storch. I am not, as indicated above, able to confirm or deny
    the existence of any CIGIE IC investigation or investigations. I also
    am not aware of the cost of any particular investigation or
    investigations, and respectfully would refer you to the IC for any
    additional information.

        42. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, how many hours have been devoted to
    these investigations?
        Mr. Storch. I am not able to confirm or deny the existence of any
    CIGIE IC investigation or investigations. I also am not aware of the
    total number of hours devoted to any particular investigation or
    investigations, and respectfully would refer you to the IC for any
    additional information. As a general matter, I believe the members of
    the IC put in substantial time to fairly, comprehensively, and timely
    review all of the matters that are considered by the IC in carrying out
    its functions.

        43. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, what allegations is CIGIE IC
    investigations against DHS OIG personnel?
        Mr. Storch. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation by the
    CIGIE IC or detail any allegations that may be under investigation. I
    respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional information.

        44. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, do you actively audit and
    investigate claims that agency employees experience adverse action
    based on their political preference?
        Mr. Storch. As the NSA IG, my office investigates a wide range of
    allegations of waste, fraud, abuse, or misconduct by NSA employees and
    affiliates. This could include a claim that an agency employee
    improperly experienced an adverse action based on their political
    preference.

        45. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, are you aware of any employees who
    experienced such negative treatment, and if so, what remedial action
    was taken?
        Mr. Storch. I cannot speak to other departments or agencies, but
    the NSA OIG has not substantiated any allegation that NSA employees
    experienced such negative treatment during my tenure as IG.

        46. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, are you aware of any employees at
    your agency who have applied for a medical or religious exemption to
    President Biden's vaccine mandate and were denied this exemption?
        Mr. Storch. I am aware that there are NSA employees who have
    applied for a medical or religious exemption to the vaccine mandate. I
    do not know if any were denied an exemption, and it is my understanding
    that the process for adjudicating exemption requests made by civilian
    employees is on hold pending litigation regarding the vaccine mandate.

        47. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, if so, how were these claims
    treated?
        Mr. Storch. As indicated in response to the prior question, I do
    not know if any claims for an exemption were denied, and it is my
    understanding that the process for adjudicating exemption requests made
    by civilian employees is on hold pending litigation regarding the
    vaccine mandate.

        48. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, has any employee at NSA been fired
    because he or she objected to President Biden's vaccine mandate?
        Mr. Storch. I am not aware of any employee at NSA having been fired
    because he or she objected to the vaccine mandate.

        49. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, has any workplace training at NSA,
    including in your office, discussed critical race theory, white guilt,
    or anti-racism?
        Mr. Storch. I cannot speak to all training conducted by the NSA,
    but my office has not conducted such training. I am, of course,
    strongly opposed to racism of any kind.

        50. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, have you or anyone at CIGIE ever
    advised a government employee to use agency resources to undermine the
    nomination of an individual to a Senate-confirmed position?
        Mr. Storch. I cannot speak for anyone else, but I have never
    advised a government employee to use agency resources to undermine the
    nomination of an individual to a Senate-confirmed position.

        51. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, have you or anyone at CIGIE ever
    tried to undermine the nomination of an individual to a Senate-
    confirmed position, while that nomination was pending before the
    Senate?
        Mr. Storch. I cannot speak for anyone else, but I have never tried
    to undermine the nomination of an individual to a Senate-confirmed
    position while that nomination was pending before the Senate.

        52. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, do you believe that such conduct is
    ever appropriate?
        Mr. Storch. I believe that the process for confirmation of nominees
    should be scrupulously followed, and that no one should try to
    improperly influence that important process.

        53. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, what do you think is the
    appropriate discipline for a Federal employee who advises an individual
    to use government resources to undermine the nomination of an
    individual to Senate-confirmed position?
        Mr. Storch. In my experience, determining appropriate discipline in
    any particular matter requires a case-by-case analysis of the facts at
    issue. Without significantly more information, I would not be able to
    provide a more detailed response to this question.

        54. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, what safeguards are in place to
    ensure that the CIGIE IC can consider allegations against members of
    CIGIE?
        Mr. Storch. Section 11(d) of the IG Act and the ICP&P and the
    Addendum thereto provide for a number of safeguards to ensure that the
    IC can appropriately consider allegations against members of CIGIE. I
    respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional information.

        55. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, may a member of CIGIE sit as a
    judge in his own case?
        Mr. Storch. Members of the IC are not judges, but rather serve more
    akin to the role of an OIG Investigations Division for allegations made
    against IGs or other senior covered persons that cannot appropriately
    be handled appropriately by an individual office consistent with
    section 11(d) of the IG Act. Section 3(K) of the ICP&P provides an
    extensive list of situations in which an IC member will be recused from
    consideration of particular matters, including in subsection (i):
    ``Matters in which that member or another person in that member's
    office or agency has personally and substantially participated.''

        56. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, may a member of CIGIE sit as a
    judge in a case against a more senior Member of CIGIE?
        Mr. Storch. Again, members of the IC do not sit as judges, but the
    IC has jurisdiction over allegations made against all IGs and covered
    persons, including CIGIE leadership.

        57. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, may a member of CIGIE sit as a
    judge in a case against a member who appointed him or her to CIGIE in
    the first place?
        Mr. Storch. Again, IC members do not sit as judges, and members are
    not appointed by other IGs to CIGIE, but either are appointed by the
    President and confirmed by the Senate as IGs and, therefore, members of
    CIGIE, or are appointed by the heads of their establishments to their
    positions for designated federal entities under the IG Act. To the
    extent this question refers to the CIGIE Chair, who appoints members to
    the IC under section 11(d) of the IG Act, I would reiterate that the IC
    has jurisdiction over allegations made against all IGs and covered
    persons, including CIGIE leadership. With regard to any particular
    relationship, section 3(K)(ii) of the ICP&P requires recusal of an IC
    member from ``[m]atters as to which the member believes that his or her
    impartiality would be questioned by a reasonable person with knowledge
    of the relevant facts.'' In my experience on the IC, this provision has
    been interpreted very broadly in favor of recusal if there is any
    possibility that a member's impartiality might be reasonably called
    into question.

        58. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, does CIGIE ensure that a separate,
    unrelated, and independent entity handles allegations against members
    of CIGIE?
        Mr. Storch. The CIGIE IC is established by Congress under section
    11(d) of the IG Act to handle allegations made against IGs or other
    covered persons within the IG community. As discussed above, the ICP&P
    contains a number of provisions calling for the recusal of members in
    various circumstances.

        59. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, are you aware of any individuals in
    the inspector general community who have filed or called in complaints
    through their own hotlines?
        Mr. Storch. I am aware of instances in which individuals in the IG
    community have utilized their offices' hotlines to confidentially or
    anonymously submit complaints or other information. Additionally, when
    I came on board as the NSA IG, I created what we call the ``IG
    Mailbag'' to provide a secure means for employees to submit
    confidential or anonymous concerns directly to my attention. My team
    and I also advise our employees that, as NSA is part of the DOD, they
    can file complaints through the DOD Hotline and, as the Agency is part
    of the Intelligence Community, they can file complaints with the
    Hotline maintained by the Inspector General for the Intelligence
    Community.

        60. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, if you were aware of any
    individuals in the inspector general community who have filed or called
    in complaints through their own hotlines, how were those matters
    handled?
        Mr. Storch. If NSA OIG employees choose to utilize our office's
    Hotline, such complaints would be handled consistently with our normal
    procedures and practices, including limitations on who has access to
    such information and the dissemination of the identity of the
    complainant as appropriate. With regard to complaints or other matters
    that have been submitted directly to me through the IG Mailbag, I read
    each one, consult with the employee to obtain any additional
    information as may be helpful if they have chosen to identify
    themselves, and take such action as I deem appropriate to address the
    matter. I do not know specifically how any complaints submitted by NSA
    OIG employees to the DOD Hotline or the Intelligence Community IG
    Hotline have been handled, though I would assume those offices would
    have followed their standard procedures for such matters.

        61. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, do you believe that such a practice
    is legally permissible?
        Mr. Storch. I do not know of any legal reason that a complaint
    cannot be submitted through an OIG employee's own OIG hotline. Section
    7(a) of the IG Act provides that the IG ``may receive and investigate
    complaints or information from an employee of the establishment . . .
    .'' While it is critical that we in the IG community maintain our
    independence from the establishments where we are located in carrying
    out our oversight functions, OIG employees are employees of the
    establishments their offices oversee, so I would think they are
    authorized to file complaints through their own office's hotline,
    should they choose to do so, of course.

        62. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, do you believe that such a practice
    is ethical?
        Mr. Storch. I do not know of any ethical prohibition on an OIG
    employee filing a complaint through their OIG's hotline. Such
    complaints may, for example, involve conduct or other things that the
    employee has witnessed at the department or agency where they work, and
    I believe it would be appropriate for employees to use the hotline as a
    means to bring such information to the attention of their office's
    Investigations Division should they choose to do so. If such a
    complaint were to involve an allegation of misconduct by OIG personnel,
    there would be an examination of any conflicts or appearances of a
    conflict and appropriate steps taken to ensure fair consideration of
    the matter. Depending on the facts and circumstances, such measures
    could include things like walling off certain personnel if an internal
    investigation can be fairly and credibly conducted by the OIG and, if
    that is not the case, obtaining the assistance of another OIG to
    independently consider the matter. Any allegations related to the IG or
    other covered persons under section 11(d) of the IG Act would be
    submitted to the IC for its consideration.

        63. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, has CIGIE ever received any
    allegation of misconduct that Deborah Jeffries withheld, failed to
    release, delayed, or otherwise altered any report? If so, please
    provide a copy of all such allegations and any report that CIGIE IC
    produced on the matter. If CIGIE IC did not open an investigation into
    this allegation of misconduct, please identify the reasons why CIGIE
    declined to do so.
        Mr. Storch. Consistent with standard practices across the
    investigative community and the requirements of the Privacy Act, I can
    neither confirm nor deny the receipt of any allegation of misconduct by
    the CIGIE IC related to any particular individual. I respectfully would
    refer you to the IC for any additional information.

        64. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, if an employee serves in an Office
    of Inspector General on detail but later leaves that office, do you
    believe that CIGIE maintains jurisdiction to investigate that
    individual?
        Mr. Storch. Section 2 of the ICP&P provides that, ``[a]t its
    discretion and consistent with the public interest (including the
    availability of an effective remedy), the IC may consider wrongdoing
    alleged to have occurred while an individual served as a Covered
    Person, even if that individual is no longer a Covered Person or in
    government service when the IC receives the allegation.'' This is
    consistent with what I understand to be CIGIE's position and a prior
    determination by the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel, and
    I respectfully would refer you to the IC for any additional
    information.

        65. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, what safeguards are in place to
    prevent partisan investigations into political appointees in inspector
    general offices who leave when their term expires?
        Mr. Storch. With regard to the CIGIE IC, section 1 of the ICP&P
    provides as follows:
        Members of the Inspector General community are charged with
    protecting the integrity, efficiency, and economy of the Federal
    government and its programs, activities, and operations. To maintain
    public trust, all Inspector General community members must adhere to
    high standards of official conduct and are accountable in the event
    that they fall short of those standards. The statutory mandate of the
    Integrity Committee (``IC'') of the Council of the Inspectors General
    on Integrity and Efficiency (``CIGIE'') is to receive, review, and
    refer for investigation allegations of wrongdoing made against
    Inspectors General or Acting Inspectors General who are members of
    CIGIE (``IGs''), designated members of the senior staffs of those IGs,
    and the Special Counsel and Deputy Special Counsel of the Office of
    Special Counsel (``OSC''), and to ensure the fair, consistent, timely,
    and impartial disposition of allegations that fall within the IC's
    statutory mandate.
        These policies and procedures (``Policies''), required by section
    11(d)(7)(B) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C.
    app. (``IG Act''), were adopted by the IC in conjunction with the CIGIE
    Chairperson, and in consultation with the Public Integrity Section
    (``PIN'') of the Department of Justice (``DOJ'') and the OSC.
        IGs are themselves appointed ``without regard political
    affiliation'' pursuant to section 3(a) of the IG Act, and such
    nonpartisanship is a bedrock principle in the IG system. In my
    experience on the IC and in the OIGs where I have worked, I have never
    seen partisanship play any role in any investigation.

        66. Senator Hawley. Mr. Storch, in your capacity as Inspector
    General for the National Security Agency, under what authority did you
    provide yourself a pay raise?
        Mr. Storch. I have never provided myself a pay raise. As I
    previously informed the Committee, I learned the week before my
    confirmation hearing that a question had been raised as to whether I
    may have been overpaid by NSA, upon which my office relies for
    processing a variety of human resources (HR) functions, by $2,700 in
    2019 and $7,700 in 2020. I immediately looked into the matter, and I
    was informed by the NSA senior leadership office that it and the NSA
    Office of General Counsel--apparently with DOD approval at the time but
    without consulting with me or my office--had determined that it was
    appropriate to apply the government-wide cost of living adjustment
    (COLA) to my pay in 2019, and that this was followed in 2020, both
    within the cap applicable to the pay schedule at which I came to work
    here. I further was informed that, in 2021, the Agency decided not to
    apply the COLA to my pay (which is direct-deposited into my wife's and
    my savings) because of the pay freeze for political appointees, and
    that the Department had conducted a review of IG pay across the defense
    intelligence components. While my office and I again were not consulted
    on any of this, I am responsible for my pay and I unambiguously
    informed the Agency officials with whom I spoke, and reiterated to the
    Committee, that I never intended to receive and would not keep any
    funds if there was any question at all that they were appropriate. I
    instructed my HR lead to follow up and, specifically, to reach out to
    CIGIE for guidance--my understanding is that the issue is still being
    researched and I will, as indicated above, immediately repay any and
    all funds that it is determined may have been incorrectly paid to me.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Honorable Robert P. Storch
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Honorable Robert P. Storch,
    which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
    nomination was referred, follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
    nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
    requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
    form that details the biographical, financial, and other
    information of the nominee. The form executed by Honorable
    Robert P. Storch in connection with his nomination follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

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

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Honorable Robert P. Storch was reported
    to the Senate by Chairman Reed on March 8, 2022, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on November 30, 2022.]
                                     ______

