[Senate Hearing 117-1003]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-1003
THE NOMINATIONS OF: MS. MILANCY D. HARRIS
TO BE DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF DE-
FENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY; DR.
RADHA I. PLUMB TO BE DEPUTY UNDER
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR ACQUISITION
AND SUSTAINMENT; MR. BRENDAN M. OWENS
TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
FOR ENERGY, INSTALLATIONS, AND ENVIRON-
MENT; AND DR. LAURA D. TAYLOR-KALE TO
BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
INDUSTRIAL BASE POLICY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 28, 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
63-591 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut TOM COTTON, Arkansas
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
TIM KAINE, Virginia JONI ERNST, Iowa
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia RICK SCOTT, Florida
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
MARK KELLY, Arizona TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
John D. Wason, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________
july 28, 2022
Page
The Nominations of: Ms. Milancy D. Harris to be Deputy Under 1
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security; Dr. Radha
I. Plumb to be Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment; Mr. Brendan M. Owens to be
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and
Environment; and Dr. Laura D. Taylor-Kale to be Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy.
Members Statements
Reed, Senator Jack............................................... 1
Inhofe, Senator James M.......................................... 4
Witness Statements
Plumb, Dr. Radha, Nominee to be Deputy Under Secretary of Defense 5
for Acquisition and Sustainment.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 38
Questions for the Record....................................... 65
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 74
Biographical Sketch............................................ 75
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 77
Signature Page................................................. 87
Harris, Ms. Milancy, Nominee to be Deputy Under Secretary of 7
Defense for Intelligence and Security.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 87
Questions for the Record....................................... 109
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 111
Biographical Sketch............................................ 112
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 114
Signature Page................................................. 120
Taylor-Kale, Dr. Laura, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of 9
Defense for Industrial Base Policy.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 120
Questions for the Record....................................... 135
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 142
Biographical Sketch............................................ 143
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 145
Signature Page................................................. 151
Owens, Mr. Brendan, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Defense 12
for Energy, Installations, and Environment.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 151
Questions for the Record....................................... 170
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 185
Biographical Sketch............................................ 186
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 187
Signature Page................................................. 193
(iii)
This hearing is printed to include all available
information
requested or required to be inserted for the
record.
(iv)
THE NOMINATIONS OF: MS. MILANCY D. HARRIS TO BE DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY; DR. RADHA I. PLUMB TO BE
DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
ACQUISITION AND SUSTAINMENT; MR. BRENDAN M. OWENS TO BE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR ENERGY, INSTALLATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENT; AND
DR. LAURA D. TAYLOR-KALE TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
INDUSTRIAL BASE POLICY
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 28, 2022
United States Senate,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:32 a.m., in
room G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Jack Reed
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Committee Members present: Senators Reed, Shaheen,
Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono, King, Warren, Peters, Kelly,
Inhofe, Wicker, Fischer, Rounds, Ernst, Tillis, Sullivan,
Scott, Blackburn, Hawley, and Tuberville.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED
Chairman Reed. Good morning. The Committee meets today to
consider the nominations of Dr. Radha Plum to be Deputy
Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, Mrs.
Milancy Harris to be Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security, Dr. Laura Taylor-Kale to be
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Based Policy, and
Mr. Brendan Owens to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Energy, Installations and Environment.
On behalf of the Committee, I want to thank each of you for
your willingness to serve in these important positions. I would
also like to welcome the guests and family members who are
present today.
Dr. Plum, I would like to welcome your husband, John, your
father, Ravi, your mother, Rama, Aunt Sheila, and cousin Tara.
Mrs. Harris, I would like to welcome your husband, Caleb, your
father, William, and your mother, Robin. Dr. Taylor-Kale, I
would like to welcome your family members, Julian, Rana,
Isaiah, Caleb, and Jaina, and I think I have got them all, but
if not, I welcome everyone.
Mr. Owens, I welcome your wife, Wendy, daughter, Harper,
son, Aman, father, Francis, and mother, Kathleen. We are
grateful to each you for your support. Dr. Plum, you were
nominated to be Deputy Undersecretary of Defense fAndor
Acquisition and Sustainment.
You bring decades of technical expertise to this position,
including your current role as Chief of Staff for the Deputy
Secretary of Defense, and in previous experiences as Director
of Research and Insights for Trust and Safety at Google, and as
a Senior Economist at the RAND Corporation.
This position has a wide range of duties, including
delivering timely, cost effective capabilities to the armed
forces, supervising all elements of defense acquisition and the
defense industrial base, overseeing the modernization of our
nuclear forces, and serving as a principal advisor to the
Secretary on acquisition, sustainment, and core logistics.
If confirmed, an urgent priority must be working to speed
up the acquisition process. We need a way to find--a way to
provide our warfighters with the equipment they need, while
also ensuring acquisitions remain on time and on budget.
Although some progress and reforms have made in recent
years, the Defense Department's acquisition process still
remains on the Government Accountability Office's high risk
list. Similarly, the Department must improve the operation and
sustainment of weapons systems over their lifecycle, a course
that is often overlooked in the acquisition process.
Dr. Plum, I would like to know how you would plan to
address these challenges as we go forward. Mrs. Harris, you are
nominated to be Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security. If confirmed, you will serve as a
principal intelligence advisor to the Secretary of Defense and
will oversee the defense intelligence enterprise.
Your considerable experience in irregular warfare and
counterterrorism policy across the Defense Department and
Intelligence Community will serve you well in this role. Among
many challenges, you will need to ensure the security and
integrity of all Defense Department business and Government
entities and personnel.
Specifically, it is vital to protect our industrial base
from cyber theft and adverse investments by competitor nations.
The Defense Department's innovation strategy relies on
trustworthy technology and intellectual property, and it is
imperative for the Department to be able to access critical
technology that is being developed by commercial and
nontraditional defense companies.
Additionally, you will need to ensure that the defense
intelligence collection agencies, NRO, NSA, and NGA, devote
resources and management attention to the support of agile
joint all domain military operations and peer competitors--
against peer competitors. These operations require a split
second targeting support, and I would like to know how you
would ensure their success.
Dr. Taylor-Kale, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Industrial Base Policy will serve as the principal advisor to
the Undersecretary of Defense for acquisition and sustainment,
and for all industrial based policies and related matters. This
position has a wide scope of responsibility, from ensuring
supply chain security, guiding Department wide acquisitions and
investments, to coordinating small business programs.
I would note your considerable experience in economic and
business affairs in both the Commerce and State Departments, as
well as your record of leadership at the Council on Foreign
Relations. If confirmed, it would be the first person to hold
this office.
As such, there are a number of important challenges you
will need to address. Notably, the Department must build
domestic production capacity to support key technology areas
such as microelectronics, artificial intelligence, and
hypersonics.
These are game changing technologies that will be key to
maintaining our advantages over China, Russia, and other
adversaries, and our defense industrial base needs an advocate
in the Department to ensure it receives the support it requires
to deliver these products.
Further, as we have seen with greater clarity over the past
several years, ensuring supply chain security and access to
critical strategic materials such as rare earth elements is
fundamentally important for the Department and the defense
industrial base. I would like to know your thoughts on how you
would address these challenges.
Finally, Mr. Owens, you are nominated to be Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment.
If confirmed, you will oversee the Defense Department's
physical footprint and provide management of military
installations worldwide, as well as leadership on environmental
safety and occupational health programs.
Your strong engineering background both in and out of
Government, as well as your experience as an energy manager at
Fort Belvoir for seven years, should serve you well. Among the
challenges for this position is the persistent threat posed by
PFAS contamination at defense installations around the world.
Cleanup and remediation efforts for these chemicals is very
costly and technically challenging, and we would like to know
what steps you would take to help implement a better strategy
moving forward. You will also need to ensure rigorous oversight
of the privatized housing companies in the Defense Department's
Military Housing Privatization Initiative. This is an issue
that this Committee has devoted considerable attention and
effort to.
Relatedly, the Department will need to take steps to
protect and maintain mission readiness by addressing the
climate resiliency of military installations. I would ask that
you share how this process can be accelerated, particularly for
installations most vulnerable to climate risks like wildfires,
drought, and flooding.
Lastly, I welcome your thoughts on how the Department can
increase its use of distributed energy on its installations
using non-defense funded contracting nationally mechanisms,
especially in the Air Force as it has lagged behind the other
services.
Thank you again to our nominees. I look forward to your
testimony, and just a note, we will work expeditiously to get
these nominees through since we anticipate and hope for a
recess in the coming week.
So we will have an expedited timeline for questions to the
record. Now, let me recognize the Ranking Members Senator
Inhofe.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JAMES M. INHOFE
Senator Inhofe. I like the recess coming. That is good.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was not going to actually read my
statement, but I know that the Democrats are whining up a
meeting right now, so I will go ahead and do so.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to our witnesses for being
here and willing to serve the Nation. As I have said many
times, this is the most dangerous world that we have seen in my
lifetime, in my lifetime is longer than anyone else in here.
So, we have had quite a few challenges facing us in your areas
of responsibility. The NDS maintains that China is our facing
threat.
The CCP is making historic investments to modernize its
military and we are falling behind because we haven't been
resourcing our strategy adequately, and that was before we had
record high inflation. We are also moving too slowly and
providing too few munitions to our Ukrainian partners. We need
a sense of urgency to make bold, smart decisions at the
Pentagon, and that actually starts with senior civilian
leadership.
Drs. Plum and Taylor-Kale, you have been nominated for the
number two acquisition position in the top industrial base
policy position in the Department, respectively. Congress and
the Pentagon work together and have made good strides in
acquisition reform, but the Chinese are still moving faster
than us.
Earlier this month, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Air Force for Acquisition said that the PLA getting new
equipment five to six times faster than we are. We all
understand, this is a problem that we have, and we will
continue to have, and just we understand their form of
Government. That they can do some things faster than we can do
them.
Mr. Owens, you are nominated to be an Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment. I am
interested in hearing your thoughts on the current status of
the military housing privatization issue. We spent a lot of
time in the last few years. Ms. Harris, you are nominated to
serve as the number two intelligence officer in the Department
of Defense.
We must do a better job at understanding our adversaries
and articulating the threat they pose to the American public.
We still don't have a handle on how to best prevent the Chinese
from stealing our technology for military and commercial
purposes. We will be--key responsibility for yours, for when
you are confirmed.
The Department requires strong civilian leadership. We look
forward to hearing each of your views in these areas. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe, and I
will recognize the first Dr. Plum, then Mrs. Harris, and then
Dr. Taylor-Kale, and then Mr. Owens. Dr. Plum, your testimony,
please.
