[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]