        [Prepared questions submitted to Dr. Lester Martinez-Lopez
    by Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                         department of defense reforms
        Question. The National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years
    2017, 2018, and 2019 included some of the most significant personnel
    reforms of the Department of Defense since the Goldwater-Nichols
    Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986.
        Do you support these reforms?
        Answer. Yes, the congressionally directed reforms of the Military
    Health System provide an opportunity for the Military Health System to
    modernize, ensure the force is medically ready, and the medical force
    is ready, and best position the Military Health System and the
    Department for the challenges it will confront in the years ahead.
        Question. What other areas for defense personnel reform do you
    believe might be appropriate for this Committee to address?
        Answer. While the Military Health System has made significant
    progress in implementing the reforms required by law, it is not yet
    complete. If confirmed, I will examine the current implementation
    status, as well as identify any potential gaps, and work with Congress
    as needed to identify any future areas for focused action.
                                 qualifications
        Question. What background and experience do you have that qualify
    you for this position?
        Answer. My experience leading large medical organizations across my
    31-year career in the U.S. Army and in the civilian sector has prepared
    me for this position. I have learned how to lead large organizations
    and ensure they deliver high quality health care. My final military
    assignment was serving as the Commanding General of the U.S. Army
    Medical Research and Materiel Command and Fort Detrick, Maryland. In
    addition, I had the honor of commanding three hospitals, serving as the
    medical officer in charge of two international disaster relief efforts
    in Haiti and Central America, serving as Forces Command Surgeon, and
    commanding the Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine, an
    organization like the CDC of DOD. After leaving the Army, I directed an
    academic teaching hospital in Houston, Texas, and was a Chief Medical
    Officer of a large hospital in Tampa, Florida. I believe that these
    military and civilian experiences qualify me for this position.
        Question. Are there are any actions you should take to enhance your
    current ability to perform the duties of the Assistant Secretary of
    Defense for Health Affairs (ASD(HA))?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will strive to work with our valued
    stakeholders to better understand the key challenges facing the
    Military Health System. In order to obtain this understanding I will
    seek input and collaboration from many stakeholders, including
    Secretary Austin, Under Secretary Cisneros, ASD(HA) staff,
    Congressional leaders, Service leadership, Combatant Command
    leadership, interagency leaders, and military and patients advocacy
    groups.
                                     duties
        Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
    the ASD(HA)?
        Answer. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs
    (ASD(HA)) is the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense and the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness for all DOD
    health and force health protection policies, programs, and activities.
    The ASD(HA) is also responsible for execution of the Department's
    medical mission, including providing and maintaining readiness for
    medical services during military operations and for ensuring the health
    of the members of the Military Services, their families and other
    eligible beneficiaries. To do this, the ASD(HA) is responsible for
    developing policies, and providing oversight of the health care system.
    Other responsibilities include effectively governing the management of
    DOD health and medical programs, the sponsorship and oversight of
    medical research and development, and medical education and training.
    Good stewardship of the Defense Health Program (DHP) appropriation and
    effective use of taxpayer dollars is another major responsibility of
    the ASD(HA). The ASD(HA) also serves as a key leader within the
    Department for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) response,
    supporting the Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Defense,
    developing and implementing Force Health Protection and other policies
    that ensure the safety of the Department's personnel. I also understand
    that the ASD(HA) is one of the leads within the Department on ensuring
    the care of those individuals affected by Anomalous Health Incidents
    (AHI), working both within the Department and with other government
    agencies and departments on this issue.
        Question. If confirmed, what duties and functions do you expect the
    Secretary of Defense to prescribe for you?
        Answer. If confirmed, I expect that the Secretary will prescribe
    duties and functions in accordance with the responsibilities described
    above.
                          major challenges/priorities
        Question. In your view, what are the major challenges confronting
    the next ASD(HA)?
        Answer. In my view, there are three major challenges facing the
    next ASD(HA). The first is the completion of the congressionally
    directed Military Health System reforms. It is my understanding that
    much has been accomplished in recent years: most notably the transfer
    of most military medical treatment facilities to the authority,
    direction, and control of DHA, and the establishment of most DHA
    markets. It is my understanding that the transfer of congressionally
    directed public health and research and development organizations and
    program to the DHA is still in progress. In the coming years, even as
    the ``geography of reform'' is solidified, we must ensure the proper
    execution of these reforms, and grow the connective tissue and culture
    required. For the ASD(HA), that will mean exercising proper oversight,
    direction, and providing appropriate guidance to ensure these reforms
    accomplish the aims of enhancing the readiness of our Force and medical
    force, while providing the benefit and care that our servicemembers,
    families, retirees, and other beneficiaries deserve.
        The second challenge I see is, amidst continuing reform, ensuring
    that we achieve and maintain a high level of medical readiness in
    support of the National Defense Strategy. In my view, the ASD(HA) must
    both safeguard medical readiness and fulfill our commitment to our
    various beneficiary populations. In light of a continually evolving
    threat picture, I believe the next ASD(HA) must place a premium on
    ensuring we have a deployable health force that can support the rest of
    our formations.
        Finally, I anticipate a challenge in continuing to manage the
    COVID-19 response by supporting the Department and its U.S. Government
    partners. It is my understanding that the Office of the ASD(HA) has led
    or contributed to almost every major initiative the Department has
    undertaken regarding the COVID-19 response, from the development of
    Force Health Protection policies to supporting COVID-19 domestic
    assistance deployments. In my view, the next ASD(HA) will need to
    continue those efforts, assuring the readiness of our Force, mitigating
    any impacts to the DHP, and managing any other second and third order
    effects to the Military Health System from the pandemic.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you address each of those
    challenges? Please be specific in your responses.
        Answer. Regarding Military Health System reform, if confirmed, I
    will bring myself fully up to speed on the current status. I will
    engage with my colleagues in the Military Health System, such as the
    Surgeons General, the Joint Staff Surgeon, and the Director of the DHA,
    to identify current challenges and obstacles, as well as what specific
    actions and assistance they need from the ASD(HA). If confirmed, I will
    also engage other senior leaders in the Department who may have
    equities in Military Health System reform, such as the Secretaries of
    the Military Departments, and COCOM Commanders, to identify areas of
    collaboration and progress and ways to overcome any obstacles. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that the Office of the ASD(HA) works closely
    with all parties involved in reform, while exercising effective
    oversight and support as required.
        Regarding health readiness, if confirmed, I will work with
    colleagues in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, especially Under
    Secretary Cisneros and Assistant Secretary Skelly, the Joint Staff, and
    the Military Departments to better understand and assess our current
    level of readiness, anticipated needs, relevant efforts currently
    underway in the Department, and how I might better understand, assist,
    and lead these efforts. If confirmed, I will continuously monitor
    progress in this area and remain connected with other leaders across
    the Department whose ability to accomplish their missions depends on
    the readiness of our formations and medical forces.
        Regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, if confirmed, I will first engage
    with all the major stakeholders in the Department engaged in COVID-19
    response, so I can understand the full scope of the Department's COVID-
    19 activities. If confirmed, I will seek to understand how COVID-19 is
    impacting other elements of the Military Health System, like the
    provision of medical care, staffing, and budgeting, and what actions
    the Military Health System is, or should be, taking to address these
    impacts. If confirmed, I will ensure the Office of the ASD(HA) supports
    the Department and the interagency in the COVID-19 response. Finally, I
    understand that the Department is conducting a Biodefense Posture
    Review, in part in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to better
    posture the Department for future biological threats. If confirmed, I
    will work within the Department and with other Federal agencies and
    departments, as needed, to implement any lessons learned and
    recommendations that come out of the Biodefense Posture Review.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your top priorities for the
    military health system (MHS)?
        Answer. If I am confirmed, my top priority will be readiness--both
    the readiness of the DOD medical force and the medical readiness of the
    DOD Force. If confirmed, I will ensure the completion and of
    congressionally directed Military Health System reforms.
        Continuing to ensure the Total Force is protected from COVID-19 is
    another important priority, and is also directly linked to readiness.
    If I am confirmed, managing the COVID-19 pandemic and preparing for
    future biological threats, as described above, will be central to many
    of my activities as the ASD(HA).
        A third priority is ensuring DOD continues to address mental health
    challenges within the military, and preventing suicide among all DOD
    personnel. If confirmed, I will support the Department in increased
    emphasis in this area.
        If I am confirmed, my other priorities would include overseeing the
    rollout of the new electronic health record, MHS GENESIS and working
    with the Department of Veterans Affairs to assist its implementation of
    its electronic health record, supporting the Department's and U.S.
    Government's work on Anomalous Health Incidents, and other Presidential
    and Secretary of Defense Initiatives.
                            relations with congress
        Question. What are your views on the state of the relationship
    between the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
    Affairs (OASD(HA)) and the Senate Armed Services Committee in
    particular, and with Congress in general?
        Answer. In my view, the relationship between the Office of the
    ASD(HA) and the Senate Armed Services Committee and Congress is
    crucial, and one of the most important relationships the ASD(HA) will
    have. In my view, it is vital that Office of the ASD(HA) have a strong,
    open, transparent, and trust-based relationship with the Senate Armed
    Services Committee and Congress. If confirmed, I will do everything in
    my power to ensure this relationship is robust and enduring.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
    productive and mutually beneficial relationship between Congress and
    the OASD(HA)?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the relationship between
    Congress and the Office of the ASD(HA) is founded upon trust and
    transparency. If confirmed, I pledge that Congress will have open lines
    of communication to the Office of the ASD(HA), that the Office will
    provide regular updates to Congress, and respond quickly and ably to
    any inquiries or requests for information. If confirmed, I will also
    continue to participate in regular updates to the House and Senate
    Armed Services Committee, as I understand is the current practice of
    the Office of the ASD(HA) and the DHA Director.
                           national defense strategy
        Question. If confirmed, how would you position the MHS to support
    more fully the Department's National Defense Strategy?
        Answer. One of the central ways that the Military Health System
    supports the Department's National Defense Strategy is through ensuring
    the medical readiness of the Force and a ready medical Force. Reforms
    the Department is currently implementing seek to sustain and enhance
    the direct care system's ability to support readiness. This, in turn,
    supports the warfighter. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the
    Military Health System is positioned to support the National Defense
    Strategy. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Military Health System
    continues its focus on supporting the warfighter, by ensuring the
    Military Health System is prepared for conflict, and its military
    medical providers have the skills needed in the event they are needed
    to support the national defense.
        Question. If confirmed, what immediate changes would you make in
    the MHS to support the National Defense Strategy better?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will immediately work to better understand
    how the MHS is supporting the National Defense Strategy and I will
    undertake any needed adjustments to fully support the National Defense
    Strategy.
                        managing the cost of health care
        Question. In your view, what is the greatest threat to the long-
    term viability of the military health system?
        Answer. The greatest threat to the long term viability of the
    Military Health System is managing the growth in health care costs
    while ensuring medical readiness and the care of our servicemembers,
    retirees and family members are not compromised. Rising health care
    costs are directly impacting the Department. The Department must
    continue to strive to find innovative ways to reduce costs in both the
    direct care system and private sector care, while ensuring a medically
    ready force and ready medical force to meet our national security
    goals, and sustain the health benefit our servicemembers, retirees, and
    their families rely on and deserve.
        Question. What is your assessment of the long-term impact of the
    Department's health care costs on military readiness and overall
    national security?
        Answer. Rising health care costs are a national problem, and the
    Department is not immune to those pressures. The Department must
    continue to provide a robust benefit, both as a way to attract and
    retain military personnel, and as an earned benefit for those who spend
    their career in the military. However, as those costs rise above the
    general growth in the Department's budget, there is the real risk that
    these rising costs will compete with resources needed to invest in
    readiness and reforms as well as the Department's other priorities in
    support of our national security needs. The Department must continue to
    transform the Military Health System to assure readiness and
    effectiveness while realizing efficiencies and eliminate unnecessary
    duplication.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to mitigate the
    effect of the Department's medical costs on the Department's budget
    top-line, while simultaneously implementing programs to improve health
    outcomes and to enhance the experience of care for all beneficiaries?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will lead the ongoing transformation of the
    Military Health System, focusing on organizational, infrastructure, and
    manpower changes. It is my understanding that the transition to a
    market-based structure to manage military hospitals and clinics is
    already underway and should lead to greater standardization,
    efficiencies, and lowering of operating costs. This, in turn, will free
    up resources to invest in readiness and continue providing our
    beneficiaries with access to the high quality care they deserve. I will
    ensure we maintain focus on performance measures, to ensure the
    Military Health System is meeting its health-outcome and quality-of-
    care goals, and on the Department's shift toward value-based care.
    Under value-based care, as in the civilian sector, the Department would
    pay for the quality of the health outcome instead of simply the
    quantity of services provided.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to create a value-based
    military health system--a system that delivers quality health care and
    improves health outcomes for beneficiaries at reasonable costs both to
    beneficiaries and to the Department?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will pursue or maintain efforts to update
    the Military Health System's business model to include resource
    incentives based on patient outcomes for both the direct care system
    and private sector care. In theory, by incorporating this value-based
    health care delivery model, the Military Health System should
    experience better health outcomes, lower costs, and achieve higher
    patient satisfaction. If confirmed, I will work with key stakeholders
    within the Department to identify areas where the Military Health
    System can gain efficiencies to further control or lower costs by
    prioritizing staffing at military medical treatment facilities and
    reducing unnecessary variation and duplication of effort, all while
    assuring these better health outcomes. If confirmed, I will also
    determine the cost of sustaining medical readiness and develop a way to
    better express the value of our system to assist Department of Defense
    senior leaders in making future resourcing decisions given our
    constrained fiscal environment.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific reforms in medical
    infrastructure, benefits, benefit management, contract acquisition,
    military provider productivity, military-civilian provider mix, and
    medical personnel end strengths would you implement to improve medical
    readiness and to help control the per capita costs of health care
    provided by the Department? Please address each issue separately.
        Answer. If confirmed, I will engage in a comprehensive review of
    our medical infrastructure with a goal to modernize and invest in
    military medical treatment facilities and the benefit in support of
    readiness and health care delivery for servicemembers, retirees, and
    their families. If confirmed, I will continue efforts to enhance
    TRICARE to support access to high value care for covered beneficiaries.
    If confirmed, I will also continue the Department's efforts to
    establish and ensure compliance with provider productivity standards.
    If confirmed, I will direct the development of manpower models to
    standardize provider-to-support staffing ratios by specialty area and
    determine the optimal military and civilian medical force mix required
    to support deployments and maintain continuity of operations within our
    military medical treatment facilities.
        Question. In your view, has the MHS adopted methods to analyze cost
    effectiveness relative to clinical and readiness outcomes?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the MHS has adopted funding
    models to analyze cost effectiveness for markets and military medical
    treatment facilities) relative to clinical and readiness outcomes.
    These funding models apply a mix of capitation and value-based
    purchasing concepts to better control costs while incentivizing
    improvements in quality. If confirmed, I will support continued efforts
    to enhance and refine value-based resourcing decisions.
        Question. In a recent audit of the Defense Health Agency's
    reporting of improper payment estimates for the Military Health
    Benefits (MHB) Program, the DOD Inspector General determined that the
    Defense Health Agency (DHA) is unable to identify improper payments
    effectively and will not produce a reliable improper payment estimate
    for the MHB Program for fiscal year 2021.
        If confirmed, what actions would you take to address these findings
    by the DOD IG?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would direct the Defense Health Agency
    (DHA) to ensure any improper payment audits are in alignment with the
    statutory definition of what constitutes an improper payment. I would
    have the DHA explore sampling methodologies and scenarios to determine
    the best way to detect improper payments. Finally, I would explore
    adding requirements to the TRICARE contracts in order to support the
    improper payment annual audit, in accordance with applicable law.
        Question. The recently-enacted National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2022 includes a provision that would authorize the
    Department of Defense to establish a program to prevent and remedy
    fraud and abuse in the health care programs of the Department.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to address
    fraud and abuse in the MHS?
        Answer. If confirmed, at the discretion of the Secretary of
    Defense, I would work with the DOD Inspector General to expand the
    DHA's fraud and abuse program to investigate and aggressively pursue
    civil monetary penalties to recoup any payments made under false
    pretenses, as defined by law, towards the DOD and the Military Health
    System. Additionally, I would reach out to my counterparts within the
    Department of Health and Human Services and the health insurance
    industry to identify any lessons learned and best practices when
    establishing a fraud and abuse programs.
                         medical provider productivity
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to improve provider
    productivity in the MHS?
        Answer. The Military Health System is unique and different than a
    civilian health care system because it must meet two missions:
    supporting the readiness of the Force and taking care of its
    beneficiaries through the provision of a health care benefit.
    Therefore, it is difficult to measure provider productivity, especially
    military provider productivity, using civilian health care benchmarks.
    If confirmed, I will continue the Military Health System's efforts to
    improve provider productivity and explore new methodologies to better
    measure provider productivity that values the unique readiness mission
    that sets us apart from the civilian sector.
        Question. How does low provider productivity impact beneficiaries'
    access to care?
        Answer. As a physician, I recognize we can only provide care to
    those patients who are able to schedule an appointment. If a provider
    does not have an adequate number of appointments to meet demand, access
    suffers. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's efforts to
    monitor compliance with productivity standards to support access to
    care for our beneficiaries.
        Question. In your view, is provider productivity impacted by the
    Department's inability or failure to provide adequate administrative or
    ancillary clinical resources to relieve providers of administrative
    burdens that may limit their time for patient encounters?
        Answer. Provider productivity can be impacted by a variety of
    factors such as lack of human capital, poor workflows/processes, and/or
    inefficient technology. My understanding is that, to address the two
    latter factors, the Department is transitioning to a new electronic
    health record, MHS Genesis, which has already shown improvement in
    clinical workflows. In terms of human capital, it is my understanding
    that the Department is working to establish standard processes to
    reduce administrative burdens. If confirmed, I will continue these
    efforts and commit to establishing and resourcing clinical support
    staff based on validated manpower models to enhance provider efficiency
    and productivity.
        Question. In your view, how does medical procedure volume and
    complexity relate to the readiness of military medical providers to
    provide casualty care in a deployed environment?
        Answer. Medical procedure volume and complexity is critical to
    ensuring the readiness of military medical providers and their health
    care teams. Indeed, studies have demonstrated that providers who have
    higher medical procedure volume and complexity achieve better patient
    outcomes. We want providers to practice the full scope of their
    privileges. It is my understanding the MHS is developing sets of
    expeditionary Knowledge, Skills and Abilities for various medical
    occupational skill sets to be able to assure adequate case volume and
    complexity to assure clinical readiness. If confirmed, I will ensure
    the Department continues efforts to increase the volume and complexity
    of care provided in its military medical treatment facilities to
    support case mix in critical wartime specialties.
        Question. In your view, do all current military treatment
    facilities (MTFs) serve as operational medical readiness training
    platforms? Please explain.
        Answer. Yes; in my view as a physician and a former military
    medical officer, I believe all current military medical treatment
    facilities serve as operational medical readiness training platforms.
    Although many people believe only surgical and critical care
    specialties support operational readiness training platforms, I
    recognize that almost all specialties support operational medical
    readiness. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's efforts to
    optimize primary care at all military medical treatment facilities to
    meet readiness needs. Without a strong primary care platform, our
    servicemembers will not be medically ready to deploy. It is also my
    understanding that the Department is focusing medicine and surgical
    specialty capabilities at larger military medical treatment facilities
    to ensure sufficient volume and case mix are available to support
    providers and health care teams with critical wartime currency. If
    confirmed, I will continue these efforts.
                     military health system reorganization
        Question. Section 702 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2017 transferred direct oversight and management of
    military hospitals and clinics from the Services to the Defense Health
    Agency (DHA).
        If confirmed, how will you enhance DHA's operations to ensure
    simultaneously the medical readiness of military forces and the
    readiness of the military medical force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the transformation of the
    Military Health System with a keen focus on balancing resources and
    reducing any remaining duplication of responsibilities between the
    Defense Health Agency (DHA) and the Military Medical Departments. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that the DHA and Military Medical Departments
    have assessed organizational structures and required resources. I will
    use these assessments to optimize the Military Health System to support
    a medically ready force and a ready medical force. Additionally, I will
    ensure the Military Health System and all its components operate in a
    mutually supporting culture to standardize military medicine,
    adequately size our system to support readiness and our patients'
    needs, and design clinical and business processes to increase value. I
    applaud the progress over the past several years, but there is much
    work to be done to fully realize the potential of the Military Health
    System transformation.
        Question. What outcome measures has the Department developed to
    help determine the effectiveness of this transition?
        Answer. The Department previously established measures to assess
    the effectiveness of the Military Health System transition, and if
    confirmed, I will review these measures as one of my first priorities.
    My understanding is that the DHA and Military Medical Departments are
    on track to complete military medical and dental treatment facility
    transition activities this fiscal year, and I will hold them
    accountable to meet that mark. In pursuit of improving the overall
    performance of the Military Health System, if confirmed, I will support
    the DHA's performance management framework, which is effectively
    designed to advance the Quadruple Aim of Improved Readiness, Better
    Care, Better Health, and Lower Cost. If confirmed, I will pursue both
    near-term and longer-term opportunities to change the trajectory of
    cost growth by building value while improving the health of those we
    serve.
                               section 703c study
        Question. Section 703c of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2017 required
    the Department to update the previous MHS Modernization Study
    accomplished in 2015, to address the restructuring or realignment of
    MTFs. Updates to this study were delayed by COVID-19.
        How has the Department's experience with COVID-19 affected its
    analysis for restructuring or realignment of MTFs?
        Answer. As the question notes, it is my understanding that the
    Department paused all section 703-related transition efforts to ensure
    adequate resources were available to support the COVID-19 pandemic
    response. It is my understanding that the Department revalidated its
    assumptions in the initial analysis for restructuring or realignment of
    military medical treatment facilities and updated its recommendations
    for each facility to account for changes in both DOD staffing and the
    impact to local health care systems' capacities and capabilities.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to shift more beneficiary
    care to the private sector in locations where direct care costs are
    significantly higher than private sector care?
        Answer. In my view, shifting beneficiary care to the private sector
    should be based on a variety of factors, of which cost savings is just
    one. Such other factors may include both the capability and capacity of
    care in the military medical treatment facility and the network
    surrounding it, as well as the quality of providers in the area
    surrounding the military medical treatment facility. If confirmed, I
    will ensure the Department is examining all of these factors to ensure
    that readiness is sustained and that our beneficiaries will have
    adequate access to quality care as part of determining if shifting care
    to the private sector.
        Question. In your view, how could the MHS better match and/or
    cross-level military provider assignments to demand signals that may
    change quickly in a given medical market?
        Answer. The MHS should ensure it is developing demand-based
    manpower standards, and apply those standards to staff military medical
    treatment facilities through a deliberate human capital distribution
    plan. If confirmed, I will seek to staff military medical treatment
    facilities with an optimal mix of military, civilian and contract
    medical personnel which will allow the Department to respond to
    changing demand signals and access to care in an agile manner.
        Question. Does this study demonstrate that the MHS must re-think
    assignment of certain specialty providers to locations where demand is
    consistently high so that those providers with critical skills required
    in combat can maintain their proficiency?
        Answer. Yes. The Military Health System primary goals are to ensure
    a medically ready force to execute the National Defense Strategy, and
    to develop and maintain a ready medical force to support the
    requirements of our Combatant Commanders. With this premise in mind,
    the study demonstrates the Department's decision to align their key
    specialty providers at military medical treatment facility platforms
    that have the volume and complexity of medical cases necessary to
    maintain their medical skill proficiency is right.
        Question. In your view, should the Department establish specialty
    care centers of excellence in specific markets with high demand for
    those specialty procedures?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will explore the feasibility of enhancing
    specialty care at locations with higher demand for certain types of
    care. This should be based on the importance of such care to optimize
    case mix complexity in support of critical wartime skills and great
    health outcomes. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's current
    efforts to modernize the direct care system by prioritizing resources
    at military medical treatment facilities with the greatest potential to
    support readiness and reduce health care costs. These locations could
    potentially be considered future centers of excellence. In locations
    where it is not feasible to do so, or where it makes more sense to
    outsource care to the private sector, I will work with the Department
    to ensure our beneficiaries receive the same quality care in our
    TRICARE network.
                          tricare contract acquisition
        Question. Section 705 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2017 requires the Department of Defense to develop a new
    medical contract acquisition strategy that: 1) ensures maximum
    flexibility in provider network design and development; 2) integrates
    medical management between military medical treatment facilities and
    network providers; 3) maximizes use of telehealth services; 4) uses
    value-based reimbursement methods that transfer financial risk to
    health care providers and managed care support contractors; 5) uses
    prevention and wellness incentives to encourage beneficiaries to seek
    health care services from high-value providers; 6) implements a
    streamlined enrollment process and timely assignment of primary care
    managers; 7) eliminates the requirement to seek authorization of
    referrals for specialty care services; 8) uses incentives to encourage
    certain beneficiaries to engage in medical and lifestyle intervention
    programs; and 9) uses financial incentives for contractors and health
    care providers to receive an equitable share in cost savings resulting
    from improvement in health outcomes and the experience of care for
    beneficiaries.
        In your view, do the DHA's proposed T-5 managed care support
    contracts fully adhere to each of the requirements of the acquisition
    strategy required by section 705?
        Answer. Yes. Based upon my understanding of the proposed fifth
    generation of TRICARE managed support contracts (T-5) request for
    proposal, the Defense Health Agency aligned the contract requirements
    with the law. In my view, the T-5 contract uses a transformational
    strategy and is designed with pre-planned product improvements over the
    contract lifecycle. Per my understanding, some of the section 705
    requirements will require pilots and demonstrations to ready the
    TRICARE program for any potentially necessary regulatory or statutory
    changes.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that implementation of
    these new requirements in DHA's contracts comply with the law?
        Answer. If confirmed, consistent with law I will review the T-5
    acquisition strategy, review the plan, and monitor the transition to
    the new contract awardees. I will also monitor the implementation of
    the T-5 contracts to ensure they comply with section 705 and other
    applicable law.
                             academic health system
        Question. Section 734 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2020 authorized the Secretary of Defense to establish an
    Academic Health System in the National Capital Region (NCR) to
    integrate the healthcare, health professions education, and medical
    research activities of the MHS in that region.
        What is your view of the value to the MHS of an Academic Health
    System in the NCR?
        Answer. It is my view that the Academic Health System in the NCR
    would improve quality care, produce advances in clinical research, and
    establish excellence in graduate medical education. Research on the
    Academic Health System model has shown that the model produces these
    outcomes. One part of the Academic Health System is Graduate Military
    Education. It is my understanding that the Uniformed Sciences
    University coordinates all Graduate Military Education in the National
    Capital Region. If confirmed, I will work with the DHA, USUHS, and the
    Military Medical Departments to ensure they have established policies
    and actions to achieve these outcomes.
        Question. If confirmed, what will you do to develop and implement
    an Academic Health System in the NCR?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would direct the Defense Health Agency, in
    partnership with the Uniformed Sciences University, to evaluate the
    establishment of an Academic Health System in the NCR but would suggest
    this concept could be expanded beyond the NCR to other MHS Graduate
    Medical Education locations.
                 performance of managed care support contracts
        Question. In the past, the transition to new managed care support
    contracts has not gone smoothly. Transition issues have included
    inability of call centers to handle call volumes; inability to complete
    requested beneficiary and provider enrollments; inadequate network
    development; inaccurate network provider directories; issues with
    referral backlogs, accuracy, and denials; and clear and legible
    admission and discharge reports.
        If confirmed, what will you do to prevent similar problems during
    the T-5 managed care support contract transition?
        Answer. Transitions of Managed Care Support Contracts are
    inherently risky due to the millions of beneficiaries involved and the
    complexity of the TRICARE program. If confirmed, I will exercise proper
    oversight, and ensure the DHA establishes a T-5 transition manager and
    develops risk mitigation strategies for any issues identified in
    previous transitions. In addition, the Government Accountability Office
    made recommendations on improvements to future transitions (GAO-20-39--
    Opportunities to Improve Future TRICARE Managed Care Support Contract
    Transitions). If confirmed, I will ensure these recommendations are
    incorporated into DHA internal operations. In addition, I understand
    the DHA published performance guarantees in the T-5 RFP to address
    critical areas of the transition that will help ensure contractor
    compliance with transition goals. As with any complex transition, one
    key will be ensuring sound decision making processes for issues raised.
    If confirmed, I will make sure decision-making is streamlined to reduce
    any issues during the transition.
                 value-based health care demonstration programs
        Question. The DHA has implemented a value-based health care
    demonstration program in the Atlanta, Georgia metro area with Kaiser
    Permanente (KP) through its managed care support contractor, Humana
    Military. Under the demonstration, however, DHA and Humana Military
    have prevented KP from utilizing the full extent of its successful
    health care delivery model. In the Committee's view, this may result in
    a less than optimal analysis of the potential for such health plans to
    deliver value-based health care to TRICARE beneficiaries at potentially
    lower cost to the Department. Additionally, the Department has told the
    Committee that it will develop and implement additional value-based
    health care demonstrations soon after the transition to the T-5 managed
    care support contracts.
        If confirmed, would you support the expansion of value-based health
    care demonstrations under the TRICARE program with the inclusion of
    high-value network providers such as Accountable Care Organizations
    already established throughout the country?
        Answer. The T-5 Request for Proposals specifies that the Defense
    Health Agency may conduct Competitive Plan Demonstrations in up to 23
    geographic areas. Unlike the Accountable Care Demonstration, these
    demonstrations may award direct contracts to competitive high-value
    network providers and health plans for beneficiary enrollment in these
    areas. If confirmed, I will support these demonstrations. By analyzing
    the outcomes of cost, quality, experience, and efficiency, I will
    support either expansion of the demonstrations or seek regulatory and,
    if necessary, statutory changes needed to implement competition across
    the TRICARE program.
                          tricare dental program (tdp)
        Question. The Committee has strongly encouraged the Department to
    develop a next-generation TDP that would give eligible beneficiaries
    more choices of dental health plans administered by a third party
    provider, similar to the Office of Personnel Management's FEDVIP
    program. The most current iteration of the Department's draft plan,
    however, falls woefully short of the Committee's expectations. In fact,
    the current draft fails to deliver a plan to provide high quality
    dental care provider networks, more beneficiary dental choices, and
    central administration of various dental health plans like the FEDVIP
    Program on a reasonable, timely schedule.
        If confirmed, what will you do to ensure that the DHA delivers,
    without delay, a modern, innovative plan to address the Committee's
    expectations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the TRICARE Dental Program
    (TDP) team and DHA leadership to ensure we develop a next-generation
    TDP that addresses our beneficiaries' needs and contributes to family
    readiness while improving the quality, access, and affordability.
    Ensuring access to quality dental provider networks should be a
    cornerstone of a new TDP contract. If confirmed, I will ensure that DHA
    is identifying beneficiary needs for choice into the TDP. If confirmed,
    I also pledge to work with Congress to ensure we have the best dental
    plan for our eligible beneficiaries.
                                  mhs genesis
        Question. The Department of Defense has engaged in a deliberate
    phased deployment of MHS Genesis, its new electronic health record
    system (EHR). This careful deployment involved operational testing that
    identified and facilitated correction of implementation challenges,
    facilitating subsequent successful deployments to different health care
    settings, where other challenges are identified and addressed.
        What is your assessment of MHS Genesis, and of the Department's
    strategy for a phased deployment of this new electronic health system?
        Answer. In my assessment of MHS GENESIS, the deployment is
    positive. It is my understanding that the Department is on track for
    the system to be fully deployed by the end of 2023. Since MHS GENESIS
    is being deployed throughout the entire Military Health System, a
    phased approach to the deployment should enable experts to identify and
    address unforeseen challenges, and make corrections on an as needed
    basis while minimizing disruptions to the entire enterprise.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the cybersecurity of
    the MHS Genesis system?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with leadership within the
    Program Executive Office for Defense Health Care Management Systems and
    the Defense Health Agency to ensure the privacy of our patients and
    beneficiaries is safeguarded to the highest standards possible.
        Question. In your view, should the Department offer it's testing
    and evaluation capabilities to the VA as it implements its version of
    the EHR that is based on the same platform as DOD's EHR?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Federal Electronic
    Health Record Modernization program office to evaluate the best options
    to assist the Department of Veterans Affairs in its implementation of
    its Electronic Health Record.
                        medical research and development
        Question. What steps will you take to assess the quality and
    effectiveness of near-term and long-term medical research activities
    throughout the Department of Defense?
        Answer. If I am confirmed, one of my key responsibilities will be
    managing and overseeing the Defense Health Program (DHP) Research,
    Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. If confirmed, I
    will take steps to ensure a rigorous programmatic and scientific review
    of all aspects of the DHP portfolio and verify the alignment of our
    investments to the highest operational medical priorities. In addition,
    to address requirements and to avoid duplicative efforts, if I am
    confirmed we will coordinate DHP RDT&E funded activities with the
    Combatant Commands, Military Departments, Defense Agencies, and other
    DOD Components.
        Question. How will you ensure that the research portfolio and
    activities include an appropriate mix of research topics representing a
    variety of research areas and technical disciplines, an appropriate
    amount of exploratory, high risk research efforts, as well as near term
    research efforts driven by current military requirements?
        Answer. As a former commander of the U.S. Army Medical Research and
    Materiel Command, I am keenly aware of the need to ensure a diverse and
    well balanced research portfolio to support military readiness and
    mission requirements. The DHP invests in a diverse research portfolio
    in a number of areas, including combat casualty care, traumatic brain
    injury, mental health treatment, and other relevant areas that will
    support current and future military requirements. The Department has
    research investments that range from basic research to clinical trials
    that will influence practice. If confirmed, I will ensure the
    Department continues to conduct annual reviews and analyses and hold
    regular governance forums that include the Military Departments,
    Defense Agencies, and other DOD Components. These efforts leverage
    formal processes to develop joint requirements and helps the Department
    align its medical research portfolio with military and mission
    requirements.
        Question. How will you ensure that these activities are coordinated
    with other DOD research activities, such as those at the DOD
    laboratories, as well as activities in other federal agencies?
        Answer. I know that the Department takes steps to ensure that DHP-
    funded research efforts are coordinated with other DOD research
    activities and also are linked with efforts of other federal agencies.
    The Department has several formal partnerships with other agencies,
    such as those it maintains with the Department of Veterans Affairs, the
    National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration. If
    confirmed, I will ensure we work within the Department and through our
    external partnerships to ensure our research activities continue to be
    closely coordinated with the activities of other DOD components, as
    well as the research activities of other federal agencies.
        Question. Existing law requires all medical research activities of
    the military services to transition to the DHA by the end of fiscal
    year 2022. If confirmed, how will you ensure a smooth transition of
    such activities by the required date?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will have the responsibility for overseeing
    the transition of DOD medical research activities to the DHA. I will
    ensure that there is coordination with all relevant stakeholders so
    that the transition is smooth and does not disrupt ongoing research and
    development activities, functions, or the operational laboratories. If
    confirmed, I will ensure DHA works collaboratively with the respective
    DOD Components to make sure the transition incorporates any lessons
    learned from previous transitions within the Military Health System. If
    confirmed, I will regularly meet with transition leaders from the DHA
    and exercise proper oversight to track execution progress and ensure
    that risks are continuously managed and mitigated, which will enable
    the successful transition of medical research activities to the DHA by
    the date required by Congress.
                   medical devices and technology acquisition
        Question. The Department of Defense uses a number of commercial
    industry partners to meet its medical technology requirements.
        What, if any, reforms need to be made to DOD acquisition and
    procurement procedures and policies to ensure that DOD can continue to
    work with leading commercial innovators in medical devices and
    technologies?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate whether existing authorities
    are sufficient to meet our long-term needs and sufficiently facilitate
    collaboration with leading commercial innovators in medical devices and
    technologies. If confirmed, I intend to engage the DHA's Chief
    Information Officer and the DHA Component Acquisition Executive on any
    needed reforms that can speed acquisition and implementation of secure
    commercial solutions that meet existing or emerging requirements
    throughout the Military Health System.
        Collaboration with industry is facilitated by DOD acquisition and
    procurement procedures and policies. As the Military Health System
    continues to standardize capabilities across the enterprise, it must
    increasingly leverage commercially available solutions rather than
    developing DOD-unique capabilities. This will allow rapid delivery of
    affordable solutions.
        If confirmed, I will seek opportunities to leverage the Defense
    Pilot Program Authority to acquire innovative commercial items,
    technologies, and services using general solicitation competitive
    procedures, while still meeting the heightened cyber security standards
    that the Department requires.
        Question. What steps has the Department taken with commercial
    partners to ensure the cybersecurity of medical records and critical
    medical devices currently used in military hospitals and clinics?
        If not, please describe how you would approach cybersecurity
    threats against medical records and critical medical devices.
        Answer. It is my understanding that the DHA has recently replaced
    the separately networked medical information technology (IT)
    infrastructure in place across the Military Departments with a single
    modern consolidated network known as the DHA Medical Community of
    Interest (Med-COI). It is my understanding that this new network has
    been specifically designed to enhance cyber security protections and
    fulfill the network technical requirements of MHS GENESIS. It is my
    understanding that, in support of Military Health System reform efforts
    directed in law and DOD policy, this consolidated infrastructure and
    enhanced enterprise-wide shared services promotes more effective and
    efficient health care operations and greater Military Health System
    integration.
        The DHA has a responsibility to rapidly adopt medical devices and
    equipment for use within our military medical treatment facilities in
    order to keep pace with advances in health care. However, these devices
    and equipment must be deployed to our medical networks in a manner that
    maintains the privacy of our patient data and the security of the
    network. It is my understanding that the DHA applies the Risk
    Management Framework to produce the DHA Assess and Incorporate Process
    for these devices and equipment. This process balances cybersecurity
    mandates with operational requirements. The Risk Management Framework
    provides a process that integrates security, privacy, and cyber supply
    chain risk management activities into the system development life
    cycle.
        Together, this standardized infrastructure and the Risk Management
    Framework help ensure cybersecurity of medical records and critical
    medical devices.
        Question. The Department of Defense has entered into an enterprise
    contract to provide a suite of common, interoperable, cloud-based
    office productivity capabilities. The winner of this contract offers a
    suite of additional cybersecurity capabilities as options to the base
    contract. The Department of the Navy chose to procure most of those
    cybersecurity capabilities.
        However, the other military departments and the Office of the
    Secretary of Defense declined to do so, which means that the Defense
    agencies will receive only a baseline set of cybersecurity support. The
    Committee understands that the Defense Health Agency raised significant
    concerns that, without the additional cybersecurity options offered by
    the vendor, the health records of military personnel would be at risk.
        Are you aware of this issue? If so, do you think that the
    cybersecurity protections approved for all the Defense agencies are
    adequate for DHA?
        Answer. No, I am not aware of this issue.
        Question. If not, will you examine this matter if you are
    confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will examine this matter.
                       quality and safety of medical care
        Question. An April 19, 2018, a US News and World Report article
    described a military health system unable ``to assure that patients
    needing challenging and risky operations are referred to centers with
    practiced surgical teams that perform the procedures regularly.'' The
    report quoted an anonymous high-ranking military surgeon who stated:
    ``They've known this and ignored it for decades. What's the solution?
    Form a task force? It's the same thing over and over. There's a
    civilian system in place that will help us prepare for war. The real
    question is whether there should be a Military Health System at all.''
        If confirmed, what would you do to ensure that patients get complex
    surgical treatment from military surgical teams providing treatment in
    high-volume surgical practices?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's focus on
    ensuring patients receive care in hospitals and clinics with
    demonstrably safe, high quality outcomes. I understand there is a
    relationship between the volume of surgeries performed and patient
    outcomes, particularly for procedures that are highly complex. All 43
    of DOD's military inpatient hospitals participate in the American
    College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program
    (NSQIP). Of note, there are about 5,000 hospitals in the U.S. that
    could participate in NSQIP, about 700 that do, and 90 that were
    recognized for meritorious performance by the ACS in 2021. Six (6) of
    the 90 were military hospitals. This demonstrates the dedication of the
    Military Health System to providing safe, high quality surgical care.
    If confirmed, I will ensure that surgical care for DOD beneficiaries in
    the private sector is equally focused on safety and high quality, and I
    will continue to explore opportunities to provide care for complex
    procedures in centers with great outcomes. If confirmed, I will
    continue to support Military Health System participation in nationally
    validated quality improvement programs like NSQIP and learn from our
    high-performing military medical treatment facilities about leading
    practices that can be scaled enterprise-wide. Also, I will work to
    continue implementing recommendations from the Defense Health Board on
    Low-Volume High-Risk Surgical Procedures with a focus on establishing
    hospital infrastructure to support complex surgical cases.
        Question. Congress has enacted legislation to facilitate the
    provision of medical care to civilians in MTFs where providing such
    care would enhance the skills and experience of the medical care
    providers who furnish the care. The law authorizes the Department to
    waive fees for care if patients have no insurance and no other ability
    to reimburse the government for care. However, it appears that the
    Department is reluctant to waive fees for providing this care, thereby
    limiting the availability of civilian patients who cannot pay the fees
    assessed.
        If confirmed, what actions would you take to encourage the
    Department's use of its authority to provide medical care to civilians
    to enhance the medical skills of MHS medical providers?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the Department's current
    efforts to direct more complex care into military medical treatment
    facilities. I recognize the Department's efforts include capturing more
    care from the TRICARE network, from interagency partners, and from
    other sources using available authorities to see civilian patients on a
    reimbursable basis in support of a ready medical force. Medical
    procedure volume and complexity is critical to ensuring the readiness
    of military medical providers and data show that the Active Duty
    population does not generate the necessary volume and case complexity.
    If confirmed, I will work closely with DHA on its efforts to capture
    caseload that will grow the clinical currency of our military
    providers, while addressing concerns about billing and the need to
    waive the fees for DOD care.
        Question. Based on your analysis of the Department's data, which
    MTFs have sufficient workload and case-mix complexity to be considered
    as readiness training platforms?
        Answer. If confrimed, I will ensure that the Department's continues
    its work to evaluate the workload and case-mix complexity at military
    medical treatment facilities to identify those which have the ability
    to support Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAs) of our medical
    personnel, and enhance their expertise in critical wartime skills. I
    understand the Department is actively identifying those military
    medical treatment facilities with the greatest potential to support
    KSAs now and in the future and is developing plans to resource those
    facilities and their wartime-critical specialties appropriately. If
    confirmed, I will also support the Department's work to bring
    additional workload into those military medical treatment facilities to
    further enhance case-mix complexity through TRICARE recapture efforts
    as well as civilian and interagency partnerships.
        Question. The Department of Defense requires all warfighters to
    complete Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) training as part of basic
    mobilization readiness. TCCC is designed to ensure that military
    personnel injured in combat receive the best pre-hospital medical care
    available until a higher-level of care is available. However, TCCC
    training is not consistent and varies in quality.
        What is your view of the importance of TCCC training?
        Answer. In my view, Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) concepts
    have played an unprecedented role in saving the lives of wounded
    servicemembers and are one of the leading reasons for unprecedented
    injury survival rates during recent contingency operations. It is my
    understanding that the Department is committed to ensuring all
    servicemembers receive training in basic TCCC concepts. However, I
    recognize there may be significant variance in the curriculum and
    delivery of combat casualty care training by the Military Services. If
    confirmed, I will continue the Department's efforts to standardize pre-
    hospital combat casualty care training. To address the variation in
    combat casualty care training, I will ensure the Department continues
    its efforts to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to
    standardize TCCC curriculum and instruction for all servicemembers.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions will you take to assess the
    quality of TCCC training for all deploying servicemembers?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's on-going
    efforts to establish jointly developed, standardized pre-hospital TCCC
    courses that provide all servicemembers, both medical and non-medical,
    with the requisite skills to save lives in the pre-hospital
    environment. As a physician and former military officer, I strongly
    support the Department's efforts to track individual and unit metrics
    for training completion and quality and other high priority
    expeditionary medical readiness related metrics.
                        graduate medical education (gme)
        Question. Section 749 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2017 requires the Department to establish and implement a
    process to provide oversight of the graduate medical education programs
    of the military services to ensure that those programs fully support
    the operational medical force readiness requirements for health care
    providers of the Armed Forces and the medical readiness of the Armed
    Forces. In July 2019, the Committee received the Department's report on
    its oversight process, which described how it would form a GME
    Oversight Council and a Tri-Service GME Integration Board.
        In your view, has this change resulted in objective evaluations and
    recommendations for training physicians and dentists in the correct
    specialties to support the operational medical force requirements of
    the combatant commanders?
        Answer. From what I have been told, the MHS has made significant
    progress in implementing a process to provide oversight of the graduate
    medical education programs to ensure those programs fully support the
    Military Departments requirements. As the Joint Staff and the Military
    Departments continue to refine their operational medical force
    requirements in line with the National Defense Strategy, I wholly
    expect GME pipeline to adjust to those requirements and the Graduate
    Medical Education (GME) Oversight Council and Tri-Service GME
    Integration Board to play a central role in that oversight process.
        Question. Did the GME Oversight Counsel and Tri-Service GME
    Integration Board make objective recommendations to revise or eliminate
    GME training programs, or make other recommendations for improvements
    to the GME training programs?
        Answer. I am not privy to the GME Oversight Council and Tri-Service
    GME Integration Board's recommendations to revise or eliminate GME
    training programs. If confirmed, I will examine their recommendations
    and ensure I am exercising appropriate oversight over GME to fully
    support the operational medical force readiness requirements for health
    care providers of the Armed Forces and the medical readiness of the
    Armed Forces.
        Question. In your view, should dermatology, neurology, pediatrics,
    ophthalmology, plastic surgery, or vascular surgery be considered
    readiness tier 1 medical specialties? Please provide an answer for each
    specialty.
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department is conducting a
    comprehensive review for the type and mix of medical specialties, and
    at this time, it is incomplete. If confirmed, I will ask for a briefing
    upon completion of this review, and come back to the Committee with my
    views for each specialty. Regardless of specialty, if confirmed I will
    expect every uniformed medical provider to maintain appropriate skills
    to deploy and support the National Defense Strategy.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure elimination of
    graduate medical education programs that do not directly support the
    operational medical force readiness requirements for health care
    providers within the Armed Forces?
        Answer. I support the restructure, realignment, and elimination of
    unwarranted duplication of programs. New ways, such as partnerships
    with non-federal training centers, should be explored to meet the
    program interdependence and clinical service required to maintain
    Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accreditation. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that programs that are no longer required are
    realigned or eliminated.
                          anomalous health conditions
        Question. The Committee is concerned about the length of time it
    has taken to obtain Secretarial designation to authorize military
    health care for U.S. Government employees and their family members who
    experience anomalous health conditions. Some government agencies have
    contracted for private health care coverage because of the lack of
    responsiveness of the Department. The recently passed National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 requires the Secretary of
    Defense to provide timely access for medical assessment, subject to
    space availability, to the National Intrepid Center, or an appropriate
    military medical treatment facility, and to furnish appropriate care to
    U.S. Government employees and their family members who experience
    anomalous health conditions.
        If confirmed, what would you do to provide, in a timely manner,
    military health care to U.S. Government employees and their family
    members who experience anomalous health conditions?
        Answer. Anomalous Health Incidents (AHIs) are an emerging medical
    threat and a priority for the Department of Defense (DOD) because they
    affect the safety, health, and welfare of DOD personnel and their
    families. I am aware of the recently passed legislation which requires
    DOD to provide timely access to care, based on space availability,
    within the Military Health System. If confirmed, I will ensure those
    affected by an AHI have access to timely health care within DOD by
    working with the relevant DOD stakeholders, as well as our interagency
    partners. Additionally, if confirmed, I will support the clinical work
    with medical research and development to help further our understanding
    of AHI.
                               mental health care
        Question. In August, 2020, the DOD IG issued a report entitled
    ``Evaluation of Access to Mental Health Care in the Department of
    Defense'' in which the IG found significant barriers to accessing
    mental health care and that thousands of active-duty servicemembers and
    their families may have experienced delays in obtaining mental health
    care.
        If confirmed, what actions would you take to improve access to
    mental health care by servicemembers and their families?
        Answer. I am aware of the DOD Inspector General report, and its
    conclusion that Active Duty servicemembers and their families may
    experience delays in obtaining mental health care, and that these
    delays may involve not being able to see the right provider at the
    right time. The Department must aim to schedule appointments with an
    appropriate provider in an appropriate timeframe. Securing and
    facilitating appointments may include actively managing and reviewing
    appointment schedules, ensuring the beneficiary is in the correct type
    of appointment with the appropriate provider. DOD can improve access to
    care by increasing accessibility for scheduling mental health services,
    such as by enabling a patient to book appointments online through the
    TRICARE Online Portal or the MHS Genesis Patient Portal, which will
    promote flexibility for the patient and improve the patient experience.
    If confirmed, I commit to working with DHA to improve access to mental
    health care for DOD beneficiaries.
        Question. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2022 requires the Secretary of Defense to implement a
    self-initiated referral process for mental health evaluations of
    servicemembers, and it also requires the Secretary to conduct a pilot
    program to provide direct assistance for mental health appointment
    scheduling at military medical treatment facilities and clinics.
        If confirmed, what actions will you take to implement these
    provisions?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review policies and procedures and
    develop a strategy to implement self-initiated referral processes from
    a supervisor or commanding officer consistent with applicable law.
        Question. In your view, are the Department of Defense's current
    mental health resources adequate to serve all active-duty members and
    eligible reserve component members and their families, as well as
    retirees and their dependents?
        Answer. It is my understanding that additional resources may be
    required to achieve desired results. Compounding this issue is the
    national shortage of mental health providers, which is creating
    challenges to address future mental health needs, not just in the DOD,
    but nationwide as well. If confirmed, I will work within the Department
    to ensure DOD is actively working to meet today's and tomorrow's mental
    health needs for all beneficiaries.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure that
    sufficient mental health resources are available to servicemembers in
    theater and to servicemembers and families at home station locations
    with insufficient community-based mental health resources
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments and
    the Defense Health Agency on mental health resourcing efforts that
    match supply to demand and optimize provider availability with the goal
    of maximizing treatment to servicemembers, family members, and all
    eligible beneficiaries, at home and abroad. I will work to expand tele-
    health and other tools to improve access where needed. It is my
    understanding the tele-behavioral health has been particularly useful
    supporting forward deployed personnel.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you expand tele-behavioral health
    services throughout the MHS to improve access to mental health care?
        Answer. The MHS can leverage tele-behavioral health (TBH) services
    for mental health assessments, ongoing behavioral health treatment, and
    surge support for pre- and post-deployment evaluations. If confirmed, I
    pledge to work to expand tele-behavioral health care, by working within
    the Military Health System, with private sector partners, and in close
    partnership with Congress.
                        mandatory covid-19 vaccinations
        Question. The Secretary of Defense has determined that mandatory
    vaccination against COVID-19 is necessary to protect the Force and
    defend the American people. Section 720 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 requires the Secretary to
    establish uniform procedures under which servicemembers may be exempted
    from the requirement to receive the COVID-19 vaccine for
    administrative, medical, and religious reasons.
        Do you agree with the Secretary's requirement that all
    servicemembers must be vaccinated for COVID-19 unless they meet the
    requirements for an administrative, medical, or religious exemption?
    Why or why not?
        Answer. Yes. The Secretary's requirement is central to ensuring the
    readiness of our Force, and if confirmed, my number one priority will
    be helping to maintain medical readiness. Timely immunization against
    COVID-19 infection is critical for both force health protection and to
    contain the global COVID-19 pandemic. DOD personnel, including
    servicemembers, work in environments where duties may limit the ability
    to strictly comply with appropriate public health measures, such as
    mask wearing, avoiding crowded areas, physical distancing, and hand
    hygiene. Therefore, rapid disease transmission of COVID-19 can occur if
    individuals are exposed and not vaccinated. Vaccines continue to be the
    safest way to be protected against severe disease, hospitalization, and
    death.
        Question. In your view, should these exemptions be uniform across
    all Services, or should they vary based on the needs of each Service?
        Answer. In my view, exemptions should be implemented consistent
    with existing Military Department policy, as directed by the Secretary
    of Defense.
        Question. In your view, does an antibody test demonstrating a
    previous COVID infection ensure that an individual has adequate
    protection against re-infection?
        Answer. No. The presence of antibodies does not demonstrate an
    individual has adequate protection against re-infection with the virus
    that causes COVID-19. At present, data are insufficient to determine an
    antibody level that indicates when an individual is protected from
    COVID-19 disease. The CDC continues to recommend that those with a
    history of asymptomatic or symptomatic COVID-19 get vaccinated once
    they are well.
                               suicide prevention
        Question. In your view, is there a correlation between the mental
    health of servicemembers and suicides and suicide attempts?
        Answer. In my view, while mental health is one aspect of suicide,
    we must recognize that suicide can be a result of many different
    factors, to include individual, community, and societal factors.
        Question. What would you recommend to the Secretary of Defense to
    reduce suicides among members of the Armed Forces?
        Answer. Every suicide is devastating to the impacted families, to
    the unit, and to our Force. Many biological, social, and psychological
    factors contribute to suicide. In recognition of this complexity of
    suicide, the Department of Defense (DOD) should aim to implement a
    comprehensive public health approach for suicide prevention and
    intervention. Suicide prevention efforts should recognize that suicide
    can be the result of individual and community/societal factors and
    focus on reducing suicide risk of all individuals by addressing the
    risk factors and enhancing protective factors.
        Question. From a medical perspective, how would you address the
    higher incidences of suicide in remote and isolated locations like Ft.
    Wainwright, Alaska?
        Answer. Every death by suicide is a tragedy and weighs heavily on
    the military community. The recent events in Alaska highlight the
    serious public health issue in the military, and that efforts must
    address the many aspects of life that impact suicide. If confirmed, I
    will work to ensure that leading clinical practices are standardized
    and used consistently, leveraging clinical practice guidelines to
    reduce unwanted variance in prevention and treatment of those
    contemplating suicide.
                      operational medical force readiness
        Question. In your view, what is DHA's role as a Combat Support
    Agency? What can DHA do to provide more medical support to the Joint
    Staff and to combatant commands?
        Answer. As I understand, DHA's role as a Combat Support Agency
    (CSA) is to enable the Army, Navy, and Air Force medical services to
    provide a medically ready force and ready medical force to Combatant
    Commands in both peacetime and wartime. The DHA uses the principles of
    Ready Reliable Care to advance high reliability practices across the
    Military Health System by improving system operations, optimize the
    delivery of care, and cultivate a culture of safety. It is my
    understanding that this is done across the Military Health System in
    support of the Military Departments' personnel clinical readiness and
    in support of DHA's Role 4 Casualty Care mission supporting the
    Combatant Commands. If confirmed, I will ensure DOD's activities are
    relevant and visible to Combatant Commanders and enhance DHA's
    integration in Combatant Command plans, exercises, and operational
    requirements.
        Question. In your view, have the Services and the DHA adequately
    defined military medical force readiness and developed an appropriate
    model to determine and project the Department of Defense's costs for
    medical force readiness?
        Answer. In my view, the Military Departments and the DHA are making
    progress in defining military medical force readiness. It is my
    understanding that the term medical readiness encapsulates both a
    medically ready force and a ready medical force. The Military
    Departments and DHA must work together to ensure the medical readiness
    of the force is maintained. It is my understanding that, to that end,
    the Department is defining and measuring critical Knowledge, Skills and
    Abilities (KSAs) that military medical personnel must have to maintain
    their clinical currency and medical readiness. It is also my
    understanding that efforts are currently underway not only to determine
    the costs of readiness, defined as the cost of sustaining a medically
    ready force and ready medical force, but also to express the value of a
    military medical treatment facility as a readiness platform.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that staffing models
    and associated costs to maintain operational medical readiness skills
    reflect actual combatant command requirements?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would initiate a review of the military
    medical personnel needed in the theaters of operation in support
    Combatant Command operational plans, as well as the appropriate
    personnel simultaneously needed within the military medical treatment
    facilities to provide sustained care to the sick and wounded from those
    operations. Once the remaining KSA specialties are established, the
    primary focus of the military medical treatment facilities will be on
    maintaining those readiness KSAs for military medical personnel and
    ensuring the medical readiness of servicemembers. An additional layer
    for this staffing analysis will need to include the force generation
    requirements of the DOD's Graduate Medical Education (GME) Programs to
    sustain appropriate personnel numbers over time, to include appropriate
    number instructors. If there is insufficient volume and complexity of
    caseload at a particular military medical treatment facility to meet
    and sustain the KSAs, the Director, DHA should establish agreements
    with civilian or other federal facilities to provide alternate venues
    for skills sustainment. Furthermore, the DHA, in its role as a Combat
    Support Agency, is a part of the Joint Staff medical planning process,
    and should inform and support the updates to medical skill requirements
    to reflect current operational planning by the Combatant Commands. If
    confirmed, I will work with the Joint Staff Surgeon, the Military
    Departments, and the DHA to overlay Combatant Command requirements for
    military medical personnel with the military medical treatment facility
    staffing requirements to maintain a medically ready force and a ready
    medical force. As stated above, if confirmed, I will also determine the
    cost of readiness and the value of military medical treatment
    facilities as readiness platforms.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to right-size the active
    medical force requirements of the Department to optimize operational
    medical force readiness capabilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue ongoing efforts to establish
    a DOD process to define the medical and dental personnel requirements
    necessary to meet operational medical force requirements, in accordance
    with applicable law. The military medical force must be appropriately
    sized in order to quickly respond to global operational medical
    requirements. If confirmed, I will work with DOD stakeholders to ensure
    DOD has a robust medical force that can provide the medical
    capabilities across the full range of military operations when and
    where needed.
        Question. If confirmed, would you advocate for outsourcing more
    beneficiaries' health care services to the private sector when and
    where it makes sense? How and where would you do that?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the Department's efforts to
    establish an integrated health care delivery system, which includes
    identifying when and where it makes sense to defer or outsource
    beneficiaries' healthcare needs to the private sector. If confirmed, I
    will ensure the Department uses established, patient-friendly and
    standard processes to send beneficiaries' care to the private sector in
    locations where military medical treatment facilities do not have
    available specialties or cannot provide care within access standards.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you collaborate with private
    sector health care providers to establish government-owned/contractor-
    operated or contractor-owned/contractor-operated hospitals and clinics
    where feasible and appropriate?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will explore the feasibility of
    establishing government-owned/contractor-operated or contractor-owned/
    contractor-operated medical facilities.
                     pain management and opioid medications
        Question. If confirmed, what policies and programs would you
    implement to improve pain management in the military health system to
    reduce and eliminate the misuse and/or abuse of opioid medications?
        Answer. During my military service, I trained and practiced as a
    family medicine physician, and I completed a Master's degree in Public
    Health. This experience, and the emerging medical evidence, has
    convinced me that any meaningful response to the national epidemic of
    opioid misuse and abuse should include policies and programs that
    address the root causes of opioid use, overuse, and abuse. This means
    that, if confirmed, I will begin with a thorough review of MHS pain
    management capabilities, practices, and policies to determine if they
    are resulting in appropriate but measured opioid prescribing. More
    importantly, if confirmed, I will determine if there are sufficient
    non-opioid pain management treatments that are available and being
    utilized in the pain care of our DOD beneficiaries.
        Question. In your view, should alternative and complimentary
    therapies for pain management be considered as benefits under the
    TRICARE program?
        Answer. This is an extremely important question that is directly
    related to the national epidemic of opioid overuse, abuse and
    overdoses. While civilian providers, and most likely military medicine
    providers have been appropriately decreasing their use of opioids for
    several years now, I know there has been a lag in replacing opioids in
    their respective pain medicine tool kits. This is not an acceptable
    situation for providers or patients. Fortunately, there has been a
    rapid evolution of thought and medical evidence to support the
    utilization of many pain management treatments that were previously
    termed ``alternative'' medical therapies. Now referred to as
    ``complementary and integrative health'', selected therapies such as
    acupuncture, mindfulness exercises, massage therapy, and movement
    therapies like Yoga have been recognized as safe and effective
    therapies for pain management by the National Institutes of Health,
    Department of Veterans Affairs, and, from what I understand, the DOD.
    If confirmed, I would support a deliberate and evidence-based plan to
    increase the availability of many of these pain management therapies
    for DOD beneficiaries.
                                 women's health
        Question. In view of the expanded roles of women serving in the
    Armed Forces, what are the health challenges that the Department of
    Defense and the military services must address to ensure appropriate
    health care for female servicemembers in deployed and non-deployed
    environments?
        Answer. To increase readiness, retention, and the overall well-
    being of our female servicemembers, timely access to reproductive
    health care and prevention of musculoskeletal injuries are two critical
    areas of focus. In non-deployed locations, this includes ensuring
    access to the full range of reproductive health care, including
    contraceptive counseling, family planning, and fertility testing. In
    deployed locations, of additional importance is the ability to self-
    test and self-treat for common urogenital conditions. Lastly, ensuring
    female servicemembers have access to gender-specific clothing and gear
    to prevent musculoskeletal injuries and regular assessment for such
    injuries at health care appointments is equally important.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you assess the adequacy of
    current health services for female servicemembers and what steps, if
    any, would you take to improve them?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Department recently
    completed the first ever Women's Reproductive Health Survey, fielded to
    Active Duty Service women in 2020 to determine preferences, experiences
    and needs regarding their reproductive health. Leveraging the findings
    of the survey is a step in identifying opportunities for improvement.
    Additionally, expansion of walk-in contraception clinics across the
    Military Health System will ensure all female servicemembers have
    timely access to contraceptive counseling without an appointment or
    referral. By utilizing the existing structures within the Department,
    continuous review of key health care needs of female servicemembers
    will ensure DOD's women servicemembers have the care necessary for
    readiness, retention and overall well-being.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
    timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
    electronic communications, and other information from the executive
    branch.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress?
        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?
        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?
        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?
        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?
        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?
        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?
        Answer. Yes.
                                     ______