STATEMENT OF DR. RADHA PLUMB, NOMINEE TO BE DEPUTY UNDER
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR ACQUISITION AND SUSTAINMENT
Dr. Plum. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
Inhofe----
Chairman Reed. Could you bring the microphone as close as
possible?
Dr. Plum. Sure.
Chairman Reed. Some of us have hearing challenges.
Dr. Plum. Is that better?
Chairman Reed. Much better.
Dr. Plum. Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member
Inhofe, and distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you
for your consideration of my nomination to serve as Deputy
Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment. I am
honored by the trust and confidence that President Biden and
Secretary Austin have placed in their support for my
nomination.
I also wanted to thank this Committee for its bipartisan
work, including the faithful passage of the National Defense
Authorization Act for over six years. Before I start, I want to
thank my family, my parents and sister and cousin, and, of
course, my husband and our two sons.
I would also like to thank a number of mentors, including
the late Michael Sheehan, General Stanley McChrystal, and of
course, Deputy Secretary Hicks, for their support and guidance
throughout the years.
I have been privileged to work in and around military,
civilian, and contractor workforce of the Department of
Defense, and if confirmed to serve as the Deputy Undersecretary
of Defense for acquisition and sustainment, it would be an
honor to continue to support their mission by enabling cost
effective, streamlined processes to develop and field
capabilities critical to our warfighters.
For more than 70 years, the United States leadership and
democratic values have laid the foundation for peace and
prosperity. But we are now operating in one of the most complex
and rapidly evolving environments in decades, one that
challenges much of that foundation. It is clear that the pacing
challenge of our time is China, who leverages its coercive
authoritarian means to threaten U.S. interests and democratic
values around the world.
Added to that is the acute threat of Russia, whose
unprovoked attack on Ukraine has highlighted the crucial role
our defense industrial base plays in delivering capabilities
needed to both reassure our allies and defend against our
adversaries.
No doubt the U.S. can and will prevail against our
competitors but doing so will require dedicated focus to
leverage the enduring advantages we derive from our democratic
values and a free society. We have the finest military in the
world, and the creativity and confidence of a thriving
commercial sector that is also the envy of the world.
If confirmed, my task will be to match warfighter
requirements from our military with the technologies and that
vibrant industrial base to ensure our military has the
capabilities it needs to prevail in critical missions anytime,
anywhere. To do this, we must establish clear transition
pathways for critical new technologies like hypersonics,
artificial intelligence, and directed energies.
We must field solutions more rapidly. We must leverage new
acquisition pathways to acquire software and software intensive
systems to meet the needs of our warfighters and invest in our
defense industrial base to reduce foreign dependency. We must
sustain our fielded weapon systems in a cost effective manner
and ensure the resilience of our installations and our systems
to the full range of biological, nuclear, chemical, and
environmental threats.
Of course, we must empower the defense acquisition
workforce to ensure they have the tools, authority, and
leadership they need. If confirmed, I will strive to accomplish
these critical priorities under the leadership and guidance of
the Secretary of Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and
Undersecretary for Acquisition and Sustainment.
To be successful in that task will require regular and
transparent dialog with Congress and, of course, this
Committee. Again, I want to thank you for its decades of
bipartisan work, and I am committed to working together to
ensure we can deter adversaries and defend the United States.
In all that I do, I pledge never to lose sight of that mission.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Plum follows:]
Prepared Statement by Dr. Radha Plumb
Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and
Distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you for your
consideration of my nomination to serve as the Deputy Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment. I am honored by the trust
and confidence that President Biden and Secretary Austin have placed in
me and their support for my nomination. I also thank this Committee for
its bipartisan work, including the faithful passage of an annual
National Defense Authorization Act for over 60 years.
I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to thank my family,
starting with my parents and my sister--whose unconditional support has
created a lifetime of opportunities. As the child of immigrants, I am
particularly grateful for my parents' courage in building a life across
the world to ensure that their children could live the American dream.
I would like to thank my husband, a Navy veteran, who has provided
unfailing support and our two sons who are an endless source of joy and
a daily reminder of why our mission at the Department of Defense is
truly a no-fail mission. I'd also like to thank a number of my mentors
including the late Michael Sheehan, former Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations, General Stanley McChrystal, and Deputy
Secretary of Defense Hicks for their support and guidance throughout
the years.
I have been deeply privileged to work in and around the military,
civilian, and contractor workforce of the Department of Defense over
the course of my career. If confirmed to serve as the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, it would be my
honor to have the opportunity to support their mission by enabling
cost-effective, streamlined processes to develop and field the
capabilities critical to our warfighters. I intend to apply my training
as an economist and over 20 years of national security related
experience in government, research centers, and industry to accelerate
the transition, procurement, and maintenance of capabilities needed to
meet warfighter requirements.
For more than 70 years, the United States' leadership and
democratic values have laid the foundation for peace and prosperity.
But we are now operating in one of the most complex and rapidly
evolving security environments in decades, which challenges much of
that foundation. It is clear that the pacing challenge of our time is
China, who leverages its coercive authoritarian means to threaten
American interests and democratic values around the world. Added to
that is the acute threat of Russia, whose unprovoked attack on Ukraine
has highlighted the crucial role of our defense industrial base in
delivering the capabilities needed to reassure our allies and defend
against our adversaries.
The U.S. can and will prevail against modern competitors but doing
so will require dedicated focus to leverage the enduring advantages we
derive from our democratic values and a free society. America has the
finest military in the world: an All-Volunteer Force that stands ready
to defend America against any adversaries. America has the creativity
and confidence of a thriving competitive commercial sector that is the
envy of the world.
If confirmed, my task will be to work with the Undersecretary for
Research and Engineering and the Service Acquisition Executives to
ensure emerging warfighter requirements are matched with current and
emerging technologies from our industrial base, to ensure our military
has the capabilities it needs to prevail in its critical missions
anytime, anywhere. This means we must establish clear transition
pathways for critical new technologies including hypersonics,
artificial intelligence, directed energy, and others to ensure we can
scale solutions and field them rapidly for operational use. This also
means leveraging new acquisition pathways to ensure we can acquire
software and software-intensive systems in a way that meets the needs
of warfighters. At the same time, we must ensure that we are investing
in our Defense Industrial Base to reduce foreign dependency and make
supply chains resilient. There also remains work to do to lower
barriers to small businesses and non-traditional firms so that we can
leverage the full depth of creativity in the commercial sector.
If confirmed, I will also work to ensure we sustain our fielded
weapon systems in a cost-effective manner to include consideration of
life-cycle costs and greater integration of modular, open architecture
systems. Additionally, we must ensure our forces and capabilities are
resilient to the full range of biological, nuclear, chemical and
environmental threats. We must invest in and empower the defense
acquisition workforce to ensure they have the tools, authorities, and
leadership support they need to acquire and field the capabilities our
servicemembers need.
If confirmed, I will strive to accomplish these critical priorities
under the leadership and guidance of the Secretary of Defense, Deputy
Secretary of Defense, and Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment. To be successful will require a regular and transparent
dialogue with Congress. I thank this Committee for decades of
bipartisan work and I am committed to ensuring we can work together to
ensure we deter our adversaries and defend the United States. In all
that I do, I pledge to never lose sight of that mission.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Dr. Plum. Mrs. Harris,
please.
STATEMENT OF MS. MILANCY HARRIS, NOMINEE TO BE DEPUTY UNDER
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY
Ms. Harris. Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and
distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an honor to
appear before you this morning as President Biden's nominee for
Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security.
I appreciate your consideration of my nomination. I have been
blessed with an incredible family and community of friends who
have supported me throughout my career.
To my husband, Caleb, thank you for being my biggest
cheerleader and my best sounding board. To my parents, Robin
and Bill, and sisters, Mackenzie and Caitlin, thank you for
your support, instilling me with a sense of public service, and
expanding my worldview. I would also like to thank all of the
National Security professionals with whom I have served
throughout my career.
Your commitment to service, your resilience, and your
character inspires me every day, and I am grateful for your
friendship and mentorship. My journey to this hearing room
today began when I joined the Defense Intelligence Agency as an
Intelligence Analyst in 2004. From that work, I learned the
importance of analytic rigor, integrity, and precision.
Through countless significant National Security challenges,
I saw the importance of speaking truth to power and having a
strong intelligence foundation for policy decisions. As I later
transitioned to policymaking roles, that perspective was only
reinforced as I became reliant on integrated intelligence
support to inform policy recommendations and decisions.
If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring the defense
intelligence enterprise is best positioned to continue
providing that critical support to our senior leaders. This
Committee has long supported our Nation's intelligence
community and the essential missions conducted within the
defense, intelligence, and security enterprises.
I am humbled to be nominated to serve alongside those women
and men, women and men who demonstrate a high standard of
excellence and drive innovation while maintaining a clear focus
on some of the Nation's most critical challenges we face as a
Nation.
Defense, intelligence, and security efforts provide
critical support to the Secretary's National Defense Strategy
and are essential to ensuring the United States retains its
strategic advantage today and in the future.
I approach my nomination with a clear focus on ensuring we
are best positioned to collaborate with allies and partners,
collect information, conduct analysis on intelligence
priorities, and protect our intelligence and innovations.
Positioning ourselves for the future also means ensuring we
recruit and retain a workforce that reflects the diversity of
our country. Our work is only as strong as those professionals
who work in the intelligence community. Efforts to increase
diversity are paramount to ensuring we have the diverse
perspectives and skillsets we need to retain our edge.
As we seek to recruit these professionals to public
service, we need to ensure we do our best to onboard them
quickly, facilitate career mobility, and ensure the work the
intelligence community can retain this talent base. This only
increases the importance of the work to streamline the
clearance process, increase reciprocity across the intelligence
community, and create educational and broadening opportunities.
If confirmed, I look forward to supporting Secretary
Austin, DNI Haines, and Undersecretary Moultrie on these
priorities, and ensuring that the defense, intelligence, and
security enterprise is well integrated in the national
intelligence enterprise.
I am also committed to working closely with this Committee
and other committees of jurisdiction to provide the information
needed to carry out your oversight responsibilities. Thank you
for your time today and consideration of my nomination. I look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Harris follows:]
Prepared Statement by Milancy D. Harris
Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, distinguished Members of the
Committee--it is an honor to appear before you this morning as
President Biden's nominee for Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security. I appreciate your consideration of my
nomination.