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
                           anomalous health incidents
        1. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, while the Department of
    Defense (DOD) has made progress in speeding up the secretarial
    designation process that allows for civilian victims of Anomalous
    Health Incidents (AHIs), or Havana Syndrome, to receive care, the
    results have been uneven and some victims wait months to receive care.
    Will you commit to assessing the current secretarial designation
    process to determine what structural improvements can be made to
    improve the efficiency of the designation process and make the process
    more accessible for victims seeking help?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I understand referrals for Department support
    are facilitated through the DOD Secretarial Designee (SECDES) program
    for medical care for non-DOD beneficiaries and requested clinical
    services are based on patient referral needs, location, site
    capability, and capacity.
        If confirmed, I will review the current processes and work to make
    sure the Department is addressing requests efficiently. I am committed
    to ensuring those affected by an AHI have timely access to necessary
    and appropriate health care.

        2. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, creating effective
    diagnostics for child dependents of victims that may have been exposed
    to the same mechanism of injury related to AHIs remains a challenge.
    Will you commit to working with my office to ensure that we fully
    account for children that have been exposed to the same mechanism of
    injury related to AHIs as their parents, so that we may better
    determine the impact of AHIs on children?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. My understanding is that Anomalous Health
    Incidents (AHIs) continue to be a priority for the Department because
    they affect the health and welfare of U.S. Government personnel and
    their families, including their children. I understand a recently
    enacted statute requires the Department to modify the DOD Trauma
    Registry to include AHI information so that DOD can keep track of those
    affected by an AHI. If confirmed, I will work to ensure those exposed
    to an AHI, including children, are accounted for by the Department, and
    keep you and the Congress updated.

        3. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, will you also commit to
    ensuring that children impacted by AHIs receive the care and
    consideration they may need now and into the future?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I understand DOD has provided assessment and
    successful treatment for suspected affected personnel, including
    children. A recently enacted statute also requires the Department to
    provide assessment and treatment for AHIs and related afflictions to
    employees and their family members, including their children, on a
    space-available basis. If confirmed I am committed to ensuring all
    those affected by an AHI have access to necessary and appropriate
    assessment and treatment, as required by law. I believe in the
    Department's continued commitment to support all those affected by
    AHIs.
                                   __________
               Questions Submitted by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
                           mental health and suicide
        4. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, for more than a decade,
    suicide rates among Active Duty servicemembers and veterans have been
    higher and have risen faster compared to civilians and non-veterans.
    Women veterans are particularly susceptible, dying by suicide at almost
    twice the rate than non-veteran women, and veterans ages 18-34 have a
    suicide rate almost three times higher than non-veterans the same age.
    If confirmed, do you have ideas on how to improve mental health for
    military members and their families to reduce suicide rates in the
    military?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Every suicide is a tragedy. One area the
    Department should continue to look at is using community based
    prevention efforts which involve military leaders, family, peers,
    spouses, and chaplains. If confirmed I will continue the ongoing
    efforts and also look at novel ways to identify individuals at risk and
    new ways to mitigate that risk. We must bring new solutions to this
    devastating tragedy, and especially address the unique risks to women
    veterans stemming from sexual trauma, and I commit to work with other
    government agencies like the Department of Veteran Affairs, the
    Department of Health and Human Services, academia, and the health care
    industry in order to bring to DOD the best practices available to
    mitigate this problem.

        5. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, we have received
    information from advocates that many servicemembers are experiencing
    long wait times to receive mental health care and some cannot be
    adequately matched with a specialist to deal with their specific mental
    health issue. This is especially true for survivors of sexual trauma.
    If confirmed, can you commit to increasing the capacity of mental
    healthcare, and providing trained specialists to assist survivors of
    sexual trauma?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed, I will work to increase the
    availability of personnel trained to assist survivors of sexual trauma.
    The Department must aim to schedule appointments with the right trained
    provider in an appropriate timeframe. DOD can improve access to care by
    enabling a patient to book appointments online through the TRICARE
    Online Portal or the MHS GENESIS Patient Portal, which will promote
    flexibility for the patient and improve the patient experience.
    Survivors of sexual trauma deserve special care, consideration, and
    attention, and, if confirmed, I will ensure they receive the care they
    need.
                     separation health physical examination
        6. Senator Gillibrand. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, reports from the DOD
    Inspector General (IG) indicate that the departments are not adequately
    adhering to policy that mandates servicemembers receive a Separation
    Health Physical Examination (SHaPE) prior to leaving the military.
    Additionally, the SHaPE lacks a robust mental exam for servicemembers
    exiting the military leaving many with inadequate continuing care. How
    do you plan on improving this transition assessment for servicemembers
    to ensure they are receiving the proper follow-on care from the
    Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed, I will work to address the
    findings in the DOD Inspector General (IG) report to improve the
    transition assessment for servicemembers. I will work with the services
    to ensure that SHaPE provides a robust mental health assessment and
    that servicemembers do not transition without the completion of their
    SHaPE. In addition, I will work, if confirmed, with the Department of
    Veteran Affairs to improve the transition of care while avoiding
    duplication of services.
                                   __________

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
                     question on nominees' fitness to serve
        7. Senator Hirono. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, since you became a legal
    adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors, or
    committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual
    nature?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. No.

        8. Senator Hirono. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, have you ever faced
    discipline, or entered into a settlement related to this kind of
    conduct?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. No.
              suicide prevention among servicemembers and veterans
        9. Senator Hirono. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, I am very concerned with the
    persistent issue of suicide among U.S. servicemembers and veterans, as
    well as those transitioning from Active Duty. Earlier this month I
    submitted a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Secretary
    of Veterans Affairs Denis McDonough expressing my concerns,
    specifically with those transitioning. If confirmed, how will you
    prioritize what DOD can do to ensure mental health is treated as part
    of the holistic health of each servicemember?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I agree that mental health should be treated as
    part of the holistic health of each servicemember, especially with
    regard to suicide risk. We know suicide results from a complex
    interaction of many factors--environmental, psychological, biological,
    and social. Thus, our efforts must address the many aspects of life
    that impact suicide.
        The Department's efforts are focused around a public health
    approach to suicide prevention. This approach focuses on reducing
    suicide risk of all servicemembers and their families by attempting to
    address underlying risk factors (e.g., reluctance toward help-seeking,
    relationship problems, financial difficulties, mental health issues
    including personality disorders, unhealthy alcohol or drug use, and
    access to lethal means), while also enhancing protective factors (e.g.,
    social connections, problem-solving, and coping skills). A public
    health approach looks at promoting health and prolonging life through
    the strength of a connected and educated community--it includes medical
    care and treatment, as well as community-based prevention efforts
    involving military leaders, family, peers, spouses, and chaplains.
        If confirmed, I will ensure that Health Affairs and the DHA works
    with its partners within DOD, Department of Veteran Affairs, Department
    of Health and Human Services, academia and health industry to bring the
    best health care practices and also to advance the science of suicide
    prevention. I will work, if confirmed, with my team to bring new ideas
    and solutions for the early identification of those at risk and new
    treatment modalities to mitigate their risk.

        10. Senator Hirono. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, how can the medical process
    ensure a better ``warm handoff'' process to adequately screen
    servicemembers as they leave Active Duty?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed, in collaboration with the VA, I
    will ensure DOD works to develop and implement a common form of
    documentation of separation physical examinations, which includes a
    comprehensive set of mental health screening questions. This effort
    should integrate the results of the separation physicals, avoiding
    unnecessary duplication of effort and improving the clinical transition
    for the servicemembers.

        11. Senator Hirono. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, what single improvement can
    best address the ongoing issue of servicemember and veteran suicides?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Every suicide is a tragedy. One area the
    Department should continue to look at is using community based
    prevention efforts which involve military leaders, family, peers,
    spouses, and chaplains. If confirmed I will continue the ongoing
    efforts and also look at novel ways to identify individuals at risk and
    new ways to mitigate that risk. We must bring new solutions to this
    devastating tragedy and I commit, if confirmed, to work with other
    government agencies like the Department of Veteran Affairs, the
    Department of Health and Human Services, academia, and the health care
    industry in order to bring to DOD the best practices available to
    mitigate this problem.
        If confirmed, I will foster a close partnership with the VA to
    improve the transition of our servicemembers to the VA and to share and
    leverage our medical research, findings and best clinical practices to
    mitigate this tragedy.
        management advisories and dod support for relocation of afghan
                                   nationals
        12. Senator Hirono. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, how can we better integrate
    the military health complex in order to provide adequate attention to
    evacuees in need?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed I will work with the Department of
    Homeland Security, the Department of State, and other Federal
    Government partners to streamline the process, so we can take timely
    care evacuees' healthcare needs within the established legal
    parameters.
                                   __________

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Gary C. Peters
                         retail pharmacy pilot program
        13. Senator Peters. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, section 706 of the Fiscal
    Year 2022 NDAA included a provision to require the Department of
    Defense to implement a retail pharmacy pilot program for refills of
    brand name prescription maintenance medications in the TRICARE pharmacy
    benefits program. The purpose of the pilot is to determine whether the
    Department of Defense can restore TRICARE beneficiaries' choice to
    elect to receive brand name prescription maintenance medications
    through military medical treatment facility pharmacies, retail
    pharmacies, or the national mail-order pharmacy program at no cost or
    even potential savings to the Department--a cause which I am very
    interested to see through.
        The legislation calls for the Secretary of Defense to carry out the
    pilot program beginning not later than March 1, 2022. As you are aware
    the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 was signed
    into law on December 27, which has resulted in some impact to the
    deadlines for reporting and implementation of the pilot under section
    706. For example, the initial report to Congress which calls for the
    Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to Senate Armed Services
    Committee and House Armed Services Committee on the pilot program
    within 90 days of enactment, is now set to occur after the statutory
    implementation date of March 1, 2022. It was not intended for DOD to be
    left reconciling these dates within such a short timeframe after
    enactment. Rather, the intent is that the Secretary should begin
    planning and implementing the pilot no later than March 1, not that the
    pilot should be operational by March 1.
        Considering that cost-savings may achieved to the Department by
    carrying out the pilot program, and that failure to implement the
    program could continue to result in unnecessary inconveniences to
    TRICARE beneficiaries who may prefer to visit retail pharmacies for
    their affected medications--do I have your commitment that, if
    confirmed, you will commit to initiate planning and implementation of
    the pilot program by March 1, and further prioritize its successful
    operationalization?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed I am committed to implement all
    legal requirements of my office to include this pilot program. This
    pilot program may present an opportunity to bring convenient and best
    value service to our beneficiaries.
                                   __________

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Mark Kelly
                                 tricare select
        14. Senator Kelly. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, the Defense Health Agency
    (DHA) Health Care Assistance Pilot Program provides health navigator
    advisors to TRICARE Select military families with complex care needs.
    This service is a lifeline to military families--helping them locate
    and obtain the healthcare services they need. I'm told that an
    increasingly high number of military families are using the program and
    registering satisfaction rates above 90 percent.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I recently sent a letter to the Surgeon General
    of the Army, Lieutenant General R. Scott Dingle, requesting his views
    on expanding the pilot program to all U.S. Army servicemembers whose
    families qualify for the Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP).
    While the Army has the largest EFMP participant pool, I believe there
    is value in expanding access to this benefit across the military
    services.
        If confirmed, will you take a look at the DHA Health Care
    Assistance Pilot Program and report back your assessment as to whether,
    in light of utilization rates, patient satisfaction, and potential for
    cost savings, this program should be expanded across all the military
    services?
        Yes, if confirmed, I will work with the DHA to incorporate the
    successful elements of the pilot into the TRICARE program.
                                   __________

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Deb Fischer
                 national disaster medical system pilot program
        15. Senator Fischer. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, section 740 of the
    National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2020
    authorized the Secretary of Defense to conduct a National Disaster
    Medical System (NDMS) Pilot Program (Pilot) in collaboration with the
    Secretaries of Veterans Affairs (VA), Health and Human Services (HHS),
    Homeland Security (DHS), and Transportation (DOT). The Pilot was
    reauthorized in section 741 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry NDAA for
    Fiscal Year 2021, which directed the Secretary to commence the NDMS
    Pilot by September 30, 2021. Section 741 also designated the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs (ASD (HA)) as the lead official
    for design and implementation. The NDMS Pilot is meant to enhance the
    interoperability and medical surge capability and capacity of the
    National Disaster Medical System. What is your familiarity with the
    NDMS Pilot?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. It is my understanding that the Uniformed
    Services University's National Center for Disaster Medicine and Public
    Health was chosen to lead the implementation of the pilot program. An
    interagency working group selected the five pilot sites, which were
    approved by the previous Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
    Affairs. These sites are: Washington, DC; San Antonio, TX; Sacramento,
    CA; Omaha, NE; and Denver, CO. I understand that civilian health care
    leadership around these five sites have partnered with the Department
    in its development and implementation of the pilot. If confirmed I will
    ask the ASD-HA and the USUHS team to bring me to a better understanding
    of this very important pilot program.

        16. Senator Fischer. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, if confirmed, will you
    commit to working with the committee and updating us on the progress of
    the NDMS Pilot?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Yes, if confirmed I will work with the
    Committee and update you on the progress of the NDMS Pilot.
                                   __________

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Thom Tillis
       biomedical advanced research and development authority initiatives
        17. Senator Tillis. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, what will you do in your
    role as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to fast-track
    Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA)
    Initiatives that have direct applications for military warfighter
    needs? For example, we have learned that BARDA is developing a novel
    mechanism as a medical countermeasure to address civilian risk of life-
    threatening respiratory depression resulting from opioid exposure. This
    work may be directly relevant to servicemembers in battlefield because
    of nerve or chemical agent attacks, as well as a therapeutic response
    to weaponized opioids. In addition, this novel drug may enable superior
    pain management of wounded servicemembers by reducing risk of
    respiratory depression associated with high doses of narcotics. We are
    concerned that not enough is being done to translate civilian focused
    medical discovery to address military medical requirements. We
    encourage DOD to leverage promising civilian-focused discovery to
    address current and future DOD medical requirements.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I understand the importance of continued
    collaboration between Government agencies, especially with the
    Department of Health and Human Services. I was the Commanding General
    of the United States Army Medical Research and Materiel Command and
    Fort Detrick when BARDA was created and we helped in their creation.
    The Department has a history of collaboration with the Biomedical
    Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), with the most
    recent collaboration occurring during the COVID-19 response. The
    Department works with BARDA and other agencies to monitor civilian
    medical developments and their relevance to the medical needs of the
    DOD. If confirmed, I am committed to the Department's continued
    partnership with BARDA to ensure our warfighters and our Nation's needs
    are addressed.
                                   __________

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
                               suicide prevention
        18. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, U.S. Army-Alaska has
    experienced numerous suicides from 2016 through 2022, mostly at Fort
    Wainwright. Army leadership has taken steps to improve the quality of
    life for soldiers in Alaska and to provide more mental health
    resources, but suicides continue. If confirmed, will you commit
    visiting Alaska and speaking with both U.S. Army-Alaska leadership and
    soldiers about their ideas to improve mental health services and reduce
    the number of servicemember suicides in Alaska?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Yes.

        19. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, in your personal view, do
    servicemembers have adequate access to mental health resources?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Nationwide, demand for mental health services
    is outpacing the supply of mental health professionals, creating
    challenges to address current and future mental health needs, not just
    in the military community, but in the civilian population as well. If
    confirmed, I will work within the Department to ensure the DOD is
    actively working to meet today's and tomorrow's mental health needs for
    all beneficiaries.

        20. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, what ideas do you have
    for expanding access to mental health services for servicemembers
    posted in remote locations?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed, I will work to expand tele-health
    and other new tools to improve access where needed, including
    servicemembers in remote locations. The MHS can leverage tele-
    behavioral health services for mental health assessments, ongoing
    behavioral health treatment, and surge support for pre-and post-
    deployment evaluations.

        21. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, from a medical
    perspective, how would you address the higher incidences of suicide in
    remote and isolated locations like Ft. Wainwright, Alaska?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. The higher incidences of suicide in remote and
    isolated locations highlight the need for a comprehensive, public
    health approach to suicide prevention. Individuals stationed in these
    remote areas may have increased exposure to risk factors such as
    isolation, depression, and sleep disturbance, with limited access to
    protective factors, to include social connections. Clinical
    interventions are necessary to promote positive outcomes; however, a
    broader approach to promote health and prolong life through the
    strength of a connected and educated community is of equal importance
    to address risk factors and enhance protective factors. If confirmed, I
    will work to expand access to telebehavioral mental health in remote
    and isolate locations, address mental health provider gaps, look at new
    tools and mental health intervention programs, and work to implement
    the public health approach to suicide across all our military
    locations, but especially remote locations.
                                   __________

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Kevin Cramer
              fertility awareness based methods of family planning
        22. Senator Cramer. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, currently, military women
    and female family members of the military are deprived of obtaining
    Fertility Awareness-Based Methods (FABMs) of preventing pregnancy.
    Access to these methods, which are listed by the Centers for Disease
    Control (CDC) and which have increased in usage within the United
    States, requires two elements: 1) accurate counseling from medical
    providers about individual FABMs (such as the sympto-thermal method,
    the sympto-hormonal method, the cervical fluid method), including
    effectiveness rates and the biological signs to be observed and charted
    and 2) provision of the method, which often includes the need for an
    instruction course and some materials. Military physicians and nurses
    do not often receive adequate information about FABMs in their training
    pipelines and therefore are rarely able to provide accurate and current
    FABM information about individual FABM methods. Moreover, the provision
    of FABM instruction courses and materials is not available within
    Military Treatment Facilities or through TRICARE reimbursement.
    Therefore, women in the Military Health System are deprived of choosing
    FABM methods, a situation which needs to be remedied immediately. What
    will you do to provide education about individual FABMs to military
    providers, and access to FABM instruction and materials to women within
    the Military Health System?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. As I understand, military providers throughout
    the Military Health System are trained and able to provide counseling
    on the full scope of contraceptive options, including Fertility
    Awareness-Based Methods (FABMs), or natural family planning (NFP), to
    all beneficiaries across the Military Health System. FABMs/NFP is part
    of the graduate education of all women's health practitioners,
    including obstetrician/gynecologist (OB/GYN) physicians, family
    practice physicians, women's health nurse practitioners, and Certified
    Nurse Midwives. If confirmed, I will ensure providers are trained and
    able to provide patients with counseling on all appropriate
    contraceptive options.
                                   __________

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Rick Scott
                                 defense health
        23. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, my questions to you are
    about the general operations of the Defense Health Agency (DHA) and how
    you would oversee that agency. The agency is tasked with many things,
    but perhaps its most important purpose is to make sure that we have
    healthy uniformed servicemembers capable of fulfilling their duties.
    Since its inception after the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense
    Authorization Act (NDAA), the DHA has encountered obstacles and
    garnered complaints about its operation as well as about the scope of
    its responsibilities. My concern today is about problems I have been
    made aware of by one of my constituents.
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. The problems I am referring to center on what
    appears to be a dispute over who in the Department of Defense actually
    has the authority to dismiss a servicemember from the military for
    medical reasons. My constituent represents dozens of servicemembers who
    complain that they have been unfairly enrolled in the Integrated
    Disability Evaluation System, or the IDES.
        They assert that after they fell ill or were wounded, they have not
    been given the appropriate care their military service doctors
    recommend in order to try to get them back to health so that they may
    continue their service. Therefore, they have lodged complaints about
    being judged medically unable to continue in military service. But the
    essence of their complaint is not simply a dispute over whether they
    can return to health or not. It's that they are being put into the IDES
    system by the DHA and that the DHA, a medical bureaucracy--and not
    their chain of command--is making decisions about their military
    readiness and ability to remain in the military. They point to a
    centuries-old tradition in the U.S. Military beginning with the first
    Commander in Chief, General George Washington, whereby servicemembers
    have a right to appeal to their chain of command and in this particular
    case be found either capable or incapable of continued military
    service. In other words, they complain that it is civilian medical
    bureaucrats who are deciding whether a servicemember can stay or go and
    there is no appeal to their actual commander who knows the
    servicemember and the Service's needs better than anyone else. In one
    case in particular, the servicemember was shuttled back and forth
    between the DHA and the Army for over a year with each telling him that
    the other office was the one making decisions about him. This is
    unacceptable. I think one of the great problems of government
    bureaucracy in any department is lack of transparency and
    accountability. There should never be a moment in a military career
    when any servicemember has no chain of command, yet there are more than
    50 documented cases since 2018 of such a gap for wounded warriors
    during the medical separation process (IDES). For the last 3 years,
    authorization committees of Congress and the Department of Defense
    (DOD) have had an ongoing discussion about the clarification required
    in U.S. Code to close this ``gap'' in command. Thus far, DOD has not
    adequately answered my questions. I continue to have grave concerns for
    servicemembers in IDES.

        24. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, while I understand there are
    multiple appellate opportunities built into IDES, what organization has
    control of and is responsible for the decisions being made during any
    servicemember appeals from day 1 to the conclusion of the IDES process?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. My understanding is that, by law, as
    established in Chapter 61 of Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.), the
    determination to separate or retire a servicemember for disability
    rests with the Secretary of the Military Department concerned. The
    Department's policy in DOD Instruction 1332.18, ``Disability Evaluation
    System (DES),'' August 5, 2014, as revised, states that all appeals
    regarding determinations of a servicemember's fitness for duty are the
    responsibility of the Military Departments. While the DHA provides
    medical support during the DES process, it is not authorized to make
    determinations of fitness or retention decisions. If confirmed, I am
    committed to ensuring the best health care to our servicemembers and
    that the medical information exchange between DHA, the servicemembers,
    and the Military Departments is available to all parties to ensure a
    just adjudication.

        25. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, is it DHA's chain of
    responsibility or the military chain of command?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. A servicemember processing through the DES is
    always under the cognizance of the chain of command of his or her
    respective Military Service. While the DHA may provide support to
    ensure the servicemember is provided with the medical exams and
    treatment, the Military Departments statutorily control their
    respective servicemembers and respective DES processes. If confirmed, I
    am committed to ensuring appropriate medical processes are in place
    that support the servicemember and the Department's ``fit-to-fight''
    force.

        26. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, is it possible for a
    servicemember to be improperly enrolled into IDES by a DHA bureaucrat
    against the advice of both the military chain of command and treating
    physician?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I understand that under law and DOD policy only
    servicemembers who meet the criteria set forth in policy for disability
    evaluation are enrolled. This is generally done by the Secretary of the
    Military Department concerned. DOD policy also requires that referrals
    by medical providers be done in coordination with the servicemember's
    commander. As I understand the DES process, given the various stages in
    the process and levels of reviews in the process, I would expect that
    any erroneous enrollment, if one did occur, would be identified and
    addressed. The Secretary of the Military Department concerned retains
    the ultimate decision on whether to return the servicemember to duty,
    or retire or separate the servicemember due to physical disability.

        27. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, if this is possible, does a
    military commander have the authority to disenroll that servicemember
    from any point in the IDES process or are they powerless and must wait
    until the last stage of IDES?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I am not aware of any DOD policy that restricts
    the discretion of the Secretary of a Military Department concerned to
    disenroll a servicemember from the IDES. If a servicemember is
    erroneously enrolled into the IDES but does not have a potentially
    unfitting condition, the IDES contains various stages in the process
    during which the servicemember may be returned to duty. It is also my
    understanding that the decision to enroll a servicemember with an
    unfitting condition into the DES is not made lightly, and is only done
    after serious consideration of numerous factors as required by law and
    policy.

        28. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, do you believe DHA
    bureaucrats should have complete administrative control of Active Duty
    servicemembers during IDES instead of the military chain of command?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. No, I support the long-standing law and DOD
    policy governing the DES which retain administrative control over
    servicemembers with their respective Military Department and reserve
    the final determination of whether to return a servicemember to duty,
    or whether to separate or retain a servicemember, to the Secretary of
    the respective Military Department.

        29. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, do you believe we should
    have a system that allows a civilian bureaucracy in the Pentagon to
    determine who can stay and who must go or would you say that no
    decision to kick someone out of military service should be made without
    the chain of command playing a vital role and making the ultimate
    decisions?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. I understand that pursuant to Chapter 61, Title
    10, U.S.C., the Secretaries of the Military Departments are responsible
    for determining whether a servicemember is processed through the DES,
    and whether the servicemember is separated, retired, or returned to
    duty. It is my understanding that the referral of the servicemember to
    the DES by a medical provider is done in coordination with the
    commander and I understand that DOD policy provides the opportunity for
    commanders to provide input in various stages of the DES.

        30. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, would you agree that the
    incentives of a civilian medical bureaucracy are different from the
    chain of command that has a view of the kind of personnel that he or
    she needs to fight our enemies, and how much the taxpayer has invested
    in that person?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. It is my understanding that all Components of
    the DOD are focused on ensuring a ``Fit-to-Fight Force'' that is
    medically ready to fight the Nation's wars. It is also my understanding
    that DOD policy provides that upon the request of the servicemember or
    upon the exercise of discretion based on the needs of the Military
    Departments, the Secretary of the Military Department concerned may
    allow unfit servicemembers to continue in a permanent limited-duty
    status, on either active or reserve duty, in the same or different
    rating or occupational specialty. Such continuation may be justified by
    the servicemember's service obligation or special skill and experience.
    The Secretaries of the Military Departments concerned may also consider
    transfer to another Military Service.

        31. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, in December 2017, the
    President signed into law Public Law No. 115-92 to authorize additional
    emergency uses for medical products to reduce deaths and severity of
    injuries caused by biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear
    agents that may imminently threaten the lives of U.S. Military Forces.
    Following the enactment of the law, the Food and Drug Administration
    (FDA) and DOD announced the launch of a joint program to prioritize the
    efficient development of safe and effective medical products intended
    for deployed American military personnel. The purpose is to ensure that
    the unique medical needs of the American Military receive all of the
    benefits that the FDA has to offer with the fast-track status.
    Understanding the regulatory process is important for DOD in order to
    take full advantage of this legislation for the benefit of all
    Services. What will you do to ensure that your office, which
    coordinates this, has sufficient FDA regulatory expertise and that each
    Service also has FDA regulatory expertise in order to take advantage of
    this law and have the critical medical needs on the priority list for
    each Service?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed, I will commit to ensuring that
    the relevant staff of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Health Affairs, the Defense Health Agency, and the Military
    Departments have continuous professional development opportunities that
    enhance their expertise in the Food and Drug Administration regulatory
    matters and the Department's joint capabilities and requirements
    process and to take advantage of this law to speed out the critical
    care needs of our servicemembers.

        32. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, do you believe there are
    ways to improve the impact of the Department of Defense's Medical
    Product Priorities list with FDA?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. Yes, and if confirmed, I will continuously seek
    to improve the Medical Product Priorities list to ensure that it is
    most relevant to, and aligned to, our Force Health Protection
    requirements, and that products are fielded to optimize a medically
    ready force and a medical force that is ready.

        33. Senator Scott. Dr. Martinez-Lopez, would you support expanding
    the list to include all medical products that are being developed under
    a cooperative research and development agreements (CRADA) with DOD?
        Dr. Martinez-Lopez. If confirmed, I support expanding the list of
    medical products to include products developed under a cooperative
    research and development agreement (CRADA) with DOD and that are
    prioritized based on the requirements of the Department.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Dr. Lester Martinez-Lopez
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Dr. Lester Martinez-Lopez,
    which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
    nomination was referred, follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
    nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
    requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
    form that details the biographical, financial, and other
    information of the nominee. The form executed by Dr. Lester
    Martinez-Lopez in connection with his nomination follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

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

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Dr. Lester Martinez-Lopez was reported
    to the Senate by Chairman Reed on March 8, 2022, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was returned to the President under the provisions of Senate
    Rule XXXI, paragraph 6 of the Standing Rules of the Senate on
    January 3, 2023.]
                                   __________