I have been blessed with an incredible family and community of
friends who have supported me throughout my career. To my husband
Caleb, I thank you for being my biggest cheerleader and best sounding
board. To my parents, Robin and Bill, and sisters, Mackenzie and
Kaitlin, thank you for your support, instilling me with a sense of
public service, and expanding my worldview.
I would like to also thank all of the national security
professionals with whom I have served through my career--your
commitment to service, your resilience, and your character inspires me
every day, and I am grateful for your friendship and mentorship.
My journey to this hearing room today began when I joined the
Defense Intelligence Agency as an intelligence analyst in 2004. From
that work, I learned the importance of analytic rigor, integrity, and
precision. Through countless significant national security challenges,
I saw the importance of speaking truth to power and having a strong
intelligence foundation for policy decisions. As I later transitioned
to policymaking roles, that perspective was only reinforced as I became
reliant on integrated intelligence support to inform policy
recommendations and decisions. If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring
the Defense Intelligence Enterprise is best positioned to continue
providing that critical support to our senior leaders.
This Committee has long supported our nation's Intelligence
Community and the essential missions conducted within the Defense
Intelligence and Security Enterprises. I am humbled to be nominated to
serve alongside those women and men. Women and men who demonstrate a
high standard of excellence and drive innovation while maintaining
clear focus on some of the most critical challenges we face as a
nation.
Defense intelligence and security efforts provide critical support
to the Secretary's National Defense Strategy and are essential to
ensuring the United States retains its strategic advantage today and in
the future. I approach my nomination with a clear focus on ensuring we
are best positioned to collaborate with Allies and Partners, collect
information, conduct analysis on intelligence priorities, and protect
our intelligence and our innovations.
Positioning ourselves for the future also means ensuring we recruit
and retain a workforce that reflects the diversity of our country. Our
work is only as strong as those professionals who work in the
Intelligence Community--efforts to increase diversity are paramount to
ensuring we have the diverse perspectives and skillsets needed to
retain our edge. As we seek to recruit these professionals to public
service, we need to also ensure we do our best to onboard them quickly,
facilitate career mobility, and work to ensure the Intelligence
Community can retain this talent base. This only increases the
importance of the work to streamline the clearance process, increase
reciprocity across the Intelligence Community, and create educational
and broadening opportunities.
If confirmed, I look forward to supporting Secretary Austin, DNI
Haines, and Under Secretary Moultrie on these priorities and ensuring
that the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise is well
integrated within the national intelligence enterprise. I am also
committed to working closely with this Committee and other committees
of jurisdiction to provide the information needed to carry out your
oversight responsibilities.
Thank you for your time today and your consideration of my
nomination. I look forward to your questions.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. Dr. Laura Taylor-Kale,
please, and I probably pronounced the name five different ways,
so forgive me.
STATEMENT OF DR. LAURA TAYLOR-KALE, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INDUSTRIAL BASE POLICY
Dr. Taylor-Kale. It is great. That is fine. Good morning,
Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, and distinguished Members
of the Committee. I am incredibly grateful for this opportunity
to appear before you, and for your consideration of my
nomination to serve as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Industrial Base Policy.
This Committee deserves great credit for your insight and
leading the way to establish the Department's focal point for
industrial based policy at the Assistant Secretary level. I am
deeply honored and humbled by President Biden's nomination to
serve in this historic role, and by the trust and confidence
that Secretary Austin, Deputy Secretary Hicks, and
Undersecretary LaPlante have placed in me.
I come from humble origins. That I sit before you today is
a testimony to this country's opportunities. I was born and
raised outside of Chicago, Illinois, by a single mother who
used the community college education to escape poverty. I would
not be here without the countless teachers, friends, mentors,
and family who encouraged me and instilled in me the importance
of hard work and selfless service.
I would like to give a special thanks to my D.C. area
friends and family, especially the Dotsons, who join me here
today. Thank you, Chairman Reed, for personally welcoming
Jaina, Caleb, and Isaiah. This brings me a lot of street cred
in teenager world. If confirmed, my service as the Assistant
Secretary of Defense would be shaped by my stalwart belief that
our economic security is fundamentally our National Security.
My experience in international economics and development
finance has reinforced my view that our open democratic system
and market driven rules based economy is our strength, and that
our resilience and innovative defense industrial base powers
our ability to prevail in an age of strategic competition
against China and other competitors.
As you noted, Mr. Chairman, I began my career in public
service as a State Department Foreign Service officer. I also
served in Afghanistan as an economic officer. I served
alongside brilliant, dedicated members of the Armed Forces, and
I remain deeply proud of our servicemen and women, and if
confirmed, it would be my privilege to support our Nation's
warfighters wherever they may be.
I have worked closely with manufacturers as the Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Manufacturing at the Department of
Commerce and studied changes in the industrial workforce.
If confirmed, my priorities will be securing the health and
resilience of the defense industrial base, balancing our short
term gaps and long term priorities by focusing on these key
issues, engaging industry and our strategic allies as partners
to mitigate supply chain risks, increasing competition and
supporting small business and nontraditional suppliers,
supporting partnerships to develop the defense, industrial, and
manufacturing workforce, protecting the defense industrial base
from foreign adversary capital, increasing our domestic
production of critical minerals and strategic materials, and
working across the Defense Department, particularly with the
Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering, to infuse greater innovation in the defense
industrial base, and move new technologies through and past the
valley of death.
Again, I am humbled and honored and profoundly fortunate to
be nominated for this position, for which there is significant
bipartisan support, on behalf of the Nation that I love. I
commit to you that, if confirmed, I will give this position my
all.
Further, if confirmed, today will mark the beginning of a
robust and meaningful dialog between us. I commit to consulting
regularly, clearly, robustly, and transparently with this
Committee and its subcommittees, and with Congress on the full
range of issues confronting the defense industrial base.
Ultimately, I hope that our joint efforts will ensure the
necessary resources for our warfighters and secure our Nation's
economic future. Thank you again, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Taylor-Kale follows:]
Prepared Statement by Dr. Laura Taylor-Kale
Good morning, Chairman Reed, Ranking Member lnhofe, and
Distinguished Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I am
incredibly grateful for this opportunity to appear before you and for
your consideration of my nomination to serve as the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Industrial Base Policy. This Committee deserves great
credit for your foresight in leading the way to establish the
Department's focal point for defense industrial base policy at the
Assistant Secretary level. I am deeply honored and humbled by President
Biden's nomination to serve in this historic role and by the trust and
confidence that Secretary Austin, Deputy Secretary Hicks, and Under
Secretary LaPlante have placed in me.
I come from humble origins. That I sit before you today is a
testimony to this country's magnificent opportunities. I was born and
raised outside of Chicago, Illinois, by a single mother who worked her
way out of poverty via a community college education to become a social
worker--giving of herself to help others. My father was an immigrant,
educated in the corn fields of Illinois, and later became an architect
and construction engineer. I would not be here without them and the
countless teachers, mentors, aunties, and uncles who encouraged and
nurtured me, and who instilled in me the importance of hard work and
selfless service.
If confirmed, my service as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Industrial Base Policy would be shaped by my stalwart belief that our
economic security is fundamentally our national security. My work in
international economics and development finance has reinforced my view
that the United States' open, democratic system, and market-driven,
rules-based economy is our strength. That our resilient and innovative
defense industrial base powers our ability to prevail in an age of
strategic competition.
I began my career in public service as a State Department Foreign
Service economic officer and during the Bush Administration was
assigned to Afghanistan. Work and life in a conflict zone brought me
face to face with the grave threats our country faces. It also afforded
me the opportunity to serve alongside brilliant, dedicated members of
the United States armed forces. I remain deeply proud of our servicemen
and women and, if confirmed, it would be my privilege to support our
nation's warfighters, wherever they may be.
Later, I served in the Obama-Biden Administration as the Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Manufacturing in the International
Trade Administration at the Department of Commerce, and as the Senior
Advisor for Policy and Operations at the U.S. Development Finance
Corporation. In these capacities, I worked closely with a variety of
U.S. industries--overseas and in Washington. I learned that
collaboration with our closest allies enables a host of benefits,
including increased access to innovation, economies of scale, and
interoperability. If confirmed, I will lean on my experiences in public
service to help build an even stronger industrial base for the
Department of Defense.
More recently, in the context of my research on workforce and
industrial strategy, I have observed first-hand the operations of
factories in eastern Tennessee, technology companies and manufacturers
in the North Carolina research triangle, and advanced manufacturing and
innovation ecosystems in Massachusetts and Illinois. I have seen the
challenges that manufacturers face in attracting and maintaining an
industrial workforce in an age of increased
urgent need for more STEM and digital skills in manufacturing and
industrial base jobs while also needing to maintain production lines on
equipment relying on the skills of an aging industrial workforce.
If confirmed, my priorities will be: securing the health of the
defense industrial base through increased competition and focused
attention on development of the defense industry and manufacturing
workforce; support for small businesses and non-traditional suppliers;
increasing our domestic production capacity in critical and strategic
minerals; building critical supply chains through domestic means and
partnerships with allies; moving new technologies through and past the
so-called ``valley of death''; and working across the Defense
Department, particularly with the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering, to infuse greater innovation in
the defense industrial base.
Again, I am humbled, honored and profoundly fortunate to be
nominated for a position for which there is such significant bipartisan
support on behalf of a nation that I love. I commit to you that, if
confirmed, I will give this position my all. Further, if confirmed,
today will mark the beginning of a robust and meaningful dialogue
between us. I commit to consulting regularly, clearly, robustly, and
transparently with this Committee and its subcommittees, and with
Congress on the full range of issues confronting the defense industrial
base. Ultimately, I hope that our joint efforts will ensure the
necessary resources for our servicemen and women and secure our
nation's economic future.
Thank you again and I look forward to your questions.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, doctor. Mr. Owens, please.
STATEMENT OF MR. BRENDAN OWENS, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR ENERGY, INSTALLATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENT
Mr. Owens. Thank you. Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe,
distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for taking
the time today to consider my nomination to be Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment.
Throughout this process, it has been clear to me how
seriously this Committee takes its responsibility to assess the
qualifications of nominees for key positions within DOD. I
thank you for your critical role in this process.
The confidence President Biden, Secretary Austin, and
Deputy Secretary Hicks have placed in me is deeply humbling. If
confirmed, I will do everything I can to live up to the
examples of service and principled leadership they have set
throughout their distinguished careers.