        [Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Christopher J. Lowman
    by Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                           duties and qualifications
        Question. If confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Sustainment (ASD(S)), what do you believe would be your most critical
    duties and responsibilities?
        Answer. If confirmed as the ASD(S), my most critical duties and
    responsibilities would be to work with Congress, OSD stakeholders, and
    the Military Departments to identify sustainment challenges and enable
    mitigation strategies that ensure Service readiness and success on the
    battlefield. Additionally, it would be critical to maintain robust
    oversight that allows stakeholder input and drives the processes needed
    to identify opportunities to improve sustainment enterprise performance
    and efficiencies.
        Question. What background and experience do you possess that
    qualify you to perform the duties and functions of the ASD(S)?
        Answer. My sustainment experiences began as a young enlisted marine
    as an Aviation communication/navigation repair technician, which gave
    me the acumen to understand the challenges our servicemembers face
    sustaining readiness. My civilian Army career included leading teams of
    Product Support Managers in the development of product support
    strategies; later, I led a team of policy experts at HQDA, developing
    field level maintenance and depot policy. From this position, I
    transitioned into leading theater-level logistics activities for
    USAREUR. After time in Germany, I led the organization responsible for
    acquisition logistics policy as the Deputy Assistant Secretary, which
    prepared me for deployment to Afghanistan leading an organization
    within a coalition environment building logistics capacity for the ANA/
    ANP. All of this experience culminated in serving as the Senior
    Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of the Army.
        Question. What leadership and management experience do you possess
    that you would apply to your service as ASD(S), if confirmed?
        Answer. For the past 33 years, I have led sustainment teams and
    organizations at virtually every echelon of management. The leadership
    experience, coupled with my formal education has enabled me to lead
    sustainment activities in CONUS, in theater of operations preparing for
    war, and deployed coalition environments in Afghanistan. My operational
    experiences coupled with HQDA leadership opportunities on the ARSTAF
    and Army Secretariat has provided me with a keen insight to the
    challenges facing the sustainment enterprise and also highlighted the
    opportunities to reduce risk and introduce improvements.
        Question. Do you believe that there are actions you need to take to
    enhance your ability to serve as the ASD(S)? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. If confirmed, I will take immediate action to meet with
    USTRANSCOM, DLA, MILDEPs, and OSD stakeholders to better understand the
    immediate challenges facing sustainment and the progress that has been
    made mitigating the challenges. This will ensure that ASD(S)
    sustainment activities are aligned with Secretary Austin's priorities
    and that emerging changes to the NDS are accommodated. In addition,
    understanding the perspectives of those in the field who execute the
    mission every day is essential for ensuring resources are focused on
    priority missions. As such, I would visit key sustainment facilities to
    gain a first-hand understanding of their workloads, processes, and
    challenges.''
        Question. If confirmed, what additional duties and functions might
    you expect the Secretary of the Defense, the Deputy Secretary of
    Defense, or the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
    Sustainment (USD(A&S)) to prescribe for you, particularly in light of
    the lines of effort set forth in the National Defense Strategy (NDS)?
        Answer. I understand a new National Defense Strategy is
    forthcoming, and the ASD(S) would have an integral part of adapting the
    policies and processes necessary to develop and posture the sustainment
    capabilities needed to meet the Secretary's priorities. If confirmed, I
    will work with Secretary Austin, Deputy Secretary Hicks, and the
    USD(A&S) to ensure that I have all of the necessary authorities and
    responsibilities needed to sustain readiness of our forces.
        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. Sustainment challenges, to include supply chain risk
    management, organic industrial base modernization and--in some cases--
    life-cycle costs require a whole of government approach to solve. This
    includes the critical support provided by the Congress and the SASC in
    particular. If confirmed, I am committed to engage in regular
    communications with this Committee, including hosting Members and staff
    at key installations.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to ensure that your
    tenure as ASD(S) epitomizes the fundamental requirement of civilian
    control of the Armed Forces embedded in the U.S. Constitution and other
    law?
        Answer. My experience across many positions within the Department
    of Defense, both in uniform and as a civilian, has affirmed the need
    for civilian control of our military, as set forth in the U.S.
    Constitution. I have been privileged to have support from teams of
    dedicated military and civilian career professionals at many of those
    positions. In order for our Department to be successful, we must be
    able to weigh the input from our dedicated men and women in uniform, as
    well as the input from civilian career professionals, to ultimately
    carry out the directives of our civilian government. If confirmed, I
    will ensure that I deliver my best civilian advice to Secretary Austin,
    Deputy Secretary Hicks, and the USD(A&S).
                                major challenges
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your vision for the Office of
    the ASD(S)?
        Answer. Broadly, my vision for ASD(S) is to develop sustainment
    policies, processes and capabilities that are enabled by advanced data
    analytics, artificial intelligence, and the necessary resources to
    support the Military Service readiness requirements. A vision statement
    is somewhat aspirational and, if confirmed, I will work with the OSD
    Staff, MILDEPs and other stakeholders to ensure my vision aligns with
    the SECDEF priorities and pending NDS changes.
        Question. In your view, what are the major challenges that confront
    the ASD(S)?
        Answer. Cost of sustainment--The Department has made progress
    developing strategies to reduce O&S life-cycle costs but more must be
    done. Taking advantage of advanced data analytics and the rich set of
    usage and cost data now available provides the basis to better
    understand fleet performance, identify cost centers, and implement
    mitigating strategies that maintain readiness more efficiently.
        Industrial Base--I am aware that assistance from this committee,
    OSD action, and MILDEP support has enabled a better understanding of
    industrial base requirements. However, as the MILDEPs continue to
    modernize to meet current and future threats our ability to modernize
    the organic industrial base must contain prudent decisions that balance
    the organic industrial base capabilities with our commercial partners.
    Modernization strategies and the subsequent capital investments must be
    aligned with the capabilities being introduced so that the department
    ensures the OIB plant and equipment and workforce skills are modernized
    at the same rate as the new capabilities are introduced and available
    when required.
        Supply Chain Risk--The Department has made progress understanding
    supply chain risk. I believe that our ability to understand where risk
    is manifesting within the 3rd-5th tiers of the supply chain is critical
    to developing mitigating strategies. Whether the risk is cyber, foreign
    acquisition, or theft of intellectual property the Department needs the
    ability to visualize the supply chain, identify and characterize the
    risk nodes and mitigate the vulnerabilities. This might include on-
    shoring critical capabilities where appropriate.
        Question. If confirmed, what management actions would you take, in
    what order of priority, and on what timeline--to address each of these
    challenges? Please be specific.
        Answer. Cost of Sustainment: If confirmed, I would immediately work
    with my staff and the MILDEPs to implement strategies that employ
    advanced data analytics to better understand cost at the fleet level. I
    would incorporate lessons learned within the product support management
    area to review LCSPs and make appropriate changes. Finally, I would
    work with my staff and the ASD(A) to ensure product support planning
    for ongoing modernization programs incorporated lessons learned from
    current capabilities and the appropriate strategies are documented in
    the LCSP.
        Industrial Base--If confirmed, I would work with my staff and the
    MILDEPs to gain an understanding of their individual OIB modernization
    strategies compared to funded modernization programs to ensure that our
    capital investment programs are aligned. Additionally, I would review
    the balance between the organic and commercial sectors to ensure that
    SCR is accommodated and mitigated where appropriate. Finally, I would
    work with OSD(P&R), my staff, and the MILDEPs to review the OIB
    workforce training plans to ensure new technologies that require novel
    industrial skills are planned, resourced and on-schedule.
        Supply Chain Risk--If confirmed, I will work with the
    ASD(Industrial Base Policy) to ensure the necessary transparency of our
    national security supply chains. I will work with my staff and the
    MILDEPs to ensure that have the policy and processes in place that
    identify the vulnerabilities and mitigation strategies.
                           major acquisition reforms
        Question. In recent years, Congress has enacted significant reforms
    of the defense acquisition organizational structure and system. As part
    of these reforms, the Department consolidated logistics, materiel
    readiness, energy, and the environment, as well as facility planning,
    design, construction, and sustainment under the authority, direction,
    and control of the ASD(S).
        In your view, what is the role of the ASD(S) in improving
    acquisition outcomes from a sustainment perspective?
        Answer. The ASD(Sustainment) provides oversight of DOD's
    sustainment efforts, develops policy, sponsors key initiatives to
    improve sustainment outcomes and ensure cost-effective readiness
    throughout the service life of weapon systems. This includes making
    certain that sustainment attributes are included in capabilities'
    designs, and approving the program Life Cycle Sustainment Plan for
    Acquisition Category (ACAT) 1D and special interest programs. I believe
    it is incumbent on the ASD(S) to work closely with ASD(A), DPC,
    Comptroller, Services, and others to ensure effective and affordable
    product support solutions for our weapon systems.
        Question. From your perspective, what is your assessment of the
    effects of recent acquisition reforms and what other potential
    opportunities for future reforms do you see?
        Answer. I believe the Department's recent acquisition reform
    efforts are critical to enhancing readiness and driving down
    sustainment costs. They are helping expedite the development and
    fielding of capabilities, while ensuring the product support required
    to sustain them. I understand these efforts are ongoing and if
    confirmed, I will work to identify metrics and tools that can to assess
    sustainment's contribution to warfighting capability. I will also work
    with other senior leaders within the Department to identify
    opportunities for future reforms within both the acquisition and the
    planning, programming, budgeting & execution processes.
        Question. Are there lessons learned with the implementation of
    recent acquisition reforms that you would want to apply in the Office
    of the ASD(S), if confirmed?
        Answer. There are always valuable lessons learned when reforms are
    initiated within the Department. It is imperative that we capture these
    lessons learned as quickly as possible for the benefit of the
    Department. If confirmed, I will ensure that these lessons learned are
    shared across the Components through the use of Communities of
    Practice, Publications, and formal training courses developed and
    sustained by the Department for the life cycle logistics workforce.
                                      data
        Question. What steps will you take to collect operation and
    maintenance data from operational systems in order to inform
    sustainment policies and practices to control sustainment costs?
        Answer. It is critical to utilize data to understand the
    performance of our weapons systems to drive future sustainment
    investment decisions. I understand the USD(A&S) team is supporting the
    Department's efforts to build enterprise-wide business health metrics
    with multiple sustainment data inputs that support weapons systems
    throughout the life cycle. If confirmed, I will ensure that this data
    is based on authoritative data sources and used to support all
    maintenance policies and practices.
        Question. If confirmed as ASD(S), how would you apply lifecycle
    cost data to anticipate requirements for new or replacement items?
        Answer. We must ensure that our new weapons systems not only meet
    warfighter performance requirements, but that they also are cost-
    effective to operate. If confirmed, I will work to incorporate cost
    data from the Services' cost data sources into new system requirements,
    assessments, and policies.
        Question. Since technical data rights and intellectual property
    issues often drive sustainment costs and challenges, what specific
    ideas do you have to improve the Department's activities with respect
    to having access to needed technical data and Intellectual Property?
        Answer. Weapon system sustainment, particularly organic
    sustainment, requires access to appropriate technical data. Necessary
    data includes, among other things, depot repair procedures, repair
    bills of material, and technical manuals. The Department should pursue
    tailored data acquisition strategies that emphasize collecting and
    maintaining specific data needed for weapon system operation and life
    cycle support while avoiding blanket policies that may lead to
    acquiring and maintaining technical data that does not benefit the
    Department.
        I believe that changes in contract requirements and the contracting
    approach can address the issue. Since sustainment costs can represent
    70% of a program's lifecycle costs, if confirmed, I will work with my
    acquisition counterpart to ensure that sustainment considerations are
    taken into account early in the acquisition lifecycle.
       national defense strategy and interim national security strategic
                                    guidance
        Question. The 2018 NDS outlines the threats confronting the United
    States: a rising China, an aggressive Russia, and the continued threat
    from rogue regimes and global terrorism. In March 2021, the Biden
    Administration issued its Interim National Security Strategic Guidance,
    which sets out the national security priorities for the Administration.
    Among these priorities is the requirement to ``promote a favorable
    distribution of power to deter and prevent adversaries from directly
    threatening the United States and our allies, inhibiting access to the
    global commons, or dominating key regions''. The Administration has
    initiated the process of preparing a new National Defense Strategy,
    planned for issuance in 2022.
        Question. How, in your view, how does the Office of the ASD(S)
    directly supports the NDS?
        Answer. While the National Defense Strategy (NDS) guides the
    Departments way forward, those aspects of the strategy which will deal
    with sustainment and logistics must be translated into policy and then
    operationalized by the Department. The Office of the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Sustainment has the integral role to take the
    direction provided in the NDS and craft the DOD Directives and
    Instructions that will allow the Department to collaboratively and
    collectively meet the priorities of the Secretary of Defense.
        Question. What is your current assessment of the risk of
    operational failure in a conflict with China as the result of a
    critical logistics failure?
        Answer. In any conflict, the success of global operations relies on
    logistical support. Conflict with China presents a set of unique and
    significant challenges to our supply chains. Even with ongoing efforts
    across the joint logistics enterprise to mitigate and manage risks,
    there are still significant threats to logistics operations and
    logistics nodes around the globe. The tyranny of distance in the Indo-
    Pacific, along with heavy burdens placed on our strategic mobility
    infrastructure to both deploy our forces and meet their resupply
    demands exacerbates that risk in any future conflict. Mitigating these
    risks requires strong alignment across strategic guidance, policy, and
    Combatant Commander planning, and must while leverage Joint, Coalition,
    and Partner exercises and engagements to validate logistical support
    concepts. If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to engage
    with the Joint Staff, Components and industry partners to support
    ongoing efforts across the Joint Logistics Enterprise to address the
    threats posed by China.
        Question. In your view, what infrastructure, military construction,
    and logistics investments are required in order to provide the
    necessary capabilities and capacity to the Joint Force to prevail in
    great power competition and potential conflict with China?
        Answer. At home we must maintain our ability to project power
    utilizing the Defense Transportation System and our strategic ports
    (air and sea). Infrastructure and military construction abroad come
    from the Combat Commanders, their plans, and assessments. Logistics
    investments should be focused on maintaining or augmenting our
    strategic mobility capabilities (to include prepositioning),
    investments in demand reduction technologies, efforts to reduce our
    logistics footprint, and increase our supply chain visibility.
        Question. To what extent should sustainability and logistics
    requirements factor into future force structure adjustments?
        Answer. Ensuring that our forces can be sustained should always be
    a consideration when developing force structure. If confirmed, I will
    work with the Joint Staff and Military Services to ensure that these
    considerations are taken into account as appropriate.
                              indo-pacific posture
        Question. First launched by the United States and Japan in 2002,
    the Defense Policy Review Initiative (DPRI) aimed to adapt the United
    States-Japan alliance to the dramatically changed threat security
    environment of the 21st century.
        What is your understanding of the status of DOD's implementation of
    DPRI?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the program is still on track
    to meet the Department's goal to improve its Indo-Pacific defense
    posture.
        Question. If confirmed to be the ASD(S), what would be your role in
    DPRI implementation and execution?
        Answer. I understand DPRI is the bilaterally-determined way forward
    for 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. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Undersecretary of Defense for Policy and the Assistant Secretary of
    Defense for Energy, Installations & Environment to review the
    implementation of this realignment plan. I will work with senior
    Department leadership to ensure DOD's sustainment and logistics efforts
    support the execution of the distributed U.S. basing infrastructure in
    the Indo-Pacific in support of the overall Defense Strategy.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    address challenges in Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
    Islands (CNMI) that may result in an adverse impact on DPRI-related
    construction cost and schedule?
        Answer. While I am not completely familiar with any specific
    challenges, if confirmed, I will work with senior Department leadership
    to ensure DOD's sustainment and logistics support on Guam and the CNMI
    is appropriately balanced with the critical national defense
    requirements associated with the DPRI program.
                              contested logistics
        Question. Over the last several years, DOD and INDOPACOM have
    conducted or sponsored several studies on contested mobility and
    logistics which have resulted in more than 50 recommendations. However,
    the GAO found that DOD has failed to implement many of these
    recommendations. As a result, DOD and INDOPACOM may be missing an
    opportunity to leverage existing knowledge on mobility challenges in
    contested environments and to increase resilience for major conflicts
    as envisioned in the National Defense Strategy and as part of the Joint
    Warfighting Concept. Given the ``tyranny of distance'' in the Pacific,
    there are significant challenges specifically related to energy and
    munitions requirements in a contested environment, some of which could
    be mitigated by making targeted investments and operational energy
    improvements to both military platforms and installations.
        If confirmed, how will you implement the multitude of
    recommendations referenced above and take actions necessary to decrease
    the logistics vulnerabilities in a contested environment?
        Answer. The U.S. Military has enjoyed a freedom of movement for
    decades that has enabled global power projection and the ability to
    conduct and sustain operations virtually unhindered. However, in future
    conflicts, adversaries will target logistics in multiple domains from
    here in the Homeland through the point of need. If confirmed, I will
    review the status of GAO recommendations and ensure sound and prudent
    measures are taken to reduce logistics vulnerabilities in contested
    environments.
        Question. If confirmed, how will you implement recommendations to
    make significant operational energy improvements throughout INDOPACOM?
        Answer. I am not familiar with the details of the studies mentioned
    above. However, if confirmed, I will review completed analyses
    regarding contesting logistics, and review opportunities for
    implementing recommendations to enhance energy supportability and
    demand reduction across Joint forces and plans.
        Question. If confirmed, how do you plan to work with the Joint
    Staff to ensure that insights from concept development work on
    contested logistics are prioritized and highlighted in other Department
    of Defense processes?
        Answer. I recognize the Joint Staff has invested significant time
    and effort to develop contested logistics concepts within the Joint
    Warfighting Concept and the Joint Concept for Contested Logistics. If
    confirmed, I would work closely with the Joint Staff to understand the
    insights gained and transformation necessary in order to effectively
    and consistently advocate in other Department processes.
                                    the f-35
        Question. The F-35 is one of the largest DOD weapon systems, with
    U.S. sustainment costs estimated at more than $1 trillion over its 30
    year life cycle.
        What are the factors contributing to spare parts shortages for the
    F-35 and what has been the effect of such shortages on the F-35 mission
    capability rates?
        Answer. My understanding is that limitations on repair capacity are
    one of the major factors driving the parts shortages that are impacting
    F-35 mission capability rates. If confirmed, I will consult with the
    Department's and Services' supply chain and contracting experts to
    assess and identify areas of F-35 supply concerns and develop
    sustainment strategies to mitigate those risks.
        Question. If confirmed as the ASD(S), what steps would you take to
    address these spare part-related deficiencies?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the F-35 program is
    closely and carefully managed with the sustainment rigor required to
    ensure that it can meet the Department's warfighting needs for peer
    competition. In addition, I will ensure that the F-35 Joint Program
    Office and the Military Services work to improve F-35 spare part-
    related deficiencies and pursue reliability improvement programs where
    appropriate.
        Question. In your view, has DOD documented requisite information
    about the technical characteristics and costs of the F-35 to
    effectively plan for its long-term sustainment?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Department's subject
    matter experts to advance initiatives that maximize the Department's
    position in obtaining the required data that improves the long-term
    sustainment strategy and warfighting capabilities for the F-35.
        Question. What should be done to increase the availability rates
    for the F135 engine? Should we increase maintenance capacity? Should we
    improve the timing and execution of transferring intellectual property
    on the F135 engine to government depots to increase engine
    availability?
        Answer. Addressing the serious readiness challenges related to the
    F135 engine will be one of my top priorities related to the F-35
    program if I am confirmed. I will work with the F-35 Joint Program
    Office and Military Services to increase depot repair capacity, stand
    up additional repair sites, and reduce demand for repairs by improving
    reliability.
        Question. How might a dearth of such information for the airframe
    and the engine impair DOD's ability to negotiate planned performance-
    based contracts or pursue alternative options?
        Answer. Performance Based Logistics contracts can be an excellent
    contract strategy to improve warfighter readiness through better weapon
    system availability and reliability at lower cost, especially if
    organic capacity is unavailable. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Services and the F-35 Joint Program Office to ensure that any decision
    to enter into a performance-based sustainment contract is data-driven
    and made based in the best interests of the warfighter. Additionally, I
    will work with the Department to ensure that we have a robust organic
    industrial base to meet statutory and core logistics requirements to
    sustain our warfighters in a contested logistics environment.
        Question. If confirmed as the ASD(S), what steps would you take to
    ensure that the correct amount and quality of information is available
    to support DOD's needs?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Services and the F-35
    Joint Program Office to ensure they have the appropriate access to the
    data they need for use across the entire lifecycle of the F-35 program.
        Question. How can the Office of the ASD(S) contribute to further
    reducing F-35 sustainment costs?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the F-35 Joint Program
    Office and Military Services to ensure prioritization of efforts that
    reduce sustainment costs and to determine if additional opportunities
    can be leveraged to reduce all F-35 program costs. More broadly, I will
    work with the Services on policies to drive efficiencies in their
    sustainment enterprises that will further improve F-35 affordability.
                degradation of equipment readiness due to aging
        Question. This Committee has received testimony from senior
    Department of Defense officials and the Military Services regarding the
    effects of aging equipment on materiel readiness.
        How would you propose that the Military Services balance increased
    readiness for current capability while maintaining or increasing the
    modernization schedule?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with our Defense
    Acquisition professionals and Component Acquisition Executives to
    evaluate the DOD and Military Services' plans to increase readiness for
    current capability while maintaining the Service modernization
    schedules. More specifically, I will work to ensure the Military
    Services are balancing modernization requirements with sustaining our
    legacy platforms at readiness levels necessary to meet current
    operations using advanced data analytics.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to regenerating
    materiel readiness that is degraded by equipment that is simply ``aging
    out''--often after many years of sustained high operations tempo in
    combat?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to refine the capabilities
    that provide visibility into the current readiness of our weapon
    systems and employ advanced data analytics to determine the underlying
    causes of degraded materiel readiness. Armed with this insight, I will
    work collaboratively with the Military Services to ensure that our
    limited sustainment resources are directed toward those efforts that
    will return the most readiness per dollar expended.
                       depot maintenance strategic plans
        Question. The Military Departments are required to regularly update
    their depot maintenance strategic plans to address the appropriate
    levels of capital investment in facilities and equipment, public-
    private partnerships, workforce planning and development, and the
    integration of logistics enterprise planning systems.
        What is your understanding of the extent to which the Military
    Departments have updated or revised their depot maintenance strategic
    plans to address current and future logistics and maintenance
    requirements?
        Answer. I understand the Military Services regularly update their
    depot maintenance strategic plans and are actively working on
    Infrastructure Optimization Plans (IOPs) to make targeted improvements
    to the Organic Industrial Base. If confirmed, I will continue the
    process of evaluating the Military Services plans against their current
    and future logistics and depot maintenance requirements. I will ensure
    the Military Services' depot maintenance strategic plans are properly
    aligned with the National Defense Strategy priorities and meet
    applicable statutory depot maintenance requirements.
        Question. In your view, is the level of funding programmed and
    budgeted for equipment repair and reset sufficient--not only to prepare
    forces for overseas contingency operations but also to improve the
    readiness of non-deployed forces for other potential contingencies?
        Answer. I believe the Department's prioritization procedures
    adequately consider priorities and risks across the entire portfolio.
    However, I am fully aware that competition for resources is always a
    challenge, and funding for equipment repair and reset is complicated by
    the mounting strain on weapon systems due to their age. If confirmed, I
    will focus on continuing to balance requirements for operationally
    deployed forces and units in garrison.
        Question. What impact is this level of funding likely to have, if
    any, on the ability of National Guard units to support Homeland Defense
    and civil authorities missions?
        Answer. While the specific impacts are outside the scope of my
    current portfolio, I sincerely appreciate the total force contributions
    of the National Guard. They are a critical enabler to Homeland Defense
    and defense support to civil authorities. If confirmed, I will ensure
    that the National Guard's requirements are adequately resourced.
        Question. Is it your understanding that as a general rule, Military
    Department depots are operating at optimal capacity to meet rebuild and
    repair requirements?
        Answer. I believe the Military Service depots are sized to be
    effective at meeting warfighter requirements. If confirmed, I will
    evaluate whether the Military Service depots are operating at optimal
    capacity and continue to monitor their performance to ensure statutory,
    core, and warfighter requirements are met.
        Question. What additional steps, if any, do you believe could be
    taken to increase depot capacity?
        Answer. I understand the Military Services are continuously
    applying process improvements to increase throughput of their depots
    and, where advantageous, use public-private partnerships as a way to
    increase depot capacity and capability. If confirmed, I will continue
    to advocate and enable conditions that foster improvements and assess
    the Military Services plans to modernize their infrastructure and
    improve their productivity.
        Question. What is your understanding as to how additional capacity
    that may exist across the organic industrial base is identified when
    needed to address critical backlogs?
        Answer. I understand the Military Services regularly collaborate to
    address issues and requirements of mutual concern, with their
    respective Sustainment Commands operating under a memorandum of
    agreement to that effect. If confirmed, I will work with the Military
    Services to look for additional opportunities enhance mutual support of
    cross service requirements.
        Question. With the ship repair industrial base (organic and
    commercial) unable to keep up with demand and execute programs on time
    or within project costs, what should DOD and the Navy do to expand
    capacity and improve performance on ship depot maintenance programs?
        Answer. Our public and private industrial repair capability is
    critical to meeting our Navy's operational readiness requirements. I
    understand there have been issues with on time performance in recent
    years, and the Navy has undertaken the Shipyard Infrastructure
    Optimization Plan (SIOP) to help increase capacity. If confirmed, I
    look forward to understanding the Navy's progress with SIOP,
    incorporating lessons learned, and then ensuring we have continuity of
    effort across the commercial sector.
                   condition-based and predictive maintenance
        Question. What is your understanding of the Military Services'
    plans to collect, store, and analyze data related to improving
    maintenance efforts, decreasing maintenance and spare part costs, and
    increasing readiness?
        Answer. Weapon systems that are not available due to unplanned
    maintenance, part shortages, or overly-tasked maintenance resources
    jeopardize our national defense. When properly applied, condition-based
    and predictive maintenance efforts enable us to increase readiness,
    forecast requirements, and optimize the use of our limited resources. I
    believe that the Services must fully embrace this concept and while
    much work has been done, the journey is not yet complete. If confirmed,
    I will work to ensure we continue the Department's efforts to
    institutionalize the tenets of condition-based and predictive
    maintenance.
        Question. What steps would you take to ensure that developmental
    and operational activities collect, store, and share data in common
    repositories to enable continuous data analysis and to enhance
    modeling, simulation, and engineering activities in order to improve
    capabilities and reduce sustainment costs?
        Answer. As our Services operate more jointly, with common assets,
    it is essential to our decision making and strategy development
    processes that we maintain data where it can readily be accessed and
    utilized. A key aspect of condition-based and predictive maintenance is
    providing a common environment where the data, regardless of source, is
    understandable, comparable, and readily ingestible into our capability
    and decision-informing tools. I believe that making the best use of our
    artificial intelligence and machine learning initiatives will
    significantly enhance this effort. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Military Services and other agencies to continue fostering an
    environment that fully develops these shared goals.
        Question. What is your understanding of the outcomes to date of
    condition-based and predictive maintenance programs and their utility
    in increasing readiness and reducing costs?
        Answer. Condition-based and predictive maintenance are initiatives
    the Department has been working for quite some time. I understand that
    the Services have numerous programs where the benefits of condition-
    based and predictive maintenance programs have been achieved and are
    being reaped. I also recognize that this journey is not yet over and
    the Department still has more work to fully realize our desired
    outcomes. If confirmed, I will fully support this initiative and its
    objectives as a readiness enabler and strategy for cost-effective life-
    cycle sustainment.
                         logistics and the supply chain
        Question. If confirmed, how would you assess the readiness of
    logistics across the force, and where do you foresee the greatest
    challenges?
        Answer. Logistics assets across the force face a multitude of
    challenges that are being addressed by the Department's professional
    logisticians on an ongoing basis. From aging weapon systems that are in
    operational use beyond their original life expectancy to new weapons
    system acquisition programs that contain the latest technological
    advances with sustainment considerations built in from the beginning,
    the Department requires a wide supplier base to support all of its
    requirements. If confirmed, I will work closely with all Components and
    my OSD counterparts to promote secure, dependable, and resilient supply
    chains that will ensure the readiness of our weapon systems.
        Question. Given the number of sole source vendors with which DOD
    contracts, do you believe there is adequate competition across the
    supply chain?
        Answer. It is my understanding that there is adequate competition
    within our supply chains, but sole source contracts are often
    necessary, especially in unique areas. For example, legacy weapon
    systems often include specialty parts where competition is limited.
    When sole source contracts are necessary, I understand the Department
    has established tools and processes to help negotiate a fair and
    reasonable price. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the
    Components and other purchasing activities to continue enhancing those
    tools and processes and identify in-sourcing opportunities where
    appropriate.
        Question. What steps can we take to reduce the costs of logistics?
        Answer. The Department's logistics cost makes up a large portion of
    the budget, and it is crucial we continue to employ the latest
    efficiency and effectiveness reforms to reduce the overall logistics
    cost while ensuring readiness. If confirmed, I will work to employ
    effective supply and financial executive metrics to ensure we return
    the most readiness per dollar expended. Analysis of these metrics can
    then be used to develop the appropriate policy and expansion of
    logistics initiatives which have proven effective and efficient
    sustainment solutions.
        Question. In your view, how can we control costs of spare parts,
    especially in cases where there are limited suppliers of such parts?
        Answer. I recognize that the Department's weapon systems often
    include specialty parts produced by a limited number of suppliers. I
    understand the Department has established tools and processes to help
    negotiate fair and reasonable prices for spare parts. If confirmed, I
    will work to ensure that spare part inventories are supported by actual
    product demand with steady stock levels to stabilize procurements and
    prevent stock shortages or excess buying.
                              prepositioned stocks
        Question. The Department of Defense positions materiel and
    equipment at locations around the world to enable it to quickly field a
    combat-ready force.
        What is your understanding of the extent to which the Department is
    working across the Military Services to develop an integrated
    requirement for prepositioned stocks, based on a Department-wide
    strategy?
        Answer. Prepositioned materiel and equipment are a vital aspect of
    supporting global operations with minimal reaction time. If confirmed,
    I will work with the Joint Staff, Services and Combatant Commands to
    review prepositioned materiel program to ensure a sound and integrated
    requirements generation process.
        Question. What are the logistical and maintenance implications of
    an expanded use of prepositioned stock, particularly in today's
    constrained budgetary environment?
        Answer. Today's budget-constrained environment demands an
    appropriate balance between requirements and costs and a clear
    understanding any potential risks. If confirmed, I will work with the
    Joint Staff, Services and Combatant Commands to understand the
    logistical and maintenance implications associated with prepositioned
    stock.
        Question. Do you believe that the Military Services have adequately
    assessed which of the many pieces of nonstandard equipment that were
    purchased to meet urgent war fighter needs should be added to
    prepositioned stock sets?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Joint Staff, Services
    and Combatant Commands to review what role nonstandard equipment
    previously purchased should have in prepositioned stock.
        Question. In your view, have the Military Services programmed
    adequate funding to execute plans to reconstitute their prepositioned
    stocks around the world?
        Answer. Prepositioned materiel and equipment are a vital aspect of
    supporting global operations with minimal reaction time. If confirmed,
    I will work with the Joint Staff, Services and Combatant Commands to
    review policy and requirements to assess if funding is sufficient.
        Question. In your view, have the Combatant Commanders adequately
    planned for the defense of prepositioned stocks in a contested
    environment?
        Answer. In future conflict, adversaries will target logistics in
    multiple domains from here in the Homeland through the point of need,
    and prepositioned stock will likely be targeted as well. If confirmed,
    I will work with Combatant Commanders to understand their plans for
    defense of prepositioned stock and any additional support they may
    require.
                         defense logistics agency (dla)
        Question. On behalf of the USD(A&S), the ASD(S) is charged to
    ensure the effectiveness, efficiency, economy, and performance of the
    Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). In particular, the ASD(S) is
    accountable for DLA's mission performance and for ensuring that DLA is
    attentive and responsive to customer requirements, both inside and
    outside DOD.
        If confirmed, what would be your approach to the supervision and
    oversight of DLA?
        Answer. The Defense Logistics Agency is the nation's combat
    logistics support agency, delivering global logistics support in both
    peacetime and war. It provides critical support to the Military
    Services, other federal partners, and allied nations. If confirmed, I
    will conduct regular reviews with the DLA Director and the DLA
    leadership team to assess their performance metrics, ensure their
    strategic priorities and actions are aligned with the Department's
    goals, and leverage DLA's capabilities to enhance the sustainment
    enterprise.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you measure DLA's responsiveness
    to the needs of an expansive customer base that makes use of its
    products and services, including: the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine
    Corps, Space Force, Coast Guard, the 11 combatant commands, other
    federal agencies, and partner and allied nations?
        Answer. I understand DLA uses annual surveys and customer action
    plans to evaluate its responsiveness to its customer. If confirmed, I
    will work with DLA to ensure these measures cover all aspects of DLA
    support (strategic, operational, and tactical) and benchmark industry
    standards and trends. I will also work with DLA to ensure survey
    results are integrated into customer action plans that are transparent
    to customers.
        Question. How would you measure DLA's price transparency and
    competitiveness?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work directly with DLA's senior
    leadership, along with my counterparts in the Office of the
    Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller), to maximize price transparency
    and competitiveness. I will also ensure DLA is well represented in key
    DOD logistics and sustainment governance venues to provide
    opportunities to share cost and pricing information with customer
    organizations.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you seek to inspect and evaluate
    DLA's management of its Working Capital Fund?
        Answer. DLA's Working Capital Fund is vital to the successful
    operations across the Department. If confirmed, I would review the
    customer support performance of DLA's Working Capital Fund and support
    efforts that improve effectiveness, efficiency, and stability of the
    fund. I would rely on a collaborative approach, ensuring a close
    relationship between my office, OSD Comptroller, and DLA to maximize
    flexibility when opportunities arise to better manage the fund and
    support the warfighter.
        Question. In addition to its well-known logistics offerings, DLA
    also operates the Defense Agency Initiative (DAI) system, which many
    DOD Components use as the basis for their financial and human resources
    management systems.
        How would you exercise your responsibility to ensure that DAI is
    ``audit ready''?
        Answer. Financial improvement and audit readiness remains an
    integral part of the Department's strategy, and DLA is a key enabler to
    that effort. I understand the DAI system has received a clean audit
    opinion for the last five years. If confirmed, I will work with DLA to
    ensure they maintain this same level of audit readiness focus for DAI
    going forward. Leaders throughout DOD are embracing financial
    improvement and audit remediation responsibilities and working to
    increase transparency in how the Department manages its resources.
        Question. The reform of DOD's business operations is the third
    pillar of the 2018 NDS, with the goal of saving $46 billion over four
    years--savings that would be reinvested in enhancing the readiness and
    lethality of the force.
        What business operations reforms has DLA achieved, and how much
    money has been saved as a result of each such reform?
        Answer. My experience with DLA is that the agency has driven cost
    efficiencies for the Department over time through various techniques,
    including increased standardization and automation, greater
    consolidation of requirements across its customer base, and leveraging
    commercial supply chains to reduce inventory. While I am not
    specifically familiar with the reforms and associated savings DLA
    contributed in the last four years, if confirmed, I will ensure DLA
    remains focused on balancing cost efficiencies with improved readiness
    and business operations.
        Question. To what readiness and lethality objectives or programs
    were these savings transferred?
        Answer. Although not specifically familiar with the savings
    recently generated by DLA, it is my understanding that DLA savings
    typically result in increased buying power for the Services and other
    customers.
        Question. DLA customers have long expressed concerns that the non-
    availability of spare parts required to complete repairs and
    maintenance have led to delays in throughput and readiness shortfalls.
        What is your assessment of DLA's track record for ordering and
    delivering parts on time?
        Answer. I understand that DLA awards nearly 10,000 orders a day and
    that 90% of those orders are satisfied within less than a day as a
    result of DLA's expansive supplier network and utilization of long-term
    contracts. My understanding is that DLA is revising Performance Based
    Agreements with customers to establish customer-centric, standardized
    baseline and partnership metrics. If confirmed, I would work with the
    DLA Director to continue linking costs to metrics performance and
    leveraging the data to adjust system levers to better align obligations
    with Service demands within operating cash thresholds.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to improve
    DLA's performance in this regard?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would utilize Department governance
    structures and mechanisms to improve demand forecasts, and order and
    delivery performance. I would work with DLA, the Military Services, and
    other stakeholders to continue to improve the accuracy of demand
    predictions and end-to-end procurement and delivery times. I would
    focus on root cause analysis for any performance issues, continue
    improving data analytics to inform decision making, and focus on
    greater transparency for our Military customers.
        Question. If confirmed, what will you do to assist the Military
    Services in improving the reliability of the spare parts forecasts they
    submit to DLA?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with DLA and the Military
    Services to leverage data analytics to inform decision making, continue
    improving forecast reliability, and reduce buyback rates, with an
    emphasis on transparency, governance, and accountability.
        Question. If confirmed, what policies and procedures would you
    support to ensure that DOD Components do not acquire excess inventory
    of spare parts?
        Answer. My understanding is that inaccurate demand forecasting and
    changing requirements are the leading reasons for the accumulation of
    excess inventory, which also strains DOD's cash position. I understand
    DLA has already had some success in managing consumable items with
    alternative level-setting strategies that reduced excess inventory. If
    confirmed, I will continue to improve DOD's planning process by
    implementing data-driven inventory management procedures to deliver the
    best business outcomes for DOD and reduce excess inventory of spare
    parts.
        Question. What is your understanding of DLA's role in Foreign
    Military Sales, and what steps would you take, if confirmed, to
    expedite requisite certification and acceptance processes?
        Answer. I understand DLA plays a critical role in providing Foreign
    Military Sales to our allied partners, especially sustainment of spares
    that impact readiness. If confirmed, I will work with DLA to reduce
    order wait time, prioritize stock availability, and support higher
    priority of demands as needed by our partners.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you propose to assign priority
    among U.S. forces and allied and partner forces, for access to spare
    parts in the event of a shortage?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that spare parts are
    distributed in a manner consistent with the National Defense Strategy,
    Combatant Command requirements and the priority of the Administration.
    In the event of a shortage, I will review our policies and direct
    changes, where required, to attain the highest level of mission
    success.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role DLA played in
    response to the COVID-19 pandemic for the Department of Defense and
    other federal agencies? What best practices should DLA seek to
    implement in the future regarding pandemic response?
        Answer. My understanding is that DLA played and continues to play a
    critical role in supporting the Nation, supplying billions of dollars
    in support for vaccines, test kits, and Personal Protective Equipment
    (PPE) for the Department and other federal agencies. In addition, I
    understand DLA utilized its logistical core competencies and supply
    chain management to provide vital PPE that was distributed on behalf
    the Department of Health and Human Services to the Nation's health care
    providers.
        In terms of best practices, I believe DLA should continue to
    leverage its access to integrated supply chains, contingency
    contracting, strategic sourcing, inventory optimization, and the
    incorporation of emerging business technologies to rapidly scale in
    support whole of government responses. DLA should partner in support of
    the lead federal agencies to promote rapid and effective federal
    response to future pandemics and other contingencies.
                        corrosion prevention and control
        Question. Corrosion negatively affects DOD equipment and
    infrastructure and can lead to reduced asset availability,
    deterioration in performance, and increased weapon system and
    infrastructure costs.
        What is your understanding of the efficacy of the Department-wide
    strategy to prevent and mitigate weapon systems corrosion?
        Answer. Corrosion remains a challenge for DOD weapon systems and
    facilities. The Department updated its strategy in 2021 to better
    address acquisition, sustainment, and technology challenges, directly
    aligning the strategy with the NDS and DOD Business Enterprise
    Architecture outcomes. The strategy now focuses on a data-driven
    approach to reduce readiness, cost, and safety impacts through clearly
    defined lines of effort. If confirmed, I will work with the Military
    Departments, Defense Agencies, and commercial entities to fully
    implement this strategy.
        Question. Prior to 2018, the Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office
    reported directly to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
    Technology, and Logistics. With the establishment of the USD(A&S), the
    Corrosion Office was moved to the Office of the ASD(S).
        If confirmed, what would be your relationship with the Director of
    the Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office?
        Answer. I understand the Director of the Corrosion Policy and
    Oversight Office is assigned to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
    Defense for Materiel Readiness DASD(MR), who in turn reports directly
    to the ASD(S). If confirmed I will work closely with DASD(MR) and the
    Director to integrate corrosion prevention and control into sustainment
    policies and to transition innovative technologies and processes
    focused on reducing the impact of corrosion on systems and facilities
    across the sustainment enterprise.
        Question. If confirmed, what approach would you take to reviewing
    corrosion programs and funding levels proposed by the Military
    Departments, and in making recommendations to the Secretary of Defense
    regarding those programs and proposed funding levels?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Director,
    Corrosion Policy and Oversight and the Military Department Corrosion
    Control and Prevention Executives (CCPE) to define the requirements for
    the Military Department Corrosion Programs and establish programmatic
    and budgetary reporting expectations that support the DOD Corrosion
    strategy. Consistent program requirements and reporting will ensure a
    successful implementation of the strategy and enable me to make
    informed and actionable recommendations to the Secretary of Defense on
    these matters.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to improve
    oversight of corrosion with respect to the Military Services?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Department
    CCPEs to improve communication and collaboration. In addition, I will
    integrate corrosion prevention and control into Sustainment Reviews
    where appropriate.
           planning for contractor support in contingency operations
        Question. GAO has reported that DOD OPLANs often fail to include an
    approved ``Annex W'' addressing contract support requirements,
    contractor management plans, contract oversight processes, and manpower
    requirements for the execution of contractor oversight.
        What progress has the Office of the ASD(S) made promulgating
    policies and processes to assist Combatant Commanders in identifying
    and planning for the scope and scale of contract support that will be
    needed for a particular operation?
        Answer. It is important that more precise and more rigorous
    planning methods are used to develop contract support (commercial)
    requirements and that those requirements are incorporated in
    Commanders' planning and execution frameworks. It is also crucial that
    Commanders are able to determine scope and scale of those support
    requirements so that appropriate oversight mechanisms are in place to
    ensure contracted support continues to deliver effective and efficient
    operational capabilities to Combatant Commanders. If confirmed, I will
    review the progress made to establish policy and processes for
    operational contract support.
        Question. What steps has the Office of the ASD(S) taken to
    establish policy for foreign vendor vetting by combatant commands?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review policy and progress on
    establishing a program and oversight for foreign vendor vetting as well
    as the work underway by combatant commanders to prevent contracting
    with adversaries.
        Question. In your view, what steps must DOD take to integrate
    operational contract support in functional areas beyond logistics? What
    would be the benefits of such integration? Are there downsides to such
    integration, in your view?
        Answer. Contractors are used across many functions, not just in
    logistics (e.g., intelligence/reconnaissance, engineering, and command
    and control). As such, operational contract support concepts should be
    integrated across all applicable functional areas and domains, so that
    Combatant Commands may adequately plan for contracted requirements and
    manage contracted support to get the best results for the Department
    and the taxpayer. Benefits include more clearly quantified
    requirements, more timely planning, less contracting fratricide/waste,
    and more favorable mission outcomes. If confirmed, I will work to
    implement policy and processes that ensure the effective use of
    contracted services to achieve operational objectives.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to improve the
    execution of contractor oversight in the context of a contingency
    operation?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to work with partners in
    ASD(Acquisition), the Joint Staff, the Services, and Combatant Commands
    to support work already underway in this area. I would also advocate
    for continuous improvement of contractor oversight by ensuring it and
    other operational contract support considerations are appropriately
    addressed in policy, processes, systems, and training.
                                life cycle costs
        Question. In a February 2019 report, GAO asserted that
    approximately 70 percent of the life-cycle costs of a weapon system are
    incurred in the system's operating and support phase.
        In your view, what more could the Office of the ASD(S) do to
    advocate and influence a life cycle focus for effective product
    support?
        Answer. Given that sustainment costs can represent 70% of total
    weapon system lifecycle cost, the Office of ASD(S), must drive early
    sustainment planning, in coordination with the Services and industry.
    The best opportunities to influence affordability occur prior to
    production as systems are being designed. Once the design is set, and
    production begins, the Department has very little ability to influence
    affordability.
        If confirmed, I will continue to fully support ongoing efforts to
    reform logistics processes through the Department's logistics reform
    team. These reforms not only will enhance readiness, but also drive
    down sustainment costs. Additionally, I will focus on identifying a
    common set of metrics and tools coupled with a robust governance
    structure to measure and monitor sustainment's contribution to
    warfighting capability, in terms of availability of weapon systems and
    cost per day of availability.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps, if any, would you take to
    ensure that life cycle maintenance and sustainment requirements are
    considered in the acquisition process for new DOD systems and
    platforms?
        Answer. Maintenance and Sustainment requirements should be
    identified as early as possible in the acquisition process. Influencing
    the design of the weapons system for supportability is the principal
    way that long term maintenance and sustainment requirements can be
    reduced or even eliminated. If confirmed, I will support the recently
    published policy that requires the assignment of a Product Support
    Manager at program inception. This individual is the principal resource
    provided to the Program Manager to ensure that maintenance and
    sustainment requirements are considered early in the program's life
    cycle. Additionally, I will continue to support the development and
    identification of analytical tools and training to enable the PSM to
    provide this support.
        Question. Do you believe that the fully burdened cost of fuel is an
    appropriate factor for the Department to consider in evaluating
    acquisition alternatives? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. The fully burdened cost of fuel is an important factor that
    should be considered when evaluating acquisition alternatives because
    it recognizes the additional infrastructure costs associated with
    delivering and protecting the energy supply chain. I understand that
    the current Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) guidance includes the
    requirement to consider the fully burdened cost of fuel. If confirmed,
    I will continue to emphasize the importance of utilizing the fully
    burdened cost of fuel factor when performing the AoA.
        Question. If confirmed, by what standards would you measure the
    adequacy of lifecycle maintenance and support funding?
        Answer. Lifecycle funding should reflect the Mission Capability
    requirements, Operating Hours, equipment population, and fielding
    locations reflected in weapon system planning documentation. The
    Military Services set these requirements and should fund operations and
    maintenance accounts accordingly. If confirmed, I will continue to work
    with the Military Services and advocate for funding requirements for
    lifecycle maintenance and support.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps, if any, would you take to
    ensure that life cycle maintenance and sustainment requirements are
    adequately funded via the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and
    Execution process?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would track and monitor Service Program
    Objective Memorandum (POM) submissions to ensure sustainment planning
    is adequately funded. I would also work with the Military Services to
    ensure they manage equipment portfolios such that new weapons systems
    and retiring weapon systems are balanced in light of top line funding.
        Question. What steps would you take to use technologies developed
    by the Department of Defense and commercial and defense industries to
    help reduce sustainment costs?
        Answer. New and emerging technologies are critical to enhance the
    Department's ability to reduce sustainment costs. These include
    prognostics, health management, and Condition Based Maintenance for
    detecting potential failures, as well as new and unique turbine blade
    coatings for extended service life. If confirmed, I will support
    Department efforts to invest in these technologies that result in
    sustainment cost reductions.
        Question. What incentives would you provide to industry to help
    reduce sustainment costs?
        Answer. Incentives for industry can take many forms to include
    award term for contracts or greater profit margins when overall
    sustainment costs are reduced and system availability metrics are met
    or exceeded. If confirmed, I will continue to work with the logistics
    communities in the Department and Industry to identify more incentives
    to reward cost reduction and system availability increases.
        Question. What is your view on the use of share-in-savings to
    create incentives for industry to provide technologies that will reduce
    sustainment costs?
        Answer. I believe the Department should provide incentives for
    industry to reduce sustainment costs and foster sustainment vehicles
    that allow for long-term investments that yield a return in the form of
    increased system reliability and lower repair costs. This would also
    include incentives for industry to invest in organic depot repair
    efficiencies through the use of Public Private Partnerships. In
    anticipation of these benefits, the Department should incorporate
    contract terms and conditions that allow for government and industry to
    share in these savings.
                             household goods moves
        Question. Many military families communicated with the Committee
    about the significant hardships they experienced during the 2018 summer
    Permanent Change of Station (PCS) cycle, including: unprofessional and
    untrained household goods packers and movers; unannounced and extensive
    delays in the pickup and delivery of household goods; extensive damage
    to personal property; and limited engagement by the Military Services
    in providing oversight and taking corrective action on complaints.
        What role has the Office of the ASD(S) played in addressing
    systemic concerns about DOD's household goods transportation system?
        Answer. In my role performing the duties of the Undersecretary of
    the Army, I am aware that the ASD(S) joined with USTRANSCOM, the
    Services, and other stakeholders to identify actions to improve the
    program, supports the award of the Global Household Goods Contract, and
    participates in senior leader forums that address the concerns of
    military families. If confirmed, I would continue these critical
    efforts to improve the relocation process for servicemembers and their
    families.
        Question. What progress has the Office of the ASD(S) made in
    addressing these concerns?
        Answer. I am aware that a cross-functional team, co-chaired by
    ASD(S) and USD(Personnel and Readiness), identified a number of short
    and long-term actions to improve DOD's Household Goods Program,
    including awarding a multiyear Global Household Goods Contract (GHC).
    If confirmed, I would support the rollout of the GHC and the completion
    of the other reforms with the goal of delivering high-quality, on-time
    moving experiences for servicemembers and their families that are free
    from loss and damage to property.
        Question. What are your views of TRANSCOM's effort to privatize
    management of household goods moves under the Global Household Goods
    Contract (GHC)?
        Answer. It is my understanding the GHC does not ``outsource''
    household goods shipments; rather, it integrates activities currently
    performed by hundreds of separate commercial providers into a contract
    with a single move manager. USTRANSCOM continues to set requirements
    for the program through its contract with the single move manager. If
    confirmed, I would work with USTRANSCOM and the Services to transition
    to the GHC, which I understand may begin as early as Spring of Calendar
    Year 2022 in order to support the Calendar Year 2023 moving season.
                               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 Office of the ASD(S)?
        Answer. I understand that, just like every other organization
    within DOD, the Office of the ASD(S) is aligned with the Secretary
    Austin's and Deputy Secretary Hicks' emphasis on eliminating sexual
    harassment and gender discrimination. I fully support this emphasis and
    will ensure that the workplace is one that is safe and equitable for
    all staff.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
    receive or otherwise become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment
    or discrimination from an employee of the Office of the ASD(S)?
        Answer. Sexual harassment and discrimination have no place in any
    organization that I have led and will not have any place in an
    organization I may lead in the future. If I am confirmed and I receive
    a complaint from an employee, I would take immediate action to ensure
    that complaint is appropriately addressed.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
    timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
    electronic communications, and other information from the executive
    branch.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer 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 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 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
    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 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 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 yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
                                     ______