By my family's standards, I am quite late to public
service, but I am honored to have the opportunity to become
part of a tradition I have always been extremely proud of. My
father, Bucky, retired as captain of the port in Mobile,
Alabama, after a distinguished 25 year career in the United
States Coast Guard, the example he and my mother, Cathy, set
for my brothers and I during their service, has had a deep and
lasting effect on all of us.
Ryan, Matt, and Terry now setting the example my parents
set for us with their own families. Ryan has worked for the
Coast Guard for almost 20 years, and Matt and Terry first
responders across the river in Arlington. I am also proud of
the dozens of other aunts, uncles, and cousins who in our
family have served or are serving with distinction.
To my wife and kids, Wendy, Harper, and Eamon, I am excited
for the opportunity to continue our journey alongside the
incredible people who dedicate their lives to the safety and
National Security. I am grateful, if confirmed, that you are
willing to join me in returning to a version of the life that
defined the first 25 years in mine.
I am thrilled to have the opportunity to serve the people
who safeguard the Nation. Growing up, we learned reverence for,
and deep appreciation of the sacrifices our military
servicemembers and their families make when they answer the
call. The Defense Department's people are its greatest
strength, and their service and professionalism is unrivaled
anywhere in the world.
I am honored, if confirmed, to serve these extraordinary
people. I will do everything I can to ensure their ability to
decisively execute their mission, while those of us serving in
support of that mission safeguard their well-being. For most of
the Force, this starts by ensuring they have safe, healthy,
efficient, and resilient places to live and work.
These places should be enhancing the health, well-being,
and readiness of our servicemembers and their families. If
confirmed, I will put a 25 year background in efficient,
healthy, and resilient buildings to work, and be a champion for
our servicemembers to ensure their environment, homes,
workplaces, and infrastructure enhance their ability to
complete their mission and thrive as people.
The EI&E portfolio is broad and extends well beyond
installation fence lines. Defense communities provide
indispensable services the Department relies on to support our
uniformed military families.
So I intend, if confirmed, to put our servicemembers and
their families first. I know that the relationships the
Department cultivates and maintains with defense communities
are critical components of installation resilience and force
readiness.
I admire the foresight embodied in the integrated approach
to capability improvement and community engagement in programs
like ERSA, REPI, Sentinel, and the Defense Communities
Infrastructure Pilot Program.
The DCIP pilot is one example of many of the innovative
programs in the EI&E portfolio that recognize the
interdependency of mission continuity and the defense
community. Our installations rely on non-DOD partners for,
practically speaking, all of their energy. Installation
resilience in the face of malign and naturally occurring
disruption is crucial.
As DOD works to implement installation level mission
readiness strategies like microgrids, building the grid
integration, energy generation and storage, its sheer size also
presents an opportunity to not only support its community
partners, but also the entire country in commercializing new
and scaling existing technology, with an eye towards enhancing
resilience, energy independence, reliability, equity, and
health in the U.S.
The DOD's success and ability to complete its mission and
secure the Nation is predicated on regular, constructive dialog
between Congress and the Department. I fully understand the
importance of this partnership, and if confirmed, I will work
with the DOD leadership to ensure timely and substantive
communication with you and your staffs.
Thank you again for your consideration of my nomination. I
look forward to your questions today and forward--if confirmed,
going forward as well.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Owens follows:]
Prepared Statement by Mr. Brendan Owens
Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Inhofe, distinguished Members of the
Committee; thank you for taking the time today to consider my
nomination to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy,
Installations and Environment.
Throughout this process, it has become clear to me how seriously
this Committee takes its responsibility to assess the qualifications of
nominees for key positions within the department of defense--I thank
you for your critical role in this process.
The confidence President Biden, Secretary Austin and Deputy
Secretary Hicks have placed in me is deeply humbling. If confirmed, I
will do everything I can to live up to the examples of service and
principled leadership they have set throughout their distinguished
careers.
By my family's standards, I'm quite late to public service--but I
am honored to have the opportunity to become a part of a tradition I've
always been extremely proud of. My father, Bucky, retired as Captain of
the Port of Mobile, Alabama after a distinguished 25-year career in the
United States Coast Guard. The example he and my mother, Kathy, set for
my brothers and I during their service has had a deep and lasting
effect on all of us. Ryan, Matt and Terry are now setting the example
my parents set for us with their own families. Ryan has worked for the
Coast Guard for almost 20 years and Matt and Terry are first responders
across the river in Arlington. I'm also proud of the dozens of other
aunts, uncles and cousins in our family who, with distinction, have
served or are serving their country.
To my wife Wendy and our kids, Harper and Eamon, I'm excited for
the opportunity to continue our journey alongside the incredible people
who dedicate their lives to our safety and national security--and I am
grateful, if confirmed, that you're willing to join me in returning to
a version of the life that defined the first 20 years of mine.
I am thrilled to have this opportunity to serve the people who
safeguard the nation. Growing up, we learned reverence for and deep
appreciation of the sacrifices our military servicemembers and their
families make when they answer the call. The Defense Department's
people are its greatest strength and their service and professionalism
is unrivaled anywhere in the world--I want to serve these extraordinary
people. If confirmed, I will do everything I can to ensure their
ability to decisively execute their mission while those of us serving
in support of that mission safeguard their well-being.
For most of the Force, this starts by ensuring they have safe,
healthy, efficient and resilient places to live and work. These places
should be contributing to enhancing the health, well-being and
readiness of our servicemembers and their families. If confirmed, I
will put a 25-year background in efficient, healthy and resilient
buildings to work as a champion for our servicemembers to ensure their
environment, homes, workplaces and infrastructure enhance their ability
to complete the mission and thrive as people.
The EI&E portfolio is broad and extends well beyond installation
fence lines. Defense communities provide indispensable services the
Department relies on to support our uniformed military and their
families. So while I intend, if confirmed, to put our servicemembers
and their families first, I acknowledge the relationships the
Department cultivates and maintains with defense communities are
critical components of installation resilience and force readiness. I
admire the foresight embodied in the integrated approach to capability
improvement and community engagement in programs like ERCIP, REPI,
Sentinel and the Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot Program.
The Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot Program is one example
of the many exceptional programs in the EI&E portfolio that recognize
the interdependency of mission continuity and the defense community.
Our installations rely on non-DOD partners for, practically speaking,
all of their energy. Installation resilience in the face of malign and
naturally occurring disruption is crucial. As DOD works to implement
installation level mission readiness strategies--microgrids, building
to grid integration, energy generation and storage--it's sheer size
presents an opportunity to not only support its community partners but
also the entire country in commercializing new and scaling existing
technology with an eye towards enhancing resilience, energy
independence, reliability, equity and health in the U.S.
The success of DOD's ability to complete its mission and secure the
nation is predicated on regular and constructive dialogue between
Congress and the Department. I fully understand the importance of this
partnership and, if confirmed, I will work with DOD leadership to
ensure timely and substantive communication with you and your staffs.
Thank you again for your consideration of my nomination. I look
forward to your questions today and, if confirmed, going forward as
well.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Mr. Owens. Before we begin our
round of questioning, I have a series of questions that are
required for all nominees, and you may answer in unison. Have
you adhered to applicable laws and regulations governing
conflicts of interest?
[All four 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 four witnesses answered in the negative.]
Chairman Reed. Exercising our legislative and oversight
responsibilities makes it important that this Committee, its
subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress
receive testimony, briefings, reports, records, and other
information from the Executive Branch on a timely basis. Do you
agree, if confirmed, to appear and testify before this
Committee when requested?
[All four witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
Chairman Reed. Do you agree to provide records, documents,
and electronic communications in a timely manner when requested
by this Committee, its subcommittees, or other appropriate
committees of Congress, and to consult with the requester
regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in
providing such records?
[All four 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 four witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
Chairman Reed. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses
and briefers in response to Congressional requests?
[All four witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
Chairman Reed. Will those witnesses and briefers be
protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
[All four witnesses answered in the affirmative.]
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. Dr. Plum, a lot of
focus is on acquiring more, you know, quantity. But we also are
struggling to maintain our readiness and the forces and the
systems we use today.
What opportunities exist to increase coordination and
communication between Department's acquisition and sustaining
communities to help ensure sustainment is adequately considered
during the acquisition process?
Dr. Plum. Senator, Chairman Reed, thank you. As you know,
the sustainment costs for a number of our major programs
account for the vast majority of the total cost over the
lifecycle of the programs.
I am aware that in the Department we have been moving to
more--develop a more data driven approach to controlling those
sustainment costs, including pulling together some of that data
to control the cost drivers, as well as integrating that cost
information on the front end during contract development and
oversight of contract execution.
If confirmed, my focus would be on making sure we can
identify, as early as possible, key issues and drivers of
sustainment, include that in early negotiations, as well as
regularly maintain oversight of those cost drivers as program--
as capabilities are fielded so we can control costs during the
deployment and fielding of capabilities over their entire
lifecycle.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. Mrs. Harris, one of the
many, many duties you will have is modernizing the security
clearance process, including intelligence support and
oversight. How will you approach this modernization, and how
can you take maximum advantage of commercially available
digital data?
Ms. Harris. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. As I
am aware, security clearance reform is a major priority for the
Department. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency
is focused on ensuring that we can clear people in a timely
fashion and that we have a process that allows for us to do so
in an efficient manner.
If confirmed, I commit that I will work to ensure that we
are using the maximum technology solutions available to ensure
we can do that quickly, and that we continue to work to
streamline the processes and shorten the timelines to maximize
our cleared personnel.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. Mr. Owens, EPA last
month released new drinking water advisory levels for four PFAS
chemicals, which will have an impact on the Department of
Defense. In addition, the NDAAs over the last few years have
required reporting on PFAS conditions. If confirmed, will you
ensure that alternative water is provided when these chemicals
are detected in drinking water supplies?
Mr. Owens. Senator, Chairman Reed, thank you for the
question. I want to thank the Committee for being so stalwart
in and focused on the issues of environmental contamination and
the potential health and safety challenges they present.
Because the health and well-being of servicemembers and
their families and the civilian workforce are paramount, and
every leader in DOD should be laser beam focused on making sure
that we are doing what we can in response to the ability for
DOD to provide for the needs of the installation in the
community in the presence of situations that make any of the
infrastructure that they are relying on right now unusable. I
commit to being able to focus on ensuring that they have what
they need.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, and of course, I assume
that in a simple yes, you will comply with the reporting
requirements within the NDAA?
Mr. Owens. Absolutely, yes.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much. Dr. Taylor-Kale--that
is the sixth mispronunciation. Over the past several years, we
have come to discover that our industrial base is fragile, and
we need to take steps in the Department of Defense, all
throughout the Government. So what do you believe are the most
pressing issues for the health of the defense industrial base,
and how will you address them?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Thank you, Chairman Reed. Actually, you
correctly pronounced my name, it is Taylor-Kale. You know, as
you noted, that the health and resilience of our defense
industrial base is absolutely essential to our economic
security, I believe. We need to be able to deter strategic
adversaries like China and Russia and provide the tools and
capabilities that our warfighters need.
You know, the defense industrial base has a unique
challenge in striking a balance between long term and short
term needs and goals, between producing and sustaining mature
systems and adopting new systems and capabilities and
innovations. I think some of the key challenges are around
workforce, aging workforce, a shortage of workers with STEM and
industrial skills that makes it difficult to meet production
targets.
Also supply chain, security and vulnerabilities, as well
as, frankly, internal issues, programmatic and budgetary
predictability and stability. If confirmed, I will work closely
with this Committee, across the Department enterprise, and with
industry in the interagency to come up with solutions that
address these critical challenges.
Chairman Reed. Well, thank you very much for your
testimony. Thank you all for your commitment to service and
your testimony. Let me recognize the Ranking Member, Senator
Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Plum, you
spent time recently working at both Facebook and Google. Ms.
Harris, you also spent time working at Facebook and on the
oversight board of Facebook. Can you both please describe your
work at these companies, and what involvement you had, if any,
in the development of the content, moderation policies, or in
decisions to moderate content? Let's start with Dr. Plum.
Dr. Plum. Ranking Member Inhofe, my role, similar to roles
throughout my career at both companies, was focused on applying
data and analysis to help identify problematic issues like at
Facebook, child pornography, ICE's recruiting content.
At Google, my roles focused on applying data and analysis
to improve business operations to address issues like copyright
violations, and financial fraud, and helping make those
business processes more effective and efficient.
Overall, I was focused on the research and analysis pieces
rather than on content moderation policy or content moderation
decisions.
Senator Inhofe. Ms. Harris.
Ms. Harris. Ranking Member Inhofe, thank you for the
question. My role at Facebook was focused on designing a way to
bring outside experts in to look at Facebook's content
decision. I did not work on content moderation actions or the
policies. I was focused on the operational--operations issues
to facilitate those outside expert reviews.
Senator Inhofe. All right, and Mr. Owens, in your advanced
policy questions, you stated that, and this is a quote, ``in
many cases, the Department's installation energy projects
should not only bolster resilience, but also enhance
conservation, increase energy efficiency, and implement low--
clean, low carbon energy solutions.''
Now, I believe that the number one priority of the
Department of Defense is lethality. I would ask you if you
agree with that, and secondly, do you think that there is a
point where strategic and economic costs outweigh potential
environmental benefits?
Mr. Owens. Ranking Member, thank you very much for the
question. I absolutely agree that DOD's number one priority is
to provide military forces to deter and ensure our Nation's
security, 100 percent.
In terms of how I would characterize the joint benefits
that investments in resilience and efficiency can provide. I
absolutely see that those two things need to be considered
together. They need to be balanced.
Then they need to make sure that they are doing--everything
that we are doing from an efficiency standpoint or from a
resilience standpoint is supporting lethality.
Senator Inhofe. So you repeat then the two areas that you
feel should be hand-in-hand.
Mr. Owens. Efficiency--well, I think it is more of a triad,
efficiency, resiliency, and lethality.
Senator Inhofe. On somewhat of an equal basis?
Mr. Owens. I think I said them in the exact opposite order
of the way that they would be precedent for DOD.
Senator Inhofe. Okay, and lastly, Ms. Harris, you have
served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Irregular Warfare and Counterterrorism since February of 2021.
Can you describe the role that you played in planning for the
withdrawal of Afghanistan last year?
Ms. Harris. Ranking Member Inhofe, thank you for the
question. As you correctly state, I work for in the Office of
the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. I am one of a number
of Deputy Assistant Secretaries of Defense with
responsibilities related to our mission in Afghanistan.
My role is focused primarily on CT policy and the
employment of Special Operations Forces. So with regards to our
withdrawal from Afghanistan, those are the primary areas in
which I was involved.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Inhofe, and let me
recognize Senator Shaheen, but also point out that my
colleagues arriving now because of the special Democratic
caucus that began at 9:00 a.m. and just concluded. Senator
Shaheen, please.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. My timing
was perfect, and congratulations to each of our nominees. Thank
you for your willingness to serve our country. I want to begin
both with Dr. Plum and Mr. Owens on the issue of PFAS, because
as I know you are aware, that is a contaminant that has--is
affecting a number of our military installations across the
country.
We have seen it in the former Pease Air Force Base in
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, where because of the firefighting
foam, we have groundwater that has been contaminated. I will
tell you that the Air Force has been very cooperative and
helpful with the community, but it remains a challenge. Your
respective offices play a critical role in overseeing and
implementing energy and environmental policies that will
address PFAS contamination.
So I guess my question is for both of you, if the Fiscal
Year 2022 National Defense Act included funding to address PFAS
contamination and required the Department to adhere to a
testing schedule, required DOD to develop PFAS remediation
schedule to clean up military installations, and the schedule
is due to Congress on September 23rd, if confirmed, will each
of you commit to ensuring on time delivery of that report to
Congress?
Dr. Plum. Senator, thank you, and let me start with saying,
I share your concern on PFAS. It is a really critical area that
we do need to focus on. We owe our servicemembers and their
families safe and healthy places to live and work. If
confirmed, I absolutely commit to making sure we have on time
delivery of required reports and meeting other Federal
requirements.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Mr. Owens.
Mr. Owens. I will follow on to what Dr. Plum said about
making this a priority for the Assistant Secretary EI&E, if
confirmed, and we will also commit to ensuring that we are
giving you the reports that you need, according to NDAA.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. Well, we will talk
again on October. One of the other concerns that I have is that
when Congress has sought to provide higher levels of funding
for PFAS testing and remediation beyond what has been
appropriated in the past, DOD has claimed that it was not
executable.
I think that is just unacceptable. If Congress is going to
provide funding, you need to work with us to ensure that that
funding is going to be used in the way the Congress intends.
So again, if confirmed, will you ensure that the
appropriate plans are developed to ensure that DOD can make use
of any additional funding provided by Congress for PFAS related
activities, and that you will not turn away that critical
funding?
Dr. Plum. Senator, if confirmed, I commit to working with
the Committee and with our colleagues and Comptroller to
develop the necessary products to figure out how to spend the
money and do the right remediation.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Mr. Owens.
Mr. Owens. I will commit to the same.
Senator Shaheen. Also, Mr. Owens, you will assume the role
of Chair of the PFAS Task Force, if confirmed. It is an
important body that was put in place initially as an ad hoc
group by the former Secretary Esper.
It was codified in Fiscal Year 2021 NDAA to ensure
sustained attention. Can you speak to, assuming you are going
to take over and get confirmed, I am assuming that you are,
what would be your top priorities in leading this task force?
Mr. Owens. Senator, I think, in terms of the specific remit
of the task force, I am not that familiar with what the roles
and responsibilities would be. I know that it, PFAS is a
critically important issue, and I commend this Committee for
making it such an area of focus.
If I am confirmed, I think the process to engage in
ensuring that we understand testing limitations, ensuring that
we understand what the strategy for finding alternatives for
any places that PFAS are still in use, and then also
remediation would be the three top priorities.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I look forward to working with
you on those priorities. Dr. Plum, one of the things that has
worked very successfully in terms of dealing with our energy
use have been third party financing vehicles, so energy saving
performance contracts, ESPCs. Can you talk about what your
views are relative to ESPCs and their importance in helping our
military achieve the energy savings that we are all looking
for?
Dr. Plum. Senator, I think ensuring we have energy savings,
and more generally, energy resilient and energy efficient
installations is a critical priority for our Department, both
to be faithful stewards of taxpayer dollars, and frankly to
have the resilience our installations need.
So creative solutions like these third party partnerships
can be really helpful in helping us achieve those goals. If
confirmed, I would want to work to understand these deals,
these approaches, and other approaches to make sure we are
identifying the right solutions for the right installations to
get those cost savings and resilience.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thanks very much. I appreciate that.
I think the Army should be commended for its efforts to revamp
the way it deals with performance contracting. I know the Navy
is also looking at this issue.
I understand the Air Force has been more reluctant, so I
hope they will take this as a shot across the bow. This is
something they need to look at. Thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Shaheen. Senator
Tuberville, please.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Congratulations to all of you. It is great to see your family
members back here in the back.
They are all smiling, those that we can see. You know,
while our military boast the best equipment in the world, ask
to any servicemember what they think about DOD websites and
office systems that--and they will tell you, they are slow,
old, frustrating. Our military members spend hundreds of hours
logging on to an ancient system.
The Navy still use a program called NAVFIT98A to process
evaluations. Now, 98 ought to give you a good idea of when that
was originated. Some of you worked for the most cutting edge
tech leaders in the world.
As you take your new leadership roles, I would like each of
you to refuse to approve any new websites in your areas of
responsibility that are not, that are not built to be
compatible with the three most popular internet browsers and
top two operating systems. I hope you do that.
You know, this is a--we are long past, you know, the stone
age. Ms. Harris, in September 2018, the Department of Defense
released its cyber strategy. The strategy charges DOD to defend
forward, shape the day to day competition, and prepare for war
in the cyber domain. DOD is now in the process of updating its
cyber strategy.
If confirmed, what actions will you take to mitigate any
gaps between defense intelligence and the goals of the current
and emerging cyber strategy?
Ms. Harris. Senator, thank you for the question. I agree,
cyber security and cyber threats are a critical concern for the
Department today. Cyber is an issue that bridges a number of
stakeholders within the Department.
If confirmed, I will commit that I will ensure that the
intelligence and security apparatus is best supporting those
efforts, both on assessing cyber threats in the intelligence
community, but also in ensuring that we are taking the proper
cybersecurity practices.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Dr. Plum, thank you for
meeting with me last week. Every Secretary of Defense since
Rumsfeld has sought to refine and streamline how the DOD
handles procurement. The DOD has no--has a no fail mission, but
success continues to be held up by the red tape and contract
protests. In your opinion, one of the most important factors to
monitor, to understand the health of the defense acquisition
systems?