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
                     question on nominees' fitness to serve
        1. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lowman, since you became a legal adult, have
    you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors, or committed any
    verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
        Mr. Lowman. No.

        2. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lowman, have you ever faced discipline, or
    entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
        Mr. Lowman. No.
                            defense logistics agency
        3. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, you would have
    oversight of the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which has a large role
    regarding Red Hill facility in Hawaii. If confirmed, will you conduct
    oversight of DLA to ensure that the agency prioritizes the defueling of
    the Red Hill facility?
        Mr. Lowman. I understand the Department is currently conducting a
    review of the Red Hill's long-term future, to include the option of
    permanently defueling the facility. If confirmed, I will work with DLA
    and the Navy to support this review, and ensure that any resulting
    actions have the appropriate oversight, resources, and authorities to
    protect the health and safety of the people of Hawaii and the
    environment, while also supporting our strategic objectives in the
    Indo-Pacific theater.

        4. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lowman, there is concern that DLA has not
    played a large enough role in oversight of the Red Hill facility. If
    confirmed, will you look into whether the agency should have a larger
    role in oversight of the facility than it has had in the past?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes, if confirmed, I will work with the Director of DLA
    to review DLA's oversight of the Red Hill facility and look for
    opportunities to strengthen that oversight where appropriate.
                                   __________

               Questions Submitted by Senator Angus S. King, Jr.
                             additive manufacturing
        5. Senator King. Mr. Lowman, 3D printing can help address
    logistical, readiness, and sustainment challenges throughout the DOD
    enterprise by providing parts and materials for platforms in a deployed
    setting. If confirmed, what steps will you take so that maintainers of
    platforms and weapons systems can quickly access additive manufacturing
    technology at the depot level, intermediate maintenance activity level,
    and individual platform level?
        Mr. Lowman. Manufacturing at the point of need will help to reduce
    reliance on vulnerable supply chains, transportation assets, and
    storage requirements. I believe that maintainers of platforms and
    weapons systems must be able to quickly access additive manufacturing
    technology at the depot, intermediate and individual maintenance
    activity levels to ensure maximum impact of this capability. If
    confirmed, I will review the Department's existing 3D printing
    implementation efforts and look for opportunities to accelerate
    implementation.
                                  kc-46 basing
        6. Senator King. Mr. Lowman, the Maine Air National Guard's 101st
    Air Refueling Wing (101st ARW) sits near some of the most commonly
    trafficked Trans-Atlantic refueling tracks and has cold weather
    experience that makes it capable of supporting Arctic operations. Given
    its strategic location and the proven capability of the 101st ARW,
    would you support modernizing the wing with the new KC-46 aircraft?
        Mr. Lowman. Having robust aerial refueling capabilities are
    critical to sustaining operations in theaters like the Artic. If
    confirmed, I will work with the Air Force and USTRANSCOM to review the
    force structure of the aerial refueling fleet and ensure that they have
    an appropriate modernization strategy in place so that the fleet can
    continue this support in the future.
                                   __________

                     Questions Submitted by Senator Peters
                           weapon systems sustainment
        7. Senator Peters. Mr. Lowman, the Fiscal Year 2021 National
    Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) directed the Department of Defense to
    establish readiness metrics to address ``the materiel availability,
    operational availability, operational capability, and materiel
    reliability of each major weapon system by designated mission, design
    series, variant, or class'' (title 10 U.S. Code Sec. 118). Starting
    with the Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget Request, the Secretary of
    Defense is required to submit an annual report on major weapons systems
    sustainment for the period covered by the future years defense program
    (FYDP) to include (1) an assessment of the materiel availability,
    operational availability, and materiel reliability for each major
    weapon system; and (2) a detailed explanation of any factors that could
    preclude the Department of Defense or any of the military departments
    from meeting applicable readiness goals or objectives. If confirmed,
    will you ensure compliance with this statutory requirement to provide
    Congress with an assessment of major weapon system sustainment in the
    budget request, and agree to be open with this committee on factors
    inhibiting the Department from reaching those requirements through the
    FYDP, to include fiscal constraints?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes. If confirmed, I will work with my staff and the
    Military Services to ensure the Department is compliant with this
    statutory requirement.
                                   __________

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Duckworth
        cybersecurity threats to our logistics networks and supply chain
        8. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lowman, there is one area of our
    logistics backbone that I am not confident DOD nor our industry
    partners have adequately addressed: cyber threats to our logistics and
    supply chain networks. As we discussed last week, the Government
    Accountability Office (GAO) released a report in 2020 on cybersecurity
    threats to the Defense Logistics Agency's network. GAO identified five
    critical vulnerabilities, which included over a thousand unaddressed
    risks. To this day, none of those five vulnerabilities have been closed
    according to GAO. If confirmed how will you ensure the leadership of
    the Defense Logistics Agency addresses vulnerabilities in the logistics
    networks needed to provide a combat credible force?
        Mr. Lowman. In any future conflict, we can expect supply chains to
    be contested in every domain, including cyberspace. As such, ensuring
    that our logistics enterprise is cyber-secure must be a top priority. I
    understand DLA has taken steps to resolve and close the five findings
    identified in the GAO audit. If confirmed, I will ensure that DLA
    continues to work toward closing these GAO findings, and that they
    prioritize the security of the business systems and networks critical
    to their logistics support mission.
        9. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lowman, what can Congress do now to aid
    you in this effort?
        Mr. Lowman. It is my understanding that the Department remains
    concerned about cyber vulnerabilities in the industrial base,
    particularly with lower tier suppliers who have limited capability to
    monitor malicious cyber activity. If confirmed, I will review these
    efforts, to include areas that may require congressional assistance.

        10. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, will you commit to
    working with my staff on this effort and presenting my office with your
    strategy to protect our logistics backbone?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes.
                                   __________

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Thom Tillis
                          integrated project delivery
        11. Senator Tillis. Mr. Lowman, the Department of Defense has been
    challenged to deliver military construction projects, particularly
    large complex projects, on-time and within budget. Both design-build
    and design-bid-build projects have come in late and over budget. The
    large projects have also experienced an increase in litigation
    sometimes starting while the project is still in construction.
        In the private sector and especially overseas more and more
    projects are being delivered using integrated project delivery.
    Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is an approach that aligns the
    objectives of the owner (government), with those of the constructor and
    designer. Research conducted by the University of Minnesota showed that
    projects that use IPD are far more likely to complete on time and
    within budget.
        Do you agree that the Department of Defense has been challenged to
    deliver complex projects such as hospitals, command and control
    facilities and AEGIS ashore on-time and within budget?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes, I understand the Department has been challenged to
    deliver certain projects on the original schedule and budget.

        12. Senator Tillis. Mr. Lowman, is there a reason not to have some
    pilot projects to see if IPD is a better construction delivery method?
        Mr. Lowman. It is my understanding that military construction
    policy and project delivery is now in the portfolio of the recently
    created Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and
    Environment (ASD(EI&E)). While I generally think that using pilot
    projects as a way to explore improvements to any process is reasonable,
    if confirmed, I would defer to the ASD(EI&E) on the decision to
    implement this specific pilot program.
                                   __________

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
                               red hill fuel leak
        13. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lowman, the State of Hawaii ordered the
    U.S. Navy to halt operations at the Red Hill facility after a petroleum
    leak on November 20, 2021, contaminated the military drinking water
    supply. The facility is vital to United States Indo-Pacific Command
    (INDOPACOM) operational plans. From a force sustainment perspective, do
    you think DOD should look at decentralizing fuel storage in the
    INDOPACOM area of responsibility (AOR)?
        Mr. Lowman. I understand the Deputy Secretary of Defense has
    directed the Department to analyze and determine the distribution of
    fuel reserves for operations in the Indo-Pacific theater. If confirmed,
    I will support this review and ensure that all options, to include
    decentralization of fuel storage, are considered.

        14. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lowman, will you commit to personally
    briefing me within 30 days of your confirmation on the suitability of
    the former Navy base in Adak, Alaska for fuel storage within the
    INDOPACOM AOR?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes. If confirmed, I will work with USTRANSCOM, DLA,
    and other senior leaders in OSD to review all options for fuel
    distribution in the INDOPACOM AOR, and brief you on the suitability of
    the former Naval Air Facility Adak as a fuel storage site.
                                   __________

                Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
            facilities, sustainment, restoration, and modernization
        15. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, what is the current facilities,
    sustainment, restoration, and modernization (FSRM) backlog?
        Mr. Lowman. It is my understanding that the Fiscal Year 202021
    estimate of the Department's FSRM backlog was approximately $121
    billion.

        16. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, how will you work
    with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy and
    the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and
    Environment concerning current FSRMs backlogged projects?
        Mr. Lowman. If confirmed I will work with the two Assistant
    Secretaries to ensure that we have the right analytics, policies, and
    strategic partnerships in place to help address the FSRM backlog.

        17. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, what are the
    impacts on recruiting and retention if DOD cannot keep facilities safe
    and up-to-date?
        Mr. Lowman. I am not familiar with data that relates facility
    condition to recruiting and retention goals. If confirmed, I will raise
    that question with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
    Readiness (the office responsible for recruiting and retention) and the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and
    Environment (the office responsible for facility condition).

        18. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, for example, what will happen to
    hypersonic weapons testing programs if the facilities are falling apart
    and bogged down with copious facility maintenance backlogs?
        Mr. Lowman. It is my understanding that the FSRM program and its
    oversight is now in the portfolio of the recently created Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment
    (ASD(EI&E). To the extent any FSRM issues affect programs for which the
    ASD for Sustainment is responsible, if confirmed, I will work with the
    ASD(EI&E), and other senior leaders across the Department to advocate
    for the appropriate level of resourcing to ensure critical missions are
    not jeopardized due to inadequate FSRM funding.
                                  afghanistan
        19. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, maintaining ``over-the-horizon''
    counterterrorism (CT) mission is logistically taxing as Afghanistan is
    a landlocked country; therefore, what are the short and long-term
    logistical challenges for DOD?
        Mr. Lowman. If confirmed, I will proactively work with the Joint
    Staff and the DOD Components to ensure sustainment activities are in
    place to support the logistical requirements of over-the-horizon
    counterterrorism missions in Afghanistan.

        20. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, what are DOD's
    current sustainment shortfalls?
        Mr. Lowman. I am not aware of any current sustainment shortfalls
    with regard to Afghanistan. If confirmed, I will review sustainment
    requirements with senior leaders in the Department and address as
    appropriate.

        21. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, what innovative perspective and
    resolve does your background provide in resolving current ``over-the-
    horizon'' challenges?
        Mr. Lowman. Over-the-horizon (OTH) capabilities require near-term
    readiness be sustained and the necessary personnel and supplies be
    available on short notice. Over the past 30 years, I've been engaged at
    virtually every echelon of tactical, operational, and strategic
    sustainment capability ensuring readiness of U.S. Forces, regardless of
    location. OTH readiness will require visibility of sustainment
    requirements and equipment condition to ensure the necessary
    maintenance, supply, and sustainment capabilities are positioned for
    rapid response. My work developing and maturing the Condition Based
    Maintenance capability within the Army has provided a valuable
    understanding of the of the power of data and prognostic capability to
    better forecast maintenance and spare part requirements. If confirmed,
    I will work with the services and CENTCOM to ensure the necessary
    visibility and resources are available to support the OTH requirement
    for Afghanistan

        22. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, can you commit to
    exploring the options to assist at risk Afghan allies currently in
    Afghanistan?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes. If confirmed, I will work with senior Defense
    leaders to support the Department of State with their efforts in
    Afghanistan.
                                   __________

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
                              indo-pacific theater
        23. Senator Hawley. Mr. Lowman, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin
    and Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks have testified that the
    Indo-Pacific is the Department's priority theater and that China is our
    pacing threat. Do you agree with these designations?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes, I agree with Secretary Austin's and Deputy
    Secretary Hicks' assessment that the Indo-Pacific region is
    strategically vital and China is our pacing challenge.

        24. Senator Hawley. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, how will you ensure
    that the defense logistics enterprise stays focused on the unique
    logistical challenges posed by the Indo-Pacific theater, particularly
    given the vast distances our Forces will need to travel to get there
    and the need for our logistics forces to operate within the Chinese
    weapons engagement zone once they arrive?
        Mr. Lowman. If confirmed, I will work with the Joint Staff,
    INDOPACOM, USTRANSCOM, DLA, and other senior leaders in the Department
    to ensure that the defense logistics enterprise stays focused on the
    unique transportation challenges posed by the Indo-Pacific theater and
    our ability to operate in a contested environment.

        25. Senator Hawley. Mr. Lowman, Secretary Austin wrote earlier this
    year in response to my question for the record that a ``combat-
    credible, forward deterrent posture is instrumental to the U.S.
    Military's ability to deter, and if necessary, deny a fait accompli
    scenario [italics added].'' The Deputy Secretary, Under Secretary, and
    multiple commanders of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) have since
    reaffirmed the Secretary's emphasis on combat-credible forward forces.
    Do you share the Secretary's commitment to maintaining combat-credible
    forward forces in order to deter or if necessary, deny a Chinese fait
    accompli against Taiwan?
        Mr. Lowman. Yes, I support Secretary Austin' commitment to
    maintaining a combat-credible forward force that is postured and
    resourced to deter or defeat Chinese aggression.

        26. Senator Hawley. Mr. Lowman, if confirmed, how would you support
    the logistical requirements necessary to posture ``blunt'' forces
    located to the west of the International Date Line, in order to deter
    or defeat Chinese aggression?
        Mr. Lowman. I understand posturing forces in Indo-Pacific theater
    requires unique and significant resources. If confirmed, I will work
    with the Joint Staff, INDOPACOM, USTRANSCOM, DLA, and other senior
    leaders in the Department to ensure that Combatant Commanders are
    resourced to deter or defeat Chinese aggression.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Mr. Christopher J. Lowman
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Mr. Christopher J. Lowman,
    which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
    nomination was referred, follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
    nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
    requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
    form that details the biographical, financial, and other
    information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr.
    Christopher J. Lowman in connection with his nomination
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

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

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Mr. Christopher J. Lowman was reported
    to the Senate by Chairman Reed on March 8, 2022, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on March 18, 2022.]
                                   __________

        [Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Peter J. Beshar by
    Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                          duties and responsibilities
        Question. Section 9019 of title 10, U.S. Code, establishes the
    position of the Air Force General Counsel and provides that the General
    Counsel shall perform such functions as the Secretary of the Air Force
    may prescribe.
        What is your understanding of the current duties and functions of
    the Air Force General Counsel?
        Answer. The duties and functions of the General Counsel are
    determined and assigned by the Secretary of the Air Force pursuant to
    10 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  9013, 9014 and 9019. The General Counsel provides
    legal advice and guidance to the Secretary, the Under Secretary, the
    Assistant Secretaries, their staffs, and other offices within the
    Office of the Secretary, as well as to the Chief of Staff and the rest
    of the Air Staff and the Chief of Space Operations and the Office of
    the Chief of Space Operations. The General Counsel also provides legal
    services throughout the entire Department in a variety of disciplines
    including fiscal law, ethics, acquisition, dispute resolution,
    environmental law, international law, intellectual property law, real
    property law, and personnel law. The General Counsel serves as the
    Designated Agency Ethics Official, the Dispute Resolution Specialist,
    and is responsible for providing and supervising the Suspending and
    Debarring Official for the Department of the Air Force. In addition,
    the General Counsel exercises oversight of intelligence and other
    sensitive activities and investigations.
        Question. If confirmed, what additional duties and functions would
    you expect the Secretary of the Air Force to prescribe for you?
        Answer. If confirmed, I anticipate Secretary Kendall will expect me
    to provide sound and timely legal advice, on a wide range of issues, to
    assist him in carrying out the Air Force's mission to Fly, Fight and
    Win against all adversaries. Additionally, I anticipate the Secretary
    will expect me to manage the General Counsel's Office efficiently and
    effectively, while fostering an atmosphere of professionalism, and will
    expect me to work collaboratively across the organization, including
    with The Judge Advocate General, the General Counsel of the Department
    of Defense and the General Counsels of the other military departments,
    as well as the legal staffs of other government agencies.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
    that your tenure as Air Force General Counsel epitomizes the
    fundamental requirement for civilian control of the Armed Forces
    embedded in the U.S. Constitution and other laws?
        Answer. My understanding is that civilian and military personnel in
    the Department of the Air Force, as well as the entire Department of
    Defense, respect this foundational principle of our system of
    government. Civilian control of the Armed Forces is ensured by Article
    I and Article II of the Constitution. It is also embedded in federal
    law for the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Air Force. If
    confirmed, I would confer with Secretary Kendall and others to help
    ensure the Department is organized and operated to properly reflect
    this requirement for civilian control.
        Question. In your opinion, who is the ``client'' of the Air Force
    General Counsel?
        Answer. The client of the General Counsel of the Department of the
    Air Force is the Department of the Air Force.
        Question. What is your view of the responsibility and authority
    associated with the Air Force General Counsel's designation as the
    Chief Legal Officer of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. As the Chief Legal Officer of the Department of the Air
    Force, the General Counsel serves as the principal legal advisor to the
    Secretary and other senior officials. The responsibility and
    authorities of the General Counsel are those prescribed by the
    Secretary. In discharging those responsibilities, I would, if
    confirmed, seek out and greatly value the input of The Judge Advocate
    General.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your responsibility for
    providing legal advice and services to the Space Force?
        Answer. My understanding of the responsibility for providing legal
    advice and services to the Space Force is that the General Counsel
    provides legal advice to the Chief of Space Operations and the Office
    of the Chief of Space Operations, as well as other uniformed and
    civilian members of the Space Force as needed or directed by the
    Secretary of the Air Force.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you view your role as the Air
    Force General Counsel with respect to the General Counsel of the
    Department of Defense (DOD) in her role as the DOD Chief Legal Officer?
        Answer. The General Counsel of DOD is the Chief Legal Officer and
    final legal authority for DOD. If confirmed, I anticipate having a
    close professional relationship with Honorable Krass characterized by
    continuing consultation, communication, and cooperation. I also look
    forward, if confirmed, to building strong working relationships with
    the General Counsels of the Army and Navy.
                                 qualifications
        Question. What background and experience do you possess that
    qualify you to serve as the General Counsel of the Department of the
    Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I respectfully believe that I have the
    experience, judgment and temperament to serve as the General Counsel of
    the Department of the Air Force.
        First, I have extensive management experience leading a team of
    over 600 legal, compliance and public affairs professionals. For the
    past 17 years, I have served as the Executive Vice President and
    General Counsel of Marsh McLennan, a global professional services firm
    that specializes in risk management. With the support of our leadership
    team, I have built a world-class, and diverse, legal and compliance
    team. I have found that the greatest accomplishments in life are the
    collective endeavors achieved by a group of individuals pulling
    together toward a common goal. I have also developed the project
    management skills to drive policy change across an organization of more
    than 80,000 employees in 100 countries.
        Second, over the past decade, I have developed domain expertise in
    cybersecurity, with a particular focus on public-private partnerships
    to enhance the resilience of our nation's critical infrastructure. I
    have testified multiple times before Congress on cybersecurity and
    terrorism matters and had the privilege of participating in the Joint
    Service Academy's Cybersecurity Summit at the Air Force Academy in
    Colorado Springs. As the Department of the Air Force develops its next
    generation air dominance program, modernizes its nuclear enterprise and
    communication systems and builds out the Space Force, cybersecurity and
    technological innovation will be crucial priorities.
        Third, early in my career, I had the great privilege of serving as
    the Special Assistant to former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance in the
    peace negotiations in the Balkans. It was my first exposure to war, and
    it sparked a profound respect for our military and a deep interest in
    our national security. As Chair of the Veteran's Committee at John Jay
    College for Criminal Justice and executive sponsor of our veterans'
    initiatives at Marsh McLennan, I have spearheaded a series of
    initiatives to help military students and veterans get jobs and
    enhanced housing and disability benefits. As a result of the work that
    we did on multiple fronts, Marsh McLennan was voted the No. 1 Military-
    Friendly Employer in the United States.
        I have been honored to receive the Military Mondays Pro Bono Award
    from Legal Services NYC, the Distinguished Leadership Award from John
    Jay College of Criminal Justice, the Law and Society Award from the New
    York Lawyers for the Public Interest and the Business Leadership Award
    from Citizens Union.
        Question. Do you believe that there are any actions you need to
    take to enhance your ability to perform the duties of the Air Force
    General Counsel?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would be eager to meet with the
    Department's leadership team to learn more about their strategic
    priorities, including the seven operational imperatives identified by
    Secretary Kendall, to assess how best the Office of General Counsel can
    support their goals. I would plan to conduct in depth sessions with the
    talented career lawyers within the Office of General Counsel to learn
    more about the most pressing legal and compliance issues facing the
    Department. Concurrently, I would seek to develop a respectful and
    cooperative relationship with The Judge Advocate General of the
    Department and other members of the JAG Corps to understand their
    perspective on the range of legal and compliance issues that can arise
    across an organization of nearly 700,000 individuals. In addition, I
    would be eager to confer with the General Counsel of the Department of
    Defense to learn about her top priorities and how I can best support
    her objectives for the entire Department.
                        major challenges and priorities
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your vision for the Office of
    the Air Force General Counsel of today? And for the Office of the Air
    Force General Counsel of the future?
        Answer. Before articulating any type of a strategic vision for the
    Office of General Counsel, I would want, if confirmed, to consult
    widely to understand the opportunities, and challenges, before the
    broader Department of the Air Force. This would include senior leaders,
    such as the Secretary and Undersecretary of the Air Force, the Chief of
    Staff of the Air Force and the Chief of Space Operations, peers and
    others throughout the organization. I believe it is important as a
    general counsel to have a philosophy about what the team is trying to
    accomplish and how it proposes to do so. After consulting broadly, I
    would seek, if confirmed, to identify a limited set of strategic
    priorities. The office can do anything, but it cannot do everything.
        The pace of technological change is accelerating exponentially.
    Moving forward, it will be important for the attorneys and other
    professionals within the Office of General Counsel to adjust to this
    changing dynamic. The domains of cyber and space, in particular, will
    only increase in significance in the years ahead. If confirmed, I would
    hope to provide, and personally take advantage of, professional
    development opportunities in an array of emerging areas.
        Question. In your view, what are the most significant legal issues
    facing the Air Force and Space Force today?
        Answer. The top priorities of the Office of General Counsel should
    reflect the top priorities of the Department of the Air Force, and the
    broader Department of Defense. If confirmed, I would want to consult
    with the experienced and capable attorneys and compliance professionals
    within the Office of General Counsel, and with The Judge Advocate
    General and other members of the JAG Corps, to solicit their views
    about the most pressing legal issues facing the Department.
        Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
    challenges you will face if confirmed as Air Force General Counsel?
        Answer. From reading public reports and Congressional testimony, I
    would anticipate that key challenges, if confirmed, would include: (1)
    the implementation of the sexual assault reforms recently passed by
    Congress and the Independent Review Commission recommendations adopted
    by the Department of Defense; (2) the modernization of the nuclear
    enterprise, including the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent; (3)
    acquisition and sustainment initiatives for accelerating modernization
    efforts; (4) the build out of the Space Force; (5) the refinement of
    protocols, particularly around post-strike assessments and
    investigations, for minimizing civilian casualties; (6) compliance with
    environmental laws; and (7) efforts to foster a culture of integrity
    and inclusion.
        The overarching challenge for the next General Counsel of the
    Department of the Air Force will be to advise on legal issues relating
    to the Department of Defense's number one pacing challenge--China.
        Question. What plans do you have for addressing each of these
    challenges, if confirmed?
        Answer. The Office of General Counsel has experienced and capable
    attorneys who are experts in these areas of the law. If confirmed, I
    would support these attorneys in their efforts to provide the best
    possible advice to decision-makers throughout the Department. If
    confirmed, my goal as General Counsel would be to serve as a trusted
    legal advisor to enable the senior leadership to meet these challenges
    and execute the mission of 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 Air Force General Counsel must be consulted?
        Answer. The legal and policy issues on which the Department of the
    Air Force General Counsel and the Office of the General Counsel must be
    consulted are those directed by the Secretary of the Air Force. If
    confirmed, I would recommend to the Secretary that the General Counsel
    review every staffing package provided to his office for a decision. If
    confirmed, I would seek to have senior leaders engage with the Office
    of General Counsel early on in the process of developing strategies and
    plans for the Department regardless of operational sensitivity. I would
    strive to accomplish this in a cooperative and collaborative manner.
        Question. If confirmed, are there specific categories of Air Force
    General Counsel legal opinions that you would expect to reconsider and
    possibly revise? If so, what categories?
        Answer. At this time, I do not anticipate revising any specific
    category of Department of the Air Force General Counsel legal opinions.
    If confirmed, I would seek input from others in both the Office of
    General Counsel and The Judge Advocate General to see what legal
    opinions, if any, might warrant reconsideration.
        Question. If confirmed, what innovative ideas would you consider
    providing to the Secretary of the Air Force to improve the organization
    and operations of the Office of the Air Force General Counsel and to
    improve the delivery of legal services Air Force-wide?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would first study the organization and
    operations more closely, as well as the delivery of legal services
    across the Air Force. I would also solicit the views of the team
    regarding the technology available to each attorney in the Office of
    the Air Force General Counsel. As an example, we established an in-
    house innovation team at Marsh McLennan that harnessed artificial
    intelligence and other technology tools to streamline routine
    processes.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you use organizational climate
    surveys to enhance your leadership and management of the Office of the
    Air Force General Counsel?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would be keenly interested to review
    organizational climate surveys to better understand any challenges
    facing personnel in the Office of Air Force General Counsel. These
    tools can also play an important role in assessing the overall culture
    of an organization.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
    productive and mutually beneficial relationship between Congress and
    the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. Communication is crucial. It is important that the
    Department of the Air Force has a professional and collaborative
    partnership with Congress. If confirmed, I would be committed to
    building and maintaining open lines of communication and working
    closely with the Secretary of the Air Force and the Office of
    Legislative Liaison to maintain a productive and transparent
    relationship with Congress.
         relationship with the judge advocate general of the air force
        Question. If you are confirmed, how will you work with the Judge
    Advocate General of the Air Force in carrying out your duties?
        Answer. If confirmed, I intend to fully respect the role of The
    Judge Advocate General as an independent legal advisor. I would strive
    to maintain a collaborative, respectful and professional relationship
    with The Judge Advocate General. To that end, if confirmed, I would
    hope to meet regularly with The Judge Advocate General to exchange
    information and views about our respective priorities and identify
    those areas where we can collaborate most effectively. I expect that
    personnel within the Office of the General Counsel will maintain
    similar professional working relationships with members of The Judge
    Advocate General's Corps to ensure consultation and collaboration on
    matters of mutual interest and to ensure the provision of the highest
    quality legal support to the Department of the Air Force.
        Question. How are the legal responsibilities of the Department of
    the Air Force allocated between the General Counsel and the Judge
    Advocate General?
        Answer. Subject to the direction and control of the Secretary of
    the Air Force, the General Counsel serves as the Chief Legal Officer of
    the Department of the Air Force. The Judge Advocate General is
    established as part of the Air Staff and is the senior uniformed legal
    adviser to the Secretary and all officers and agencies of the Air Force
    and Space Force. The Judge Advocate General is responsible for the
    activities of The Judge Advocate General's Corps and is primarily
    responsible for providing legal advice and services regarding the
    Uniform Code of Military Justice. I recognize and understand that the
    law expressly prohibits interference with the ability of The Judge
    Advocate General to give independent legal advice to the Secretary of
    the Air Force.
        Question. How are the legal responsibilities of the Space Force
    allocated between the General Counsel and the Judge Advocate General?
        Answer. My understanding is that the legal responsibilities of the
    Space Force are allocated between the General Counsel and The Judge
    Advocate General similarly to how they are allocated for legal advice
    to the Air Force. The General Counsel serves as the Chief Legal Officer
    of the Department of the Air Force and as such, provides legal counsel
    to the Chief of Space Operations and Space Force. The Judge Advocate
    General is the senior uniformed legal adviser to the Chief of Space
    Operations and the Space Force. Per 10 U.S.C. 9037, The Judge Advocate
    General is entitled to give independent legal advice to the Chief of
    Space Operations without interference from any other office or
    employee. If confirmed, I would regularly communicate with the Chief of
    Space Operations and The Judge Advocate General to ensure all legal
    needs are met in a timely fashion.
        Question. If confirmed, will you seek to revise this allocation of
    responsibilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will strive to maintain a collaborative,
    respectful and professional relationship with The Judge Advocate
    General and between the Office of General Counsel and the Office of The
    Judge Advocate General.
        Question. What is your view of the authority of the Judge Advocate
    General of the Air Force to provide independent legal advice to the
    Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and
    Chief of Space Operations?
        Answer. The Judge Advocate General's ability to provide independent
    legal advice to the Secretary of the Air Force, the Chief of Staff of
    the Air Force, and the Chief of Space Operations without interference
    from any other employee, has been statutorily recognized as essential
    to the delivery of legal services to the Department of the Air Force.
    Beyond the statutory requirement that The Judge Advocate General be
    able to provide independent legal advice, I appreciate that military
    attorneys are in a position to provide a different legal perspective
    and many insights into key issues, and I believe the ability to share
    that perspective unhindered ensures the Department of the Air Force
    receives the most timely and thorough legal advice possible.
        Question. What is your view of the responsibility of Air Force
    judge advocates to provide independent legal advice to military
    commanders and other Air Force officials and employees?
        Answer. Air Force Judge Advocates have a critical responsibility to
    provide timely and effective legal advice to commanders in the field.
    My understanding is that The Judge Advocate General's Office takes that
    responsibility seriously and, if confirmed, I would seek to ensure the
    General Counsel's Office respects that responsibility as well.
        Question. If confirmed, would you propose any changes to the
    current relationship between the Air Force General Counsel and the
    Judge Advocate General of the Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, my top priority will be building on the
    effective and professional relationship that I understand currently
    exists between the Acting General Counsel and The Judge Advocate
    General. If confirmed, I would solicit the views of the Secretary, The
    Judge Advocate General and others, to discuss the best way to maximize
    our respective resources to meet the legal challenges facing the
    Department. Our common goal is to ensure that the Department of the Air
    Force is receiving the most effective legal advice possible.
        Question. If confirmed, would you propose any changes to the
    current relationships and/or allocation of responsibilities between
    attorneys in the Office of the Air Force General Counsel and uniformed
    Air Force judge advocates?
        Are legal opinions of the Office of the Air Force General Counsel
    binding on all Air Force lawyers?
        Answer. If confirmed, I plan to discuss the current relationship
    and allocation of responsibilities with The Judge Advocate General to
    ensure the Department of the Air Force is receiving effective and
    timely legal advice. The legal opinions within the areas of
    responsibility assigned to the Office of the Air Force General Counsel
    are binding on all Air Force lawyers.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the legal
    opinions of your office are available to Air Force attorneys, including
    judge advocates?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure legal opinions are easily
    accessible through knowledge management systems and disseminated as
    widely as possible through email and other means. I expect The Judge
    Advocate General's Office to assist in this and ensure that all judge
    advocates are aware of any legal opinions.
        Question. How do you view the role and responsibilities of the Air
    Force General Counsel in the supervision and oversight of military
    justice matters vis-`-vis the Judge Advocate General of the Air Force?
        Answer. My understanding is that The Judge Advocate General has the
    primary responsibility for providing legal advice and services
    regarding the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the administration
    of military discipline. If confirmed, I will recognize The Judge
    Advocate General's statutory duties and special expertise in military
    justice and expect to consult on matters of mutual interest. I also
    recognize the recent changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice
    with respect to certain crimes, such as sexual assault, and the
    creation of the Office of Special Counsel. If confirmed, I would be
    guided by the views of the Secretary and plan to offer support and
    advice as these important changes are implemented and carefully review
    the role of the Air Force General Counsel with respect to military
    justice matters that will be under the purview of the Office of Special
    Counsel.
        Question. Section 548 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2020 required the Secretary of Defense to carry out a
    program to provide legal counsel to victims of domestic violence
    offenses who are otherwise eligible for military legal assistance.
        In your view, how do the needs of victims of domestic violence
    offenses differ from the needs of victims of sexual assault? How should
    any such differences affect the parameters of a legal counsel program
    established for domestic violence victims?
        Answer. The needs of victims of domestic violence and victims of
    sexual assault can be similar in many ways, while also having important
    differences depending on the particular facts of each case, including
    living arrangements. As I understand it, a key parameter of the legal
    counsel program is to ensure that the assigned counsel as well as
    paralegals receive sufficiently broad training to serve all victims
    effectively.
        Question. In your view, how do the needs of military child victims
    of sexual abuse differ from the needs of adult victims of sexual
    assault and from those of domestic violence victims? How would any such
    differences affect the parameters of a legal counsel of guardian ad
    litem program established for military child victims of sexual abuse?
        Answer. The sexual abuse of a child of a military member is
    particularly abhorrent. As above, one of the most important parameters
    is the specialization and depth of the training for relevant staff.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself
    in assisting the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct the program
    required by section 548?
        Answer. If confirmed, as with all requests and needs of the
    Secretary of the Air Force, I will seek to assist the Secretary, with
    appropriate coordination and deference to The Judge Advocate General.
    comprehensive review of department of the navy uniformed military legal
                                  communities
        Question. On January 10, 2020, the Department of the Navy released
    its Comprehensive Review of the Department of the Navy's Uniformed
    Legal Communities. In commenting on the importance of the review, the
    Vice Chief of Naval Operations stated, ``[i]t is precisely because our
    legal communities provide vital services [that] are necessary to
    promote the readiness of the force and successful mission
    accomplishment, that a review of this nature was warranted . . . This
    comprehensive review was an opportunity for us . . . to reflect on how
    we conduct ourselves and do business, in terms of military justice and
    legal support to our sailors, marines, and their families.''
        Have you reviewed the report of the Navy's Comprehensive Review?
        Answer. Yes, I have reviewed the report.
        Question. Did the Navy's Comprehensive Review yield any findings or
    recommendations that you believe may be applicable or useful to the Air
    Force legal community? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. A number of the findings of the Comprehensive Review
    regarding the need for organizational structural improvements,
    professional development, and better data collection may be applicable
    or pertinent to the Department of the Air Force legal community. If I
    were to be confirmed, I would want to consult, and reflect, on these
    issues, especially regarding the build out of the Space Force, the
    implementation of the recent Uniform Code of Military Justice
    amendments, and the creation of the Office of Special Counsel. If
    confirmed, I would discuss the findings in the Comprehensive Review
    with The Judge Advocate General to determine if any of the findings or
    recommendations may be applicable, and if so, how they may best be
    implemented.
                               covid-19 response
        Question. What is your view of the legality of the Secretary of
    Defense's directive that requires all servicemembers, including members
    of the National Guard and Reserves, to be vaccinated for the
    coronavirus?
        Answer. I support the Secretary of Defense's determination that
    vaccination against COVID-19 disease is necessary to protect and ensure
    a ready Force. If confirmed, I will seek to ensure that Department of
    the Air Force's vaccination programs and guidance comply with recent
    Court rulings, applicable laws, regulations and policies.
        Question. What guidance have the Air Force and Space Force given to
    commanders regarding precautions to limit the spread of COVID-19, and
    what role has the Office of the Air Force General Counsel played in
    generating and reviewing such guidance?
        Answer. I am not familiar with the specific guidance given to
    commanders regarding precautions to limit the spread of Covid-19. I
    understand that the Department, at the direction of Secretary Austin,
    has committed significant resources and effort to this task.
        Question. What role do you believe that the Air Force General
    Counsel should play in reviewing medical, administrative, and religious
    accommodation requests from Air Force and Space Force servicemembers
    and Department of the Air Force civilian employees for an exemption
    from the Department's COVID-19 vaccine mandate?
        The Department of the Air Force General Counsel should play the
    role directed by the Secretary of the Air Force. The General Counsel
    has a responsibility for advising senior leaders of any significant
    legal concerns that have been identified and then work with the
    leadership to ensure the Department of the Air Force exemption
    processes comply with applicable court rulings, laws, regulations and
    policies.
        Question. What are your views on the medical, administrative, and
    religious accommodation processes for Air Force and Space Force
    servicemembers and Department of the Air Force civilian employees who
    seek an exemption from the Department's COVID-19 vaccine mandate?
        Answer. The publically announced processes appear to appropriately
    cover the requirements of Federal law and policy. I understand that
    processes involving civilian employees have been paused based on a U.S.
    District Court injunction. If confirmed, I would examine the
    Department's policies with respect to civilian employees so that they
    comport with the recently-issued court injunction.
                   civilian attorney recruiting and retention
        Question. In your view, does the Department of the Air Force have a
    sufficient number of military and civilian attorneys to perform its
    many missions?
        Answer. I am not currently in a position to have sufficient
    visibility into the level of resources. If confirmed, I would plan to
    review the needs of the Department with senior leaders, confer closely
    with The Judge Advocate General, review legal staffing levels at the
    other military departments and assess the adequacy of those resources.
    The demand for legal expertise in the domains of cyber and space will
    only grow in significance to the Department's evolving mission. If
    confirmed, I would also be committed to adequate staffing to
    effectively implement the changes to the Uniform Code of Military
    Justice and the Independent Review Commission recommendations.
        Question. Air Force judge advocates benefit from an established
    career progression format, substantial mentoring and training
    opportunities, and exposure to a broad spectrum of legal practice areas
    and leadership responsibilities. By contrast, Air Force civilian
    attorneys normally do not have established career programs and may do
    the same type of legal work for many years, with promotions based
    solely upon longevity and vacancies that may arise.
        If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to recruit,
    hire, and retain high quality civilian attorneys, and provide
    sufficient opportunities for their development and advancement through
    positions of increasing responsibility and leadership in the career
    civilian component of the Air Force legal community?
        Answer. I am a firm believer in the importance of providing
    opportunities in professional development and career progression. As
    part of that process for me personally, I have been reading and
    watching many of the materials recommended by General Brown. If
    confirmed, I would seek to confer with the members of the Office of
    General Counsel and others and hope to build on existing programs to
    develop compelling professional development opportunities, particularly
    around emerging areas of the law relating to technological advances. If
    confirmed, I will also seek to foster a culture of inclusion so that
    attorneys and others in the General Counsel's office are able to
    contribute to the best of their abilities. I would consider it part of
    my responsibility, if confirmed, to try to support all of the members
    of the OGC in their career aspirations.
        Question. Do you foresee that in the coming years, the Department
    of the Air Force's demand for civilian attorneys with legal expertise
    in certain technical fields (e.g., cyber, space, and intellectual
    property law) will increase, commensurate with the Department's
    evolving missions and the 2018 National Defense Strategy? If so, in
    what legal specialties would you expect the Air Force's and Space
    Force's requirements to increase, and why?
        Answer. Yes. The need for legal expertise in the domains of cyber
    and space in particular will only grow in importance to the
    Department's evolving missions. I understand the Office of Air Force
    General Counsel has already set up an Intellectual Property Cadre to
    tackle challenging intellectual property law issues.
        Question. Do you believe the Air Force, including Air Force Office
    of General Counsel, 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 believe would be helpful?
        Answer. At this time, I am not familiar enough with the current
    incentives and talent management tools that exist. If confirmed, I
    would look into these matters and determine if enhancements are needed
    to recruit, develop, sustain and retain a top-flight civilian attorney
    workforce.
        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 the Air Force Office of General Counsel to engage
    in pro bono work? If not, why not? If so, what would be the parameters
    of such a program?
        Answer. If one does not already exist, I would favor, if confirmed,
    the creation of a program to permit civilian attorneys in the Air Force
    Office of the General Counsel to engage in pro bono work. I support the
    American Bar Association's assertion that all lawyers should aspire to
    provide legal services for the good of the public. As an example, Marsh
    McLennan has been a proud sponsor of the Advanced Individual Academic
    Development program at West Point for over a decade. Furthermore, if
    confirmed, I will look at any current policies and work with the ethics
    attorneys to determine appropriate parameters.
                                     ethics
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to effectuate
    your duties as the Designated Agency Ethics Official for the Department
    of the Air Force?
        Answer. I consider this a core responsibility of the General
    Counsel. If confirmed, I would meet with the Alternative Designated
    Agency Ethics Official and Deputy Designated Agency Ethics Officials,
    as well as the leaders of the DOD's Standards of Conduct Office, to
    review the ethics program. I would plan, if confirmed, to build on the
    excellent work that has already been done and seek, through leadership
    messaging and impactful training, to foster a culture of integrity and
    inclusion.
        Question. What do you see as the role of the Air Force General
    Counsel in setting an ``ethical tone'' for all Air Force and Space
    Force personnel, military and civilian?
        Answer. Every leader has a responsibility to set the right ethical
    tone. If confirmed, I would seek to enlist the support of senior
    leaders across the Department, including the Secretary, the
    Undersecretary, the Chief of the Air Force, the Chief of Space
    Operations, the Assistant Secretaries and The Judge Advocate General,
    in reinforcing the importance of fostering an ethical environment that
    makes everyone feel proud to be associated with the Department of the
    Air Force.
        Question. What actions has the Air Force taken over time to ensure
    that its military officers and other Air Force and Space Force
    personnel are trained--throughout their careers--on ethics matters and
    the Air Force's and Space Force's core values?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Air Force has developed a
    robust training program on ethics. If confirmed, I would review these
    programs and seek to ensure that all Air Force and Space Force
    personnel have access to ethics training and understand the core values
    of the Air Force and Space Force.
        Question. What role does the Air Force General Counsel play in
    ensuring that Department of the Air Force personnel--military and
    civilian--timely identify and disclose potential personal and
    organizational conflicts of interest and take all appropriate steps to
    avoid or mitigate them?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Air Force and Space Force
    senior leadership to inform military and civilian personnel within the
    Department to understand the types of circumstances that can lead to
    organizational conflicts of interest and how to identify those
    circumstances at the earliest opportunity. Together with others within
    OGC, I would also help Department of Air Force personnel assess any
    conflicts of interests that they may have and when they must recuse
    themselves.
        Question. What training do Air Force lawyers receive to ensure they
    are competent to provide effective, accurate, and timely guidance to
    Air Force and Space Force personnel in need of counsel on ethics
    matters?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Office of Air Force General
    Counsel employs several attorneys who specialize in ethics and that
    they provide training to other attorneys. I am not familiar with the
    specifics of training programs, but would review the trainings if
    confirmed. I am also not familiar with how The Judge Advocate General
    ensures judge advocates are properly trained to handle ethics issues.
    If confirmed, as the Designated Agency Ethics Official for the
    Department,
        I would work with The Judge Advocate General to seek to ensure
    judge advocates were properly trained.
        Question. What resources has the Air Force made available to
    provide Air Force and Space Force GOs and SESs the legal advice and
    assistance they need to adhere to ethical and legal standards in
    complying with 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 am not familiar with the specific resources, but I
    understand that Air Force and Space Force GOs and SESs receive training
    on the ethical and legal standards regarding travel regulations and
    ensuring government resources are used only for official purposes. If
    confirmed, I will review the resources provided to Air Force and Space
    Force GOs and SESs and seek to ensure Air Force and Space Force all GOs
    and SESs know about the resources available to them.
        Question. What is your understanding of the actions required of a
    Department of the Air Force civilian attorney or judge advocate who
    becomes aware of improper activities by an Air Force or Space Force
    officer or official who has sought, but failed to follow that
    attorney's legal advice?
        Answer. I expect all attorneys to fully comply with applicable
    rules of professional responsibility. Under those rules, if an attorney
    becomes aware of improper activity, the attorney should raise the issue
    to a superior or another appropriate resource. In extreme cases, I
    understand that the matter may need to be referred to either the
    Department of the Air Force Inspector General or the Department of
    Justice.
                         energy security and resilience
        Question. The range of threats against which Air Force and Space
    Force installations must maintain resiliency is ever-growing.
        In your view, how can the Air Force OGC assist the Air Force and
    Space Force in better integrating energy security and resilience as
    standard components of its Military Construction (MILCON) programs?
        Answer. I understand that the Department of the Air Force has
    already engaged in exercises to test energy resilience at various
    installations and will continue to do so. The General Counsel's office
    has a continuing role in monitoring compliance with statutes related to
    energy, as well as Administration Executive Orders. If confirmed, in
    addition to supporting compliance, I will encourage lawyers in the OGC
    to review programs and policy for opportunities to integrate energy
    security and resilience.
        Question. What is the role of the Air Force Office of General
    Counsel in advising on the use of these authorities? Has the Air
    Force's or Space Force's use of one or more of these authorities
    yielded outcomes of particular promise?
        Answer. I do not have working familiarity with all of the
    authorities mentioned. However, I understand that one division in the
    Office of General Counsel specializes in installation matters and thus
    supports the exercise of all of these authorities. I am aware of a few
    publicly-reported projects such as the large-scale solar array at
    Edwards Air Force Base, and if confirmed, would seek to have the
    General Counsel's office continue to support projects and initiatives
    to enable energy security and resilience.
                   environmental stewardship and conservation
        Question. If confirmed to be the Air Force General Counsel, how
    would you educate Air Force and Space Force leaders and the forces at
    large about the imperative of complying with environmental protection
    laws and regulations, as well as with guidance from the Environmental
    Protection Agency?
        Answer. I understand that Department of the Air Force General
    Counsel personnel already participate in training events for Air Force
    and Space Force personnel, as well as providing crucial one-on-one
    advice to senior leaders regarding the Department's obligations to
    comply with environmental protection laws and regulations. If
    confirmed, I will encourage Department of the Air Force General Counsel
    personnel to continue and, if warranted, expand this training and
    reiterate the importance of complying with environmental protection
    laws and regulations.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you work with the Department of
    the Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to promote
    environmental stewardship and conservation on and around Air Force and
    Space Force installations, while ensuring military readiness?
        Answer. If confirmed, in addition to ensuring Department of the Air
    Force General Counsel staff support Department of the Air Force
    compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations relating
    to such resources, I will encourage them to confer with the Department
    of the Interior and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service on how best to
    comply with relevant laws and regulations in a manner that strikes the
    appropriate balance between stewardship of lands within our control and
    the needs of the military mission.
        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. I recognize that any effort to streamline the preparation
    of EISs must ensure that federal agencies still give proper
    consideration to the environment prior to undertaking any major federal
    action that significantly affects the environment. I understand the
    Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) is currently reviewing its
    implementing regulations. If confirmed, I would advise members of the
    Department of the Air Force strive to respect the intent of National
    Environmental Policy Act while supporting CEQ's review effort.
                military housing privatization initiative (mhpi)
        Question. If confirmed as Air Force General Counsel, what would be
    your role in establishing accountability inside the Air Force and Space
    Force for sustaining the high-quality housing that airmen and guardians
    and their families deserve?
        Answer. airmen, guardians and their families deserve safe and clean
    housing under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI). I
    understand that the Department of the Air Force has made significant
    progress in implementing reforms that increased accountability within
    the MHPI program so that privatized housing meets the expected quality
    and conditions established for airmen, guardians, and their families.
    If confirmed, I would seek to have the General Counsel's office
    continue to play a key role in the implementation of the MHPI reforms
    that are contained in the National Defense Authorization Acts, in
    addition to working with the Office of the Secretary of Defense on
    policy to improve oversight and accountability measures.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to improve
    business operation constructs and vest accountability in MHPI
    ``contractors'' for strict compliance with the terms of their public-
    private partnership agreements with the Air Force and Space Force?
        Answer. I understand that the National Defense Authorization Acts
    for Fiscal Years 2020-2022 included MHPI reforms designed to improve
    certain operational aspects of MHPI projects and enhanced
    accountability in the business practices of MHPI project owners. I
    believe it is important for the General Counsel's office to help
    continue efforts to incorporate those reforms into existing contractual
    agreements, along with identifying other measures that can be
    negotiated to further strengthen accountability and improve housing
    services to our military members. In the event that MHPI project owners
    fail to comply with their contractual obligations, the General
    Counsel's office would provide legal assistance to the Department of
    the Air Force for the enforcement of appropriate remedies. In this
    regard, I note the important enforcement actions recently taken by the
    Department of Justice. In addition, the General Counsel's Office has
    the ability, on behalf of the Department of the Air Force, to suspend
    or debar MPHI providers and employees who have engaged in fraud or poor
    performance.
        Question. What progress has the Air Force and Space Force made in
    creating a ``Tenant Bill of Rights'' and enumerating ``Tenant
    Responsibilities'' applicable to military families who reside in
    privatized housing?
        Answer. I understand that the Tenant Bill of Rights was made
    available to all military tenants of Air Force privatized housing
    projects last August, as directed by the Department of Defense. If
    confirmed, I would review the ongoing work with respect to the Tenant
    Bill of Rights and seek to ensure military tenants in privatized
    housing projects are aware of their rights.
        The installation or regional commander in charge of the oversight
    of privatized housing units will serve as the ``deciding authority'' in
    the dispute resolution and payment-withholding processes established
    pursuant to section 2894 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2020.
        Question. What role will Air Force Office of General Counsel play
    in training commanders, their legal counsel, and other participants in
    the dispute resolution and payment withholding processes?
        Answer. My understanding is that, as part of its Acquisition
    Integrity Program, the Office of the General Counsel, in cooperation
    with the Judge Advocate General's Corps, provides training across the
    Air Force and Space Force on fraud remedies available in response to
    fraud, corruption and poor performance.
                           civilian casualty matters
        Question. What is your understanding of the obligations of the Air
    Force and U.S. Military in seeking to avoid civilian casualties under
    international law, U.S. law, and Department of Defense policy?
        Answer. Secretary Austin recently stated that this is a moral and
    strategic imperative for the Department of Defense.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Air Force
    General Counsel in advising DOD leadership on policies relating to
    civilian harm mitigation and investigations into civilian casualty
    incidents?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would closely review the plans recently
    announced by Secretary Austin and seek to support the Secretary and
    other senior leaders in any efforts to implement refinements or
    enhancements to existing protocols, particularly around post-strike
    assessments and investigations. In coordination with The Judge Advocate
    General and others, I would also seek to provide appropriate training
    and guidance regarding the proper reporting of relevant incidents.
                                  acquisition
        Question. In successive NDAAs beginning in fiscal year 2013,
    Congress enacted sweeping reforms of the defense acquisition system and
    organizational structure. These reforms expanded the acquisition-
    related functions of the Service Chiefs and incorporated measures
    designed to reduce the cost and development timelines of major systems.
        What is your understanding of the role of the Air Force General
    Counsel in ensuring that Air Force and Space Force acquisition programs
    are executed in accordance with the law and DOD, Air Force, and Space
    Force acquisition policy?
        Answer. As the Chief Legal Officer of the Air Force, the General
    Counsel has an essential role in seeking to ensure that the Air Force's
    acquisition programs complies with the law and DOD, Air Force, and
    Space Force acquisition policy. If confirmed, I would plan to work
    closely with the Secretary of the Air Force, the Assistant Secretary
    for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, the Assistant Secretary for
    Space Acquisition and Integration, and other senior leaders to support
    critical modernization efforts while complying with these
    responsibilities.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that Air Force and
    Space Force acquisition officials understand and leverage the
    flexibilities provided by Congress in the context of acquisition
    reform?
        Answer. The Office of General Counsel should be proactive in
    providing legal counsel to acquisition officials regarding legal
    authorities and flexibilities to meet the needs of the warfighter. I
    understand the OGC has a division of attorneys who specialize in
    acquisition and partner regularly with acquisition officials at all
    stages of the acquisition process. If confirmed, I would seek to ensure
    that acquisition officials receive sound and timely legal advice
    regarding the full spectrum of acquisition authorities so they
    understand and can leverage the flexibilities provided by Congress.
        Question. What are the legal implications that must be considered
    when the Air Force and Space Force leverage non-developmental or
    commercial off-the-shelf solutions to meet Air Force and Space Force
    requirements?
        Answer. It is important that the Air Force and Space Force leverage
    non-developmental or commercial products to meet warfighter
    requirements. Determining appropriate technical data and computer
    software license rights in non-developmental and commercial products is
    essential to making the best use of this important acquisition tool.
        Question. What is your assessment of the legal issues pertaining to
    the identification, evaluation, and management of risk in the Air
    Force's and Space Force's organic and commercial defense industrial
    base, including the munitions industrial base?
        Answer. I expect that there are many nuanced legal issues that
    pertain to the identification, evaluation, and management of risk in
    the Air Force's and Space Force's organic and commercial defense
    industrial base, including ``vendor lock'', supply chain
    vulnerabilities, and cyber vulnerabilities. The efforts to innovate in
    this area are important, but must always follow applicable statutes and
    regulatory rules.
        Question. Do you believe that the Air Force has implemented
    intellectual property (IP) best practices to ensure that the government
    has appropriate access to IP and technical data to give proper return
    on investments in research and development (R&D), retain the ability to
    re-compete programs to control costs, and exercise better control over
    program sustainment costs?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Air Force has consistently
    bolstered its intellectual property practices to enable continued
    access to needed data and software, drive competition in future
    contracts, and to reduce sustainment costs. I am aware that the Air
    Force recently created an Intellectual Property Cadre composed of
    experts in the field to address these issues, and half of the Cadre are
    part of the General Counsel's office. It is my understanding that the
    Cadre is continuing to examine new and innovative methods for
    accomplishing these goals, to include regulatory and administrative
    methods, and it will implement them as developed.
        Question. If confirmed, what adjustments would you make, or work
    with acquisition officials to make, to the Air Force's practices in
    negotiating IP and technical data rights for programs to improve its
    ability to develop, procure, and sustain new systems and technologies
    affordably?
        Answer. I am committed to obtaining and maintaining the ability to
    develop, procure, and sustain new systems and technologies affordably.
    However, as each case will be different, a one-size-fits-all approach
    will not address each matter. I will work with acquisition officials,
    if confirmed, to continue to innovate in their acquisition approaches.
          role in the air force and space force officer promotion and
                             confirmation processes
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Air Force
    General Counsel in ensuring the integrity and propriety of the
    statutory officer promotion selection board process?
        Answer. I understand that the Office of the Air Force General
    Counsel reviews all promotion board memoranda of instruction, promotion
    board results and documentation for officer promotions to ensure
    conformity with legal and policy requirements and Secretarial guidance.
    An important component of this process is trying to ensure that any
    adverse or reportable information is properly considered so that the
    Secretary can make informed decisions.
        Question. Do you perceive any need for change in this role? Please
    explain your answer.
        Answer. Not at this time. If I am confirmed, I will assess whether
    any change in this role and process might be warranted.
        Question. In your view, are the current policies and procedures
    governing review of the records of Air Force and Space Force 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 Air Force, the
    Secretary of Defense, the President, and the Senate? Please explain
    your answer.
        Answer. If confirmed, I would familiar myself with the current
    policies and procedures governing review of the records of Air Force
    and Space Force officers whose selection for promotion or assignment
    requires Presidential or Secretary of Defense approval or Senate
    confirmation. After my review, I would consult with the Secretary of
    the Air Force to learn whether he feels the current policies and
    procedures are sufficient to enable him to make informed decisions.
        Question. In your view, are these policies and procedures fair to
    the individual Air Force and Space Force officers proceeding through
    the promotion or assignment processes?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would familiarize myself with the
    applicable policies and procedures. After my review, if I find the
    policies and procedures are not fair to individual Air Force and Space
    Force officers proceeding through the promotion or assignment process,
    I would bring my concerns to the Secretary of the Air Force or the
    Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Manpower & Reserve Affairs), to
    discuss potential solutions.
        Question. What is the role, if any, of the Air Force General
    Counsel in advising senior Air Force, Space Force, and DOD officials on
    the implications of adverse or reportable information pertaining to a
    military officer nominated for promotion to General Officer grades or
    for appointment to a position of ``importance and responsibility?''
        Answer. If confirmed as the General Counsel, I believe my role in
    advising senior Air Force, Space Force and DOD officials on the
    implications of adverse or reportable information pertaining to a
    military officer nominated for promotion to General Officer grades or
    for appointment to a position of ``importance and responsibility''
    would be to seek to ensure that adverse or reportable information has
    been reported and properly investigated in compliance with law,
    regulation, and applicable records, and provide advice to the Secretary
    of the Air Force on particularly difficult or unusual cases.
        Question. If confirmed, what will be your role in ensuring the Air
    Force's and Space Force's strict compliance with section 502 of the
    NDAA for fiscal year 2020 and section 505 of the NDAA for fiscal year
    2021, regarding the conduct of boards for the selection of officers for
    promotions requiring Senate confirmation?
        Answer. If I am confirmed, I will assess whether the Department of
    the Air Force has implemented appropriate policies to meet these
    obligations. The Office of the Air Force General Counsel should provide
    advice to the Secretary of the Air Force on the need for special
    selection review boards and review all promotion related board reports,
    as well as, all Departmental communications to this committee, the
    President, and the Secretary of Defense, to ensure compliance with law,
    regulation, and applicable directives.
        Question. What is your level of confidence that adverse information
    derived from Air Force and Space Force administrative investigations is
    recorded and tracked across an individual airman or guardian's career,
    and properly considered by promotion selection boards?
        Answer. I am not in the position to provide the committee an
    assessment of my confidence in the recording and tracking of adverse
    information. If confirmed, I will assess the state of the Department's
    ability to record, track, and furnish such information to promotion
    selection boards.
                  officer personnel management system reforms
        Question. The John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2019 contains several provisions to modernize the officer
    personnel management system.
        How are the Air Force and Space Force implementing these
    authorities today and to what effect?
        Answer. I am not in the position to provide the committee an
    assessment of my confidence in the recording and tracking of adverse
    information. If confirmed, I will assess, in consultation with others,
    the state of the Department's ability to record, track, and furnish
    such information to promotion selection boards.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your role in advising and
    assisting the Air Force and Space Force in further leveraging these new
    authorities?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the Office of the General
    Counsel works closely with the Secretary of the Air Force, Assistant
    Secretary of the Air Force, (Manpower and Reserve Affairs), Deputy
    Chief of Staff of the Air Force, Manpower, Personnel and Services (AF/
    A1), and Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Personnel (SF/S1), to
    develop, review, and implement Departmental policy on matters
    pertaining to officer management and promotion.
        Question. Are there other authorities that the Air Force and Space
    Force need to modernize the management of their officer personnel?
        Answer. I am not currently able to offer an opinion on the need for
    additional legislative or regulatory authority to modernize the
    management of officer personnel. However, if confirmed, I believe the
    Office of the General Counsel should be involved in assessing the need
    and assisting in drafting any legislative proposals.
                         non-deployable servicemembers
        Question. In July 2018, DOD published Department of Defense
    Instruction (DODI) 1332.45, Retention Determinations for Non-Deployable
    Servicemembers. DODI 1332.45 provides that the Secretaries of the
    Military Departments may ``retain . . . those servicemembers whose
    period of non-deployability exceeds the 12 consecutive month limit . .
    . if determined to be in the best interest of the Military Service.''
        What factors would you consider in advising the Secretary of the
    Air Force that the retention of an airman or guardian who has been non-
    deployable for more than 12 months is ``in the best interest of the
    Service''?
        Answer. If confirmed, the main factors I would consider would
    include the individual circumstances of the airman or guardian, and the
    overall force needs and readiness capabilities of the Department of the
    Air Force.
        Question. In your view, what legal and legal policy parameters
    govern how this policy should be applied to airmen and guardians with
    HIV and to airmen and guardians who identify as transgender?
        Answer. I understand the policy with respect to airmen and
    guardians with HIV continues to be reviewed in light of new medical
    treatments and HIV prevention methods. I understand the policy for
    airmen and guardians who identify as transgender has been updated in
    the past year and continues to be reviewed. However, I am not familiar
    with the specific details of those policies. If confirmed, I would
    review those policies and work with senior leaders and medical
    personnel in the Department of Defense and the Department of the Air
    Force to better understand the legal and policy parameters around these
    issues.
     sexual assault, harassment, and discrimination prevention and response
        Question. What is your view of the adequacy of Department of Air
    Force-level oversight of the implementation of policies for the
    prevention of and response to sexual assaults and sexual harassment in
    the Air Force and Space Force?
        Answer. I have reviewed the Independent Review Commission's
    recommendations and the military justice reforms recently approved by
    Congress regarding the prevention of and response to sexual assault and
    sexual harassment in the Air Force and Space Force. I am troubled by
    the reports that have come out about the prevalence of sexual assault
    and sexual harassment across the Department of Defense. I am not
    familiar with the exact contours of the Department of Air Force-level
    oversight of the implementation of policies for the prevention of and
    response to sexual assault and sexual harassment in the Air Force and
    Space Force. If confirmed, I will make this a priority.
        Question. In your view, what can the Air Force General Counsel do
    to ensure improvements in such oversight?
        Answer. The goal of these important reforms is to implement
    effective and lasting change to prevent and, when necessary, respond to
    instances of sexual assault and sexual harassment. This will require
    the support and commitment of the senior leadership, military and
    civilian staff, including commanders across the world and countless
    others throughout the Department. If confirmed, I will confer with the
    Secretary, and other senior leaders including The Judge Advocate
    General about the best way to bolster the implementation and oversight
    of these reforms.
        Question. What is your view of the value of the Air Force's Special
    Victims' Counsel program? In your view, has this program had any effect
    on the reporting and prosecution of allegations of sexual assault in
    the Air Force and Space Force?
        Answer. I understand the Air Force's Special Victims' Counsel
    program was put in place to provide victim-centered advice and advocacy
    to sexual assault victims. At this point, I have not closely studied
    the program and am not aware of any specific effect the program has had
    on reporting and prosecution of allegations of sexual assault in the
    Air Force and Space Force. If confirmed, I look forward to learning
    more about the details and efficacy of this program in collaboration
    with The Judge Advocate General.
        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 Air Force's program to prevent and respond
    to sexual harassment in the Air Force and Space Force?
        Answer. The IRC Report referenced a ``continuum of harm'' that can
    often be traced from sexual harassment to sexual assault. I understand
    the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 added
    sexual harassment to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. If
    confirmed, I would plan to confer with The Judge Advocate General about
    the implementation of new policies related to this amendment to the
    Uniform Code of Military Justice and review the Department's program to
    prevent and respond to sexual harassment in the Air Force and Space
    Force.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for yourself,
    in addressing the problem of sexual assault and sexual harassment in
    the forces?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would confer with the Secretary to discuss
    the best way that the OGC can help address the problem of sexual
    assault and sexual harassment in the force. If confirmed, I would
    anticipate working closely with the Secretary, the Undersecretary, the
    Assistant Secretary for Manpower & Reserve Affairs and The Judge
    Advocate General to help implement the recommendations from the
    Independent Review Commission and the changes directed by Congress in
    the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022.
        Question. In your view, does the Air Force's method for tracking
    the submission and monitoring the resolution of informal Equal
    Employment Opportunity complaints of harassment or discrimination
    provide Air Force and Space Force leaders, supervisors, and managers,
    with an accurate picture of the systemic prevalence of these adverse
    behaviors in the civilian workforce?
        Answer. I am not familiar with the Department's method for tracking
    the submission and monitoring the resolution of informal Equal
    Employment Opportunity complaints of harassment or discrimination. If
    confirmed, I would review the method of tracking and work with senior
    leaders in the personnel department to review the number of complaints
    and determine if it provides an accurate picture of these behaviors in
    the civilian workforce.
        Question. Does the Air Force's method for recording the outcomes of
    informal Equal Employment Opportunity complaints of harassment or
    discrimination provide Air Force and Space Force leaders, supervisors,
    and managers with a means of identifying repeat perpetrators in the
    civilian workforce?
        Answer. I am not familiar with the method for recording the
    outcomes of informal Equal Employment Opportunity complaints of
    harassment or discrimination and am not sure if that method provides
    Air Force and Space Force leaders, supervisors, and managers with a
    means of identifying repeat perpetrators in the civilian workforce. If
    confirmed, I will look at the recording method and determine if any
    changes need to be made.
        Question. Do the Air Force's and Space Force's methods for
    responding to complaints of harassment or discrimination in the
    civilian workforce provide appropriate care and services for victims?
        Answer. I am not familiar with the Air Force and Space Force
    methods for responding to complaints of harassment and discrimination
    and cannot evaluate if they provide appropriate care and services for
    victims. If confirmed, I will review the methods and work with senior
    leaders in the appropriate offices to determine if they provide
    appropriate care and services for victims.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you play in shaping
    policies and processes for the prevention of harassment and
    discrimination in the Air Force's and Space Force's civilian
    workforces?
        Answer. If confirmed and subject to the guidance of the Secretary,
    I would strive to play a constructive role in shaping the policies and
    processes for the prevention of harassment and discrimination in the
    Department of the Air Force's civilian work force. I would seek to
    ensure that any policy or process complies with applicable legal
    standards takes into account any recent findings about harassment and
    discrimination in the Air Force and Space Force civilian work force,
    and provides appropriate care and services for victims.
                  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 United
    States Capitol on January 6.
        In your view, are the Department's policies adequate to address,
    document, and track extremism in the Air Force and Space Force,
    including in the civilian workforce?
        Answer. I understand that the Department of Defense has been
    reviewing the policies to address, document, and track extremist
    activities in the Air Force and Space Force, including in the civilian
    workforce. I read the recent report on the work and believe the new
    policies provide importance guidance. If confirmed, would want to study
    that report more carefully. I would also plan, if confirmed, to review
    the implementation of any new policy as a result of that work.
        Question. What is your understanding of how the Air Force and Space
    Force balance the need to identify and respond to potentially harmful
    extremist views held by airmen, guardians, and civilian employees
    against individual privacy and respect for the rights of airmen,
    guardians and civilians to hold and express personal beliefs?
        Answer. I reviewed the recent report on extremist activities and
    think the Department of Defense has found an appropriate balance
    between the need to identify and respond to extremist activities and
    the rights of individuals to freedom of expression.
        Question. Do you see a need for a change in this balance?
        Answer. I believe the brave men and women of our armed forces
    represent the best of America and that the overwhelming majority of
    airmen, guardians and indeed the total force serve this country with
    dignity and honor. I am not aware of any need for additional change
    after the recent review, but, if confirmed, I will examine this policy
    more closely.
        Question. What is your view of the recent revisions made to DOD
    Instruction 1325.06, and what is your understanding of the role that
    you would play, if confirmed, in implementing this instruction
    throughout the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. Though I am aware of the updated DODI guidance from the
    Countering Extremist Activities Working Group, I am not familiar with
    the specific recent revisions made to DOD Instructions 1325.06. If
    confirmed, I would review the recent revisions and see that
    corresponding revisions were made, as needed, to any Department of the
    Air Force policies.
        Question. In your view, do current DOD, Air Force, and Space Force
    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? Please explain your
    answer.
        Answer. It is my understanding the Department of Defense reviewed
    the policy for including information about an individual's extremist
    views in official records in their recent review of extremist
    activities. If confirmed, I would review the policy to evaluate this
    point more closely.
        Question. In your view, do current DOD, Air Force, and Space Force
    procedures hinder the ability to share this same type of information
    with other federal and state agencies charged with identifying and
    monitoring potential extremist activities? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. It is my understanding the sharing of information is one
    item that was reviewed this year, but I am not familiar with the
    details of a new policy. If confirmed, I would review the policy, and
    any changes to comply with relevant legal requirements.
        Question. A recent Department of Defense Inspector General report
    on activities prohibited under DOD Instruction 1325.06 (supremacist,
    extremist, and criminal gang activity) found that the Department of the
    Air Force had the most allegations of prohibited activity in the
    Department of Defense from January 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021,
    with 137. Of that total, 102 allegations were for ``domestic violence
    extremism participation.'' None of the other military departments noted
    any allegations in this category.
        What is ``domestic violence extremism participation'' and what is
    your understanding of why the Air Force used this term?
        Answer. My understanding of ``domestic violence extremism
    participation'' is participation in extremist activities by a person in
    the United States. I do not have knowledge of why the Department of the
    Air Force used that particular formulation and why the other Military
    Departments did not note any allegations in this category. If
    confirmed, I would seek to understand why the Department of the Air
    Force used the term and why it recorded this number of allegations in
    that category.
                           medical malpractice claims
        Question. Section 731 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2020 authorizes
    the Secretary of Defense to consider, 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 DOD health care provider.
        In your view, what should be the role of the Air Force General
    Counsel in adjudicating and approving claims under section 731?
        Answer. It is my understanding that these claims are filed with a
    legal office within the Air Force Judge Advocate General's Corps and
    that the Department of the Air Force General Counsel will not have a
    direct role in the adjudication or approval of these claims.
                      juvenile problematic sexual behavior
        Question. A 2018 media expose asserted that the U.S. Military
    frequently fails to ``protect or provide justice to'' the children of
    servicemembers who are sexually assaulted by other children on a
    military installation.
        What actions have the Air Force and Space Force taken to regularize
    policies and programs for responding to, investigating, adjudicating,
    and documenting allegations of juvenile problematic sexual behavior on
    Air Force and Space Force installations?
        Answer. I do not have this information at this time, but if I am
    confirmed I would quickly get up to speed on this important topic.
        Question. How do the Air Force and Space Force ensure that the
    victims of juvenile problematic sexual behavior receive the care,
    treatment, support, and advocacy services they need?
        Answer. I do not have this information at this time, but if I am
    confirmed I would quickly get up to speed on this important topic.
        Question. In your view, do the Air Force and Space Force have
    mechanisms to hold accountable, as appropriate, and provide treatment
    to juveniles who engage in problematic sexual behavior?
        Answer. I do not have any knowledge of the specifics on this topic.
    If confirmed, I will support the implementation of appropriate
    mechanisms if they do not yet exist.
        Question. In your view, is retrocession of jurisdiction over
    juvenile offenses committed on Air Force and Space Force installations,
    to the State or territory in which that installation is located, the
    most effective way to ensure the accountability of juveniles who engage
    in acts of delinquency, including problematic sexual behavior? Please
    explain your answer.
        Answer. I do not have the expertise or knowledge to answer at this
    time, but if confirmed, I will seek the advice and recommendations of
    the Air Force's subject matter experts.
        Question. Do the Air Force and Space Force require any additional
    authorities to establish and maintain the centralized database on child
    and youth problematic sexual behavior required by section 1089 of the
    John S. McCain NDAA for fiscal year 2019?
        Answer. I do not have any insight into the status of a centralized
    database by the Department, but if I am confirmed, I will look further
    into this matter.
                            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 perform in ensuring that airmen,
    guardians, and civilian employees of the Department of the Air Force
    who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross mismanagement are
    protected from reprisal and retaliation, including from the very
    highest levels of the Air Force, Space Force, DOD, and the Executive
    Branch?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the members of the Office of
    Special Counsel, Inspector General and The Judge Advocate General to
    ensure that airmen, guardians, and civilian employees of the Department
    of the Air Force are properly advised of the whistleblower protections
    accorded by law and regulation. It is important that all military and
    civilian staff understand their legal responsibilities to individuals
    who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross mismanagement and that
    those individuals understand their protections under section 1034 of
    title 10, U.S. Code and section 2302 of title 5, U.S. Code. In
    addition, if I become personally aware of any cases involving
    reprisals, I will take steps to address these matters in an appropriate
    manner.
        Question. What role does the Air Force General Counsel play in
    ensuring compliance with Office of Special Counsel requests to the Air
    Force and Space Force for investigations, and in ensuring the legal
    sufficiency of any such investigation the Air Force or Space Force
    conducts?
        Answer. It is my understanding the Department of the Air Force
    General Counsel has been delegated the authority to serve as the Senior
    Management Official on Office of Special Counsel referrals of
    allegations by the Secretary of the Air Force. The Department of the
    Air Force General Counsel, in collaboration with the Inspector General
    and The Judge Advocate General, coordinates recommended findings and
    actions as a result of investigations for final decision by the
    Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower and Reserves Affairs
    (SAF/MR).
                   support to the air force inspector general
        Question. What is the relationship between the Air Force General
    Counsel and the Air Force Inspector General?
        Answer. I understand the Department of the Air Force General
    Counsel and Air Force Inspector General work closely together on
    matters of mutual interest. If confirmed, I will seek to establish and
    maintain a close, professional relationship with the Inspector General,
    and will provide candid, independent, and objective legal advice where
    appropriate.
        Question. In your view, what role, if any, should the Air Force
    General Counsel have in reviewing and rendering opinions on the legal
    sufficiency of the investigations and recommendations of the Air Force
    Inspector General?
        Answer. To my understanding, attorneys assigned to the Office of
    the Air Force Inspector General provide the legal sufficiency reviews
    for all investigations that the Inspector General conducts involving
    senior officials. The Office of the Air Force General Counsel provides
    legal reviews and advice involving cases with substantiated findings
    regarding senior officials or otherwise brought to the attention of the
    General Counsel by the Air Force Inspector General [see comment above
    re: #102].
              litigation involving the department of the air force
        Question. What is your understanding of the relationship between
    the Department of the Air Force and the Department of Justice with
    respect to litigation involving the Air Force and/or Space Force?
        Answer. The Department of Justice represents the Department of the
    Air Force through its statutory responsibility to represent all
    agencies, officers, and employees in civil litigation. I understand
    most litigation matters are handled by The Judge Advocate General's
    Office, often in collaboration with the Office of the General Counsel
    of the Air Force. If confirmed, I will work with The Judge Advocate
    General to ensure the continuation of the current strong collaborative
    relationship with the Department of Justice with respect to litigation
    involving the Department of the Air Force.
        Question. In your view, should the Department of the Air Force have
    the independence and resources to conduct its own litigation?
        Answer. I understand that there is a strong working relationship
    between the Department of the Air Force and the Department of Justice.
        Question. If confirmed, what factors would you consider in
    determining whether official Department of the Air Force information
    should be released in litigation? How would your analysis of Touhy
    requests differ in cases in which the United States or the Air Force is
    a party as compared to cases in which the United States or the Air
    Force is not a party?
        Answer. I understand the factors to be considered as to whether
    official information should be released are decided by the Department
    of Defense General Counsel and have been laid out in Agency
    regulations. If confirmed, I would review the regulations to become
    more familiar with the factors that should be considered when making
    these decisions, including how the analysis may differ in cases in
    which the United States or the Air Force is a party.
        Question. How is the authority to waive attorney/client privilege
    allocated within the Department of the Air Force? If confirmed, would
    you make any changes to this allocation of authority or to policies
    governing the release of information potentially subject to the
    privilege?
        Answer. The authority to waive attorney/client privilege rests with
    the Secretary of the Air Force. If confirmed, I do not intend to make
    any changes to the allocation of authority or policies governing the
    release of information subject to the privilege, but I would discuss
    the matter with the Secretary of the Air Force and the Department of
    Defense General Counsel if warranted.
        Question. If confirmed, what factors would you consider in
    approving a request for the representation of an Air Force or Space
    Force official or employee by Department of Justice attorneys or by
    private counsel furnished by the Department, in civil, criminal, or
    congressional proceedings in which an Air Force or Space Force employee
    is sued, subpoenaed, or charged in their individual capacity?
        Answer. If confirmed, the two factors I would consider, based on
    Agency regulation are: whether the actions for which representation is
    requested appear to have been performed within the scope of the
    employee's employment; and whether providing representation would
    otherwise be in the interest of the United States. I understand that
    The Attorney General or designee makes the final decision on the second
    factor. I further understand representation of Department of Air Force
    personnel by private counsel at Federal expense, or with reimbursement
    of private counsel fees, may also be provided at the discretion of the
    Attorney General or designee.
                  air force and space force civilian workforce
        Question. In your judgment, what is the biggest challenge facing
    the Air Force and Space Force in effectively and efficiently managing
    its civilian workforce?
        Answer. A vexing problem that is hopefully receding in significance
    is the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the pace of technological
    innovation and change is exponential. This presents myriad
    opportunities and also challenges. A priority would likely be to ensure
    that civilian positions within the Air Force and Space Force remain
    competitive with private sector opportunities. If confirmed, I would be
    interested in conferring with General Brown and General Raymond, the
    Undersecretary, the Assistant Secretary for Manpower & Reserve Affairs
    and others to hear their views about the best way to attract, retain
    and promote outstanding talent within the civilian workforce.
        It is not uncommon for contractor employees--particularly those
    contracted to provide knowledge-based or administrative services--to
    work in the same offices, serve on the same projects and task forces,
    and perform many of the same functions as Air Force and Space Force
    military personnel and civilian employees.
        Question. In your view, does the Department of the Air Force have
    in place adequate processes to ensure that contractor employees do not
    perform inherently governmental functions and that contractor
    performance of ``closely associated'' and critical government functions
    is minimized? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. My understanding is the Department of the Air Force has
    robust processes in place to avoid having contractor employees perform
    inherently governmental functions and that Department of the Air Force
    officials also closely monitor contractor performance of ``closely
    associated'' and critical government functions. If confirmed, I would
    review these processes.
        department of the air force compliance with enacted legislation
        Question. In recent years, the Department of the Air Force has
    sometimes struggled to implement recently enacted legislation within a
    reasonable period of time. This applies particularly to areas of
    military and civilian personnel law.
        If confirmed, what would be your role in reviewing newly enacted
    legislation and how do you plan to ensure the Department of the Air
    Force complies in a timely manner?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Department of the Air
    Force's Office of Legislative Liaison to review newly enacted
    legislation that applies to the Department of the Air Force and then
    propose, as appropriate, courses of action to the Secretary of the Air
    Force for the implementation of new legislation and ensure any timeline
    developed is appropriate to properly implement the changes.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
    timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
    electronic communications, and other information from the executive
    branch.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer 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 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 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
    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 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 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 yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
                                     ______