Dr. Plum. Senator, you rightly note our defense acquisition
system is not as fast as we need it to deliver our warfighter
capabilities. It is my understanding that a combination of
factors, including, as you note, protests, timelines, contract
timelines notice, timelines as well as factors during the
negotiation process can slow that delivery.
If confirmed, I commit to work within the authorities we
have and work with this Committee to identify ways to shorten
that timeline, streamline the process, also identify
efficiencies, and leverage different pathways for our different
technologies to speed that up.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Mr. Owens, we didn't get to
meet yesterday. Had a lot to talk about. Hopefully we can do
that in the future. Just a question about, have you been
briefed on the Project Pele?
Mr. Owens. Senator, not directly, but I am aware of what it
is.
Senator Tuberville. You know, obviously, we are looking for
reforming, you know, our power to our troops. Pele is a moving
reactor that you can move into the field. I would love for you
to look into that once you once you get in. It is an amazing
program that I think we are going to need in the very future.
The DOD pioneered nuclear power. I don't think a lot of
people know that. Few people know that the first commercial
reactor was a DOD project. You know, in addition to Project
Pele, the Fiscal Year 2023 NSAA directs the DOD to look at how
a thorium cycle could safely harden our military bases and fuel
space propulsion and power.
I would like you to pledge that you would look into that
and be very familiar with this review that we are going to do
through the NDAA.
Mr. Owens. Senator, I think the balancing energy,
diversity, resilience, and combat superiority is a critical
role of what is in the EI&E portfolio, and if confirmed, my
commitment--[technical problems.]
Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Dr. Taylor-Kale, a
significant portion of critical and strategic materials
required for major defense programs come from non-allied
countries, including China. What steps should the Department
take to support the domestic manufacturing and processing of
these materials?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Thank you, Senator. As I noted, I think
that the having reliable and secure supply chains is absolutely
critical for the health and resilience of the defense
industrial base. I think, you know, I want to thank this
Committee and the Senate for supporting the CHIPS Act.
I think this is an important--this will be an important
step. The Department, I think needs to take a number of steps,
some of which they have outlined, but certainly moving towards
more domestic sourcing and also working with international
partners and allies for friend shoring, as some call it.
So I would, if confirmed, be very focused on working with
stakeholders in the interagency to facilitate domestic sourcing
and also working with some of our international allies to
facilitate areas where we can work together.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you. You know, have a hard job.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Tuberville. Senator King,
please.
Senator King. I don't think it is going to work. Try this.
Okay. Ms. Harris, you are entering one of the most important
jobs in the Defense Department. Intelligence, I am coming to
believe, is the secret sauce in modern conflict, and so capable
intelligence, widely distributed within the agency and within
the warfighter groups, I think is critical.
One thing that I am very worried about, however, is cyber
and electronic warfare, and resiliency in the face of cyber-
attacks. I hope that you will have put cyber at the top of your
priority list because nothing else works if we are able--if we
are disabled in terms of cyber or electronic warfare attacks.
One strategy I think that is very important is red teaming.
Everybody thinks they are invulnerable until they are not. I
would like your thoughts on the issue of cyber and cyber
resiliency.
Ms. Harris. Senator, thank you for the question. I agree
with you both in the criticality of our intelligence and
intelligence analysis to support the warfighter, and also in
the need to ensure that we are giving cyber and cyber security
the attention that they deserve.
If confirmed, you have my commitment that I will ensure
that we are giving the proper analytic attention to that and
prioritizing the types of intelligence sharing that will
facilitate a broader understanding of the challenges we face in
the technology environment today.
Senator King. In a modern conflict, the first 30 minutes is
going to be all about cyber and electronic warfare and trying
to blind the opponent, so I think that should be a very high
priority.
An intelligence question that I have raised and have had
briefings on and am following is the determination of the will
to fight. We found in Afghanistan that we overestimated the
will to fight of the Afghan army. We underestimated the will to
of the Ukrainian people. This is an important factor.
It is difficult to assess, I understand, but I hope you
will work with General Barrier and pursue the work that they
are doing because it is an important policy question. Could be
very important for us in the future, for example, with regard
to Taiwan.
Ms. Harris. Senator, I couldn't agree more. Clearly will to
fight is an area that we need to continue to refine our
understanding of. My understanding is that the intelligence
community, as part of their continual processes to improve
their analytic abilities, is looking at just this issue. If
confirmed, I look forward to learning more about those efforts
and keeping the Committee informed.
Senator King. I can commend General Barrier and his staff
because I know they are, and the Director of National
Intelligence, is looking very closely at this subject. Dr.
Plum, sustainment and resiliency in acquisitions. I believe
that every time we buy a major platform, whether it is an
aircraft, a ship, any kind of mobile vehicle, we should be also
buying the intellectual property so that the Government has the
power to make parts.
Every depot, every hangar, every ship should have a 3D
printer. We should not have a major weapons system out of
commission because of the lack of a part. So I hope that that
is part of your acquisition strategy.
We are not just buying pieces of metal anymore. We should
be buying the intellectual properties that will allow us to
maintain those and not rely on a long and somewhat uncertain
supply chain.
Dr. Plum. Senator, absolutely. We need to figure out better
strategies to deal with the supply chain for our weapons
system. That includes dealing with part obsolescence and our
ability to produce them in-house, and in more robust and
resilient ways.
If confirmed, I commit to looking at ensuring we have the
intellectual property, as well as other solutions that can
allow us to build in that supply chain and parts resilience to
enable us to maintain and sustain our warfighting capabilities
at a much more reasonable cost.
Senator King. Just remember, for want of a nail, the shoe
was lost, for want of the shoe, the horse was lost, for want of
the horse, the battle was lost, and the war could be lost. I
don't want that to be the story of our military. Dr. Taylor-
Kale, we have had a good discussion. Two items.
One is, I would like to see more emphasis on smaller firms
and trying to develop the acquisition process so that smaller
firms can compete and participate in the Defense Department
acquisition process.
Secondly, I would like to invite you to Maine, where we
have a diverse defense industrial base, where we have large
facilities like Bath Ironworks, Pratt Whitney, Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard. But we also have many smaller firms that participate.
I think it would be useful for you to see that kind of
universe of the defense industrial base. I know you realize how
important it is to maintain the industrial base in a vigorous
and healthy acquisition atmosphere.
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate our
discussion that we had. I also enjoyed learning our mutual love
for road trips across country. I would be more than delighted,
if confirmed, to visit Maine. I have done similar trips in my
capacity as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Manufacturing to
Tennessee, North Carolina, Alabama, Pennsylvania, other States
where there is industrial base and----
Senator King. So Maine is better than any of those, just to
be clear.
[Laughter.]
Senator King. Thank you very much. I am out of time. Mr.
Owens, I am going to ask you some questions for the record.
Thank you all and congratulations on your nomination. I look
forward to working with you on behalf of the United States of
America. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator King. Senator Rounds,
please.
Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, let me
thank all of you for your continued service to our country. Mr.
Owens, I am going to add my voice to the voices that have
already expressed concerns with regard to PFOS and PFAS. Thanks
for taking the time to meet with me in my office this last
week.
If confirmed, you will be the chairman of the PFAS force.
Given how pervasive this substance is, and the longer that we
take to address the issue, the more money it will cost in the
long run. This stuff doesn't stay in one place. It continues to
permeate throughout the soils in and around the bases where it
has been used for firefighting material.
If we don't begin to tackle this as soon as possible and
get ahead of it, it is just going to cost us more money in the
long run. So we are either going to pay now or we are going to
pay a whole lot more later on.
I am just going to ask right now for your commitment that
if confirmed, you will promptly grab a hold of this issue and
make sure that the communities that support our military
installations across this country will be taken care of and
that it will be a priority for you.
Mr. Owens. Senator, thanks for your focus on this issue.
You have my commitment that this will be a priority.
Senator Rounds. Thank you. Dr. Plum, if confirmed, you will
have oversight over the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Energy, Installations and Environment, the position that Mr.
Owens had been nominated for.
As such, will also play a major role in making sure our
installations and surrounding communities are taken care of
with regard to this particular issue. Do I have your commitment
that, if confirmed, you will also look into the issue?
If any additional resources or authorities are needed to
address PFAS remediation, you will promptly let this Committee
know?
Dr. Plum. Senator, you have my commitment to look into it,
to proactively identify where we can make more progress, and to
work directly with this Committee.
Senator Rounds. Thank you. Dr. Taylor-Kale, I did I say
that right?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Taylor-Kale. Close.
Senator Rounds. Kale. Thank you. I am going to work at it.
I have expressed my confusion in the past and my frustration as
well of why with DOD plans--and when DOD plans and prepares for
a one year or a one war scenario, and in most cases a short one
war scenario at a time, basically on one front, many leading
defense experts believe that if engaged in a shooting war with
a peer or a near-peer competitor, we would run out of many of
our best weapons systems and munitions in one to two weeks.
R&D for the future is needed, but we also need procurement
now, otherwise we are going to have some very serious problems
in the Fiscal Year 2026 and 2027 timeframe. Recognizing right
now and learning from what we have seen in Ukraine and the
challenges of moving munitions that are used day to day around
right now and the shortages that immediately begin to become
apparent, I simply don't believe that the defense industrial
base, the mobilization of that, or the type that we have seen
in the past is possible in the current operational environment.
It would appear to me that we are going to have to refocus
on how we--how quickly we can come up to speed and begin to
produce munitions that we have sometimes just have taken for
granted in the past.
Would you agree with me that we have got to do something in
order to expedite the acquisition of munitions in a more timely
fashion?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Senator, I absolutely share your concern
about our supply chain vulnerabilities. I think the war in
Ukraine and following COVID-19 really laid bare some of these
vulnerabilities and these critical challenges that we have
known for a while, but certainly they are more acute now.
I think, if confirmed, it will be a very important to apply
lessons learned from this Ukraine, you know, aid, and also to
figure out how best to support the industrial base in building
more hot production lines that Undersecretary LaPlante has
advocated for.
I think some of the key issues that I outlined earlier,
like workforce issues, challenges with programmatic and
budgetary stability, will be, you know, key pieces to look out
for and to focus on.
If confirmed, I commit to you that I will work closely with
industry, work with this Committee and your staffs, as well as
across the Department enterprise to really address these
issues.
Senator Rounds. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time
has expired.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator Rounds. Just
let me recognize Senator Hirono, please.
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations to
all of you on your nominations and thank you for your service.
I ask the following two initial questions of all nominees on
any of the Committees on which I sit, so I would like to ask
each of you and the response.
We will start with Ms. Harris, and we will just go right
down the line. Since you became a legal adult, have you ever
made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any
verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
Ms. Harris. No.
Dr. Plum. No.
Mr. Owens. No.
Dr. Taylor-Kale. No.
Senator Hirono. Have you ever faced discipline or entered
into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
Ms. Harris. No.
Dr. Plum. No.
Mr. Owens. No.
Dr. Taylor-Kale. No.
Senator Hirono. Thank you. Mr. Owens, my home State of
Hawaii is still reeling from the catastrophic fuel leak at the
Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility. I don't know if you--do
you have a familiarity with this facility? Have you ever
visited the facility?
Mr. Owens. I have never visited it, but I have seen
pictures and it is gigantic.
Senator Hirono. It is massive. It is in the order of, in
terms of an engineering feat, in the order of Hoover Dam, and,
you know, it is massive. But you have been asked some questions
relating to PFAS, and there are various contamination issues
that the military has to deal with, but the situation at Red
Hill is quite immediate.
It led to the widespread water contamination, forcing
thousands of Navy personnel and their families to leave their
homes for months until their safe return could be assured. Due
to the leak and the ongoing concerns about the facility's
safety, DOD has announced its intent to entirely defuel and
permanently closed Red Hill by the end of 2024.
You can imagine what kind of enterprise this is going to be
to defuel hundreds of millions of gallons of fuel. The U.S.
Navy has proposed a defueling plan which the Hawaii Department
of Health recently rejected.
In whole, since the Department plans lacks the requisite
detail and specificity necessary for the DOH to fully evaluate
how the Department will execute safe and expeditious defueling.
If you are confirmed, oversight of facilities across the
country, including Red Hill, will be under your purview.
This year's NDAA currently authorizes $1 billion for the
Red Hill Recovery Fund, and Congress is expecting to receive a
detailed breakdown of how this money will be spent from the
Department. Delay in providing this justification risks
compromising the safe and timely closure of the facility and
could further disrupt the community's confidence in DOD in the
State.
So when all of this happened, of course, the Navy's
handling of the spill and all of that left a lot to be desired.
So the community has a lot of questions. Since--I would like
you to assure me that the defueling and closure is completed in
a safe and expeditious manner, and that you will be--take
personal responsibility along with the other people who are
going to be involved in this, but in your position, can I look
to you to make sure that the defueling happens safely and in an
expeditious manner?
Mr. Owens. Senator, I absolutely commit to doing everything
within the purview of the AS EI&E to ensure that the resources
that are necessary to safely defuel Red Hill, in alignment with
the Secretary's plan, are executed.
Senator Hirono. Yes, and our Appropriations Committee is
awaiting a much more detailed defueling plan, so I hope that is
something that, should you be confirm, that this is another
thing that you will pay attention to.
Again, for you. Mr. Owens, DOD currently has more than
174,000 non-tactical vehicles across the service branches,
making it the second largest share of the Federal vehicle fleet
after the U.S. Postal Service.
Earlier this year I introduced the Military Vehicle Fleet
Electrification Act with Senator Warren, King, and others, and
included language in the Fiscal Year 2023 NDAA that would
require DOD to transition to fully electric or zero emission
non-tactical vehicles by the end of 2030.
Mr. Owens, do you agree that transitioning to electric non-
tactical vehicles will help combat climate change while helping
to ensure our military has the advantage of a modern fleet of
vehicles that reduce the military's dependance on oil?
Mr. Owens. Senator, I think that the combination of several
investments that are being made on installations, including
electric vehicles, particularly microgrids, and the ability for
microgrids to provide a backbone for more energy diversity and
resilience, is an excellent reason to proceed as you have
outlined.
Senator Hirono. I take it that that is a yes?
Mr. Owens. It is a yes. That is a big yes.
Senator Hirono. Thank you very much. I think we need to
move ahead on this kind of transitioning because the DOD is the
biggest user of fossil fuels of all of the agencies. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Hirono. Senator Tillis,
please.
Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
congratulations to all of you on your nominations. I actually
want to start by thanking Senator Warren for the work that she
and I have done over the past several years for military
housing.
I would say it is steps in the right direction, but it
seems to me it is a continuing journey that we have got to get
right. We do have a measure in NDAA that takes another step in
the right direction, but Mr. Owens, we have got a lot more work
to do.
In North Carolina, I have made it a focus and have done
town halls down there and it seems to have improved. But I
think system wide, we have challenges, and we have challenges
in North Carolina.
So I am curious, your thoughts, what your priorities would
be? How can we really regain the trust of military families,
personnel that are living in military housing? Secondly, we
have to recognize that because of mold, a number of other
exposures that these, the occupants have had to endure, that we
have some health implications.
So in addition to fixing the inventory moving forward, we
have also got to take a serious look at instances where we
think illnesses can clearly be linked to exposures in some of
this, what I consider to be substandard housing. How are you
going to tackle that?
Mr. Owens. Thank you for the question. I really want to
again commend this Committee for taking such a strong interest
in ensuring that military family housing is up to the dignity
of the people that are living in it.
Housing is a readiness issue. Housing is a--something that
we owe to our servicemembers for the sacrifices that they make.
In terms of how to prioritize, I think this Committee has done
an excellent job in providing direction to and resources for
increasing the amount of oversight that has been happening, and
I would look to continue to do that.
Look to ensure that the tenant bill of rights that has been
established is something that can be universally accessed and
driven to ensure that our tenants have the ability, our
military families have the ability to get answers to questions
that they may have.
Then in terms of the health implications, if there are any,
I will commit to working with senior leaders in DOD to ensure
that we are providing the resources and--that are necessary to
address any situations to arise.
Senator Tillis. Thank you for that. Dr. Plum, anytime I see
somebody going before this Committee that has anything to do
with acquisition, I always have to bring one of my favorite
props.
A nearly 600 page request for proposal for the next
generation handgun. It started in the Air Force and ended up in
the Army. It took a half a generation to decide what the next
generation handgun would be. This is not a complex platform.
This is something that just boggles my mind that we haven't
figured out how to tailor acquisition processes in a way that
gets it done sooner.
That gets the capability deployed sooner and also provides
the opportunity for a larger group of people to participate. In
North Carolina, we have a very strong--we have a military
business center. In fact, we just had a meeting this week with
a number of small businesses that contribute to the defense
industrial base. But if they look at something like this, they
are out before they ever start.
They can't simply afford to go through hundreds of pages
and a multiyear process to put forth what may be one of the
best innovations that we could potentially consider. So we are
squeezing out, I think, a number of innovators in the
acquisition process. So what can we do, number one, just
generally to increase and to bolster our industrial base by
engaging more small businesses?
Secondly, how can we make progress on acquisition processes
that don't result in 600 page next generation handgun RFPs?
Dr. Plum. Senator, that is an excellent example that really
highlights how we need--we absolutely need to be faster and
better at bringing technology to the warfighter. Now, we do
have some approaches that we need to leverage more.
We have the adaptive acquisition framework that gives us a
couple other tiers, middle tier acquisition authorities,
software acquisition authorities. This Committee has really
been very supportive in helping us have some innovative
authorities and approaches. We need to use them more.
Senator Tillis. Thank you, and I hope to work with you. I
spent a fair amount of time in supply chain and acquisition in
the private sector, and after you are confirmed, would like to
talk specific initiatives. Ms. Kale, doctor--did I pronounce
that right? I just have a quick question in closing.
We just recently passed the Chips bill, and the Chips bill
clearly recognizes that we have insufficient indigenous
semiconductor manufacturing capability in this country. If we
see how the sanctions on Russia, particularly with respect to
importing chirps, has disrupted their military supply chains,
do you consider that a wise investment with respect to our own
military industrial base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Well, thank you, Senator. I think that is
going to be very important to focus on microelectronics in the
short term as well as in the long term. I think that the CHIPS
Act will bring us closer to more readiness and sort of
resilience in our defense industrial base. I share your concern
that having shortages in this area will lead to insecurity
later on, as well as in, you know, in the immediate future, I
think. If confirmed, I will work closely with industry as well
as with the interagency, particularly the lead agencies focused
on microelectronics to make sure that we can assure the needs
of our defense industrial base.
Senator Tillis. Thank you. Again, congratulations on your
nominations.
Chairman Reed. Thank you. Senator Tillis. Senator Warren,
please.
Senator Warren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
congratulations to all of you. I want to thank Senator Tillis.
I so appreciate his partnership in our work on military
housing, and he has asked my questions.
So I think Mr. Owens knows that Senator Tillis and I, and
this entire Committee, is going to stay on this issue. It is
powerfully important to our military and to our national
defense, and also it is about what is right. So, I am going to
try to be efficient and ask about some other issues.
What I would like to focus on is conflicts of interest and
ethics at the Pentagon. This year, the Pentagon's budget is
going to exceed $800 billion. About half that spending is going
to go to the for profit defense contractors to build weapons,
to perform maintenance, and to provide consulting services.
Contract and program decision should be based on what is in
the best interests of National Security, period. But the
revolving door between the Pentagon and private defense
contractors sometimes happens so fast, it looks like a blur.
Senior Pentagon officials leaving work for Lockheed to Boeing.
Top lobbyists or executives from these companies coming
into Government to hand out contracts to their former employees
and employers. You know, real or perceived conflicts of
interest undermine the public's confidence and can also lead to
program delays or even cancelation.
So, Dr. Plum, you have been nominated to a top role in the
part of the Pentagon that focuses on acquisition. Can you say a
word about your views about why it is important that Government
officials making decisions, about which defense contractors get
taxpayer dollars, must be free from conflicts of interest?
Dr. Plum. Senator, thank you, and thank you for your
leadership on this issue. As you note, it is just so important
at the Department that our number one job is to deliver
capabilities to the warfighter.
Those capabilities need to be selected to get the best
capabilities. That means that conflict of interest, apparent or
actual, can undermine, as you note, that trust, but also make
it harder for key new ideas to break through and getting to
that process.
We have a number of efforts underway, ethics agreements in
this Administration, improved oversight of our standards of
conduct. If confirmed, I pledge to continue those, but also
more to fulsomely work with you and this Committee to make sure
we are getting this balance right of getting the conflicts out.
Senator Warren. Well, that is a really good point about how
conflicts of interest can actually keep us from finding the
best products, from innovating in the ways we need to innovate.
Very strong point. So let's talk about the things we can do in
order to reduce the conflicts of interest.
You know, through the years, I have proposed a number of
changes to strengthen our ethics laws. Now, some of my
colleagues think that strong ethics requirements will stop
people from wanting to go into Government. There have been at
least 10, 10 Government funded studies now on this exact issue,
how to improve the recruitment and retention of the Federal
workforce.
Not a single one of them has concluded that ethics laws are
the barrier. When we talked last week, you said that we need to
consider both, needing to attract and retain people who want to
solve big problems and preventing the appearance of self-
dealing.
Dr. Plum, do you agree that we could strengthen ethics
standards at the Pentagon without hurting our ability to
attract top talent in public service?
Dr. Plum. Senator, I do agree. I think we need to think
about how we structure and make precise our ethics requirements
and our oversight so that we can attract top talent, let them
work on hard problems, let them solve hard problems for this
country while making sure we avoid conflicts of interests.
There is absolutely space to make progress there, and I, if
confirmed, would really welcome an opportunity to work on that
with you.
Senator Warren. Well, I think you have already answered the
question I was going to ask, and that is, will you commit to
working with me to ensure that Government officials working on
acquisition programs and policies are free of conflicts of
interest?
Dr. Plum. Senator, I would welcome an opportunity to work
with you on that. Thank you.
Senator Warren. That is terrific. Thank you very much. You
know, this is a problem across Administrations and across
Government agencies, but it is particularly acute at DOD given
the size of the Pentagon's budget.
A lot of money is at stake here. Our last three Secretaries
of Defense came to DOD straight from the board or from being a
lobbyist for the Pentagon's top five contractors. We have got
to do a lot more to end the cozy relationship between the
Pentagon and the defense industry. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Warren. Senator
Blackburn, please.
Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to each of
you, congratulations on your nominations. As you can tell, we
are a very busy committee here, and this will not be the last
time you all hear from us. We look forward to working with you
to make certain that our men and women in uniform have what
they need to carry out their mission.
You have heard about ethics. You have heard about what we
need for our housing for the military, about acquisitions. I
know that Senator Inhofe even talked a little bit about
Facebook and big tech and some of those applications. I am
going to turn now to a topic you are going to hear me talk
about a lot.
It is about maintenance and deferred maintenance, and Mr.
Owens, I am going to come to you on this, because we have got
550,000 buildings that we have a backlog. There is a goal of
getting to 90 percent on this. But the current estimate, I
think last time I looked, it was at $121 billion and FSRM. Does
that sound right to you?
Mr. Owens. Senator Blackburn, the briefing paper that I
read on FSRM had that number in it and it didn't sound right to
me. I have come to learn that it is right.
Senator Blackburn. It is right, and DOD has over 550,000
buildings and facilities worldwide. As my dad would always say,
if you build it, you have to maintain it, and it seems as if we
are getting to the point that deferred maintenance and that
backlog is way out of control.
So I want to bring this home to you with an example in
Tennessee, and I am going to ask you to visit this facility
with me. It is an Air Force base. It is Arnold Engineering and
Development Center, and it is located there in Tullahoma,
Tennessee. Those of you involved with DOD have probably heard
about this.
We have got great Tennesseans that work there. They are
leading the way on testing some of our mission critical engine
and hypersonic testing. It is going to be imperative for the
growth of our Air Force and for Space Force, and they are doing
this research work in buildings that are crumbling around them.
The deferred maintenance is--it keeps getting pushed off,
and I do give the Air Force Secretary credit for having pushed
forward to try to get resources there. This is part of our
critical infrastructure future and needs to be addressed.
So how are you going to begin addressing that backlog
because you just said you saw that figure and you thought this
can't be right, but it is. So how do you begin to reshape that,
whittle it down, and prioritize it?
Mr. Owens. Senator, I want to thank you for bringing this
issue to the forefront and being so stalwart in your in your
focus on it. In my view, the DOD has to balance their mission
requirements and their sustainment requirements.
I think one of the things that is critical to understand is
that the health and well-being of the warfighter is directly
connected to the built environment and the physical environment
that they inhabit. So one of things that I would like to do is
try to highlight the connection between the fact that the
people who are in these buildings are being affected by them.
If they are not----
Senator Blackburn. They are human capital infrastructure,
and they are a very vital and necessary component. So what kind
of analysis, what kind of partnerships, what kind of approach
do you plan to bring to this? You have obviously given some
forethought to this.
Mr. Owens. Yes, and I think that the prioritization
exercises that are necessary to ensure that we are putting the
money in the places where it can have the maximum benefit to
support the mission and then the health and well-being of the
military and military service family members is going to be a
priority for the ASD(A). Working across in collaboration with
all of the other EI&E positions for the services.
Senator Blackburn. Okay. I also want to ask you about
climate change, because that--DOD is saying this is a--they
have identified climate change as a critical National Security
issue, a threat multiplier, a top management challenge, but we
have never seen data that would support that. So how do you--I
am running out of time, and we are over.
Let's do this, why don't you submit that answer for the
record? Dr. Plum, I have got a question I will submit to you.
Ms. Harris, I do have a question specific to you that I will
submit. Thank you all very much.
Chairman Reed. Thank you. Senator Blackburn. Senator
Peters, please.
Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and each of the
nominees, thank you for your willingness to serve and
congratulations on your nomination. Mr. Owens, my first
question is for you.
If you are confirmed, your office will clearly have
significant role in leading the Department of Defense's PFAS
cleanup efforts, and I know you have spoken about that to some
of my colleagues in questions that they have addressed to you
already. This is, unfortunately, a subject that Michiganders
know all too well.
We have communities all across our State from Oscoda, which
is the former home to Wurtsmith Air Force Base, to the K.I.
Sawyer Air Force Base in Marquette that have been grappling
with PFAS contamination literally for decades.
These folks are sick and tired of what they have seen as a
slow response and basically some disrespect from the Department
of Defense when it comes to dealing with what is a significant
issue.
So my question for you, sir, is, if confirmed, will you
ensure that the Department of Defense commits to pursuing
remediation in these two sites in particular in Michigan, and
give it the type of attention that the folks there deserve and
have been waiting far too long to get?
Mr. Owens. Senator, the health and well-being of our
servicemembers and the defense communities that support them is
critical. If confirmed, I will commit to ensuring that we are
addressing and budgeting for the appropriate resources that are
necessary to do the remediation.
Senator Peters. Well, if confirmed, I intend to invite you
to come up to Michigan to see these sites firsthand and talk to
these individuals, and I would hope you consider accepting that
invitation if confirmed.
Mr. Owens. Yes, Senator.
Senator Peters. Dr. Taylor-Kale, an analysis conducted by
Frans Stefan Gady, a senior fellow at the International
Institute for Strategic Studies, concluded that at the current
rate the Ukrainian military is firing hammers rockets, they
will exhaust in less than two months the 9,000 missiles that
the United States currently produces annually.
Simply put, I think it Is clear the U.S. defense industrial
base needs to consider what it will require--what is required
to fully equip a war in a modernized industrial war like we are
seeing between Ukraine and Russia.
So my question for you is, if confirmed, how would you work
within the Pentagon, with Congress and with the industrial base
partners, to ensure that the U.S. military would remain well
supplied in the event of a conventional conflict with a near-
peer competitor, whether that be China or Russia or someone
else. Clearly, our stockpiles need to be bigger, but our
production rates need to be higher as well.
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Thank you, Senator. First, I want to note
that I believe our support to Ukraine has been invaluable in
combating Russian aggression. The crisis has clearly laid bare
some of the critical vulnerabilities in our supply chain.
As I have noted before, some of these we have known for a
while and others are becoming more apparent. You know, if
confirmed, supply chain resilience would be an absolute
priority for this role and for this office, and, of course,
working across the Department enterprise will be key.
So if confirmed, I would work closely with Undersecretary
LePlante and others in acquisition and sustainment, but also
with the military Departments and the Joint Chiefs planning to
better understand the needs of the industrial base and also
working with industry partners to understand where the gaps
are, where the critical needs are.
As I have stated before, I think workforce is going to be a
particular concern for the industrial base moving forward. It
is something that I think the Department, and of course, the
industrial base policy will need to work closely with industry
to address.
Senator Peters. Very good. Dr. Taylor-Kale, another
question for you here. The Senate just recently passed the
Chips and Science Act to ensure that we are producing
semiconductors essential for so many products here in America,
including the auto industry.
Particularly important that we passed that bill for an
industry that is a major industry in the State of Michigan, but
important for the whole country. Could you please speak to how
vital it is for us to ensure that we have a supply of
semiconductors that are manufactured here in the United States,
and how that relates to National Security in your mind?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Senator, I want to underline my support
for this, for the CHIPS Act, and appreciate the work of the
Senate in moving that bill forward. You know, microelectronics
are an important issue within the supply chain because they cut
across areas. They cut across sectors.
I think like workforce, like some of these other issues
that are cross-cutting, the Defense Department, you know, along
with industry, and as partners along with the rest of the
interagency, needs to work together and understanding better
how to, you know, increase supply and make sure that these
critical components are available, and allow for our defense
industrial base to be able to replenish and restock as
necessary.
Senator Peters. Tight. Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Peters. Senator Sullivan.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
our nominees today. Congratulations. Dr. Taylor- Kale and Dr.
Plum, you are going to have a very important position here,
defense industrial based policies. Can both of you briefly talk
about how important critical minerals are for our defense
industrial base, how reliant we are on China, critical
minerals, rare earth, and--well, are they important? Can you
just give me a quick answer? I have a number of questions on
this.
Dr. Plum. Senator. Yes, both critical minerals and
specifically rare earths are really important inputs, and there
are, as you know, supply chain issues.
Senator Sullivan. Supply chain and reliance issues on
China, correct?
Dr. Plum. That is my understanding, sir.
Senator Sullivan. Does that undermine our National
Security?
Dr. Plum. Senator, I think making sure we have a robust and
resilient supply chain for them is absolutely critical for our
National Security.
Senator Sullivan. Do you agree with that, Dr. Taylor- Kale?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Absolutely. I am concerned about our
supply chains being vulnerable to foreign adversaries, as well
as the sole source suppliers. So, absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. If it is possible, and the President has
held summits on this already, the best approach is to be able
to source these from home, particularly critical minerals, rare
earths, which we have an abundance of, isn't that correct?
Dr. Plum. Yes, sir, that is my understanding. Yes.
Senator Sullivan. Would you agree with that?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. That is my understanding as well.
Senator Sullivan. So I want to talk a little bit about an
issue that is just is a head shaker for me. My State has
enormous natural resources, oil, gas