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
                               transgender rights
        1. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Beshar, last year the Air Force, along with
    the Space Force, was the first Service to reissue guidance on
    transgender servicemembers following the Biden administration's repeal
    of a ban on allowing servicemembers to pursue gender transition. How
    will you ensure that the Air Force continues to treat all
    servicemembers with dignity, respect and equal treatment under law?
        Mr. Beshar. I understand the Department of the Air Force has a
    Service Central Coordination Cell that is composed of members across
    the Department of the Air Force who focus on facilitating resolution of
    transgender issues, whether medical, administrative, or other. If
    confirmed, I would review the work being done by the Service Central
    Coordination Cell and confer with its members and others across the
    Department with the goal of ensuring that all servicemembers are
    treated with dignity, respect, and equal treatment under the law.
                                 women's rights
        2. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Beshar, what steps will you take to ensure
    that anti-harassment and anti-discrimination measures are applied in
    the Air Force, given that according to the Air Force Office of the
    Inspector General, more than one-third of female servicemembers in the
    Air Force and Space Force have experienced harassment and pregnancy-
    related discrimination and women are consistently under-represented in
    leadership positions?
        Mr. Beshar. If confirmed, one of my top priorities would be work
    with Secretary Kendall, General Brown, General Raymond, Under Secretary
    Ortiz Jones, and other civilian and military leaders across the
    Department to reinforce a culture of integrity and inclusion through
    leadership messaging and training on the importance of an inclusive
    environment where everyone has the opportunity to achieve their full
    potential. This includes prioritizing implementation of the key
    recommendations from the Independent Review Commission on Sexual
    Assault in the Military If confirmed, I would review existing policies
    to make sure appropriate anti-harassment and anti-discrimination
    measures are in place, including with respect to pregnancy-related
    discrimination. If confirmed, I would also plan to confer with the
    Undersecretary, the Assistant Secretary for Manpower & Reserve Affairs,
    The Judge Advocate General, and members of the Department's Equal
    Opportunity Office, the Diversity & Inclusion Office and the Women's
    Initiatives Team, to review the work that the Department has done since
    releasing two disparity reports, and followup on the root cause
    analyses that I understand are underway.
                                   __________

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
                     question on nominees' fitness to serve
        3. Senator Hirono. Mr. Beshar, since you became a legal adult, have
    you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors, or committed any
    verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
        Mr. Beshar. No.

        4. Senator Hirono. Mr. Beshar, have you ever faced discipline, or
    entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
        Mr. Beshar. No.
                                   __________

                Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
                            statutory interpretation
        5. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Beshar, what role does legislative
    history including committee and conference reports have on the
    interpretation of statutes?
        Mr. Beshar. Legislative history does not overcome the plain
    language of a statute. However, legislative history, including
    committee and conference reports, can be helpful in understanding the
    intent behind a statute and is particularly useful if there is any
    ambiguous wording in a statute.

        6. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Beshar, do you commit to discussing with
    the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) any questions or concerns
    about statues within committee jurisdiction?
        Mr. Beshar. Yes.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Mr. Peter J. Beshar follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Mr. Peter J. Beshar, which was
    transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
    nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
    requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
    form that details the biographical, financial, and other
    information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr. Peter J.
    Beshar in connection with his nomination follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

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

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Mr. Peter J. Beshar was reported to the
    Senate by Chairman Reed on March 8, 2022, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on March 10, 2022.]

                                  [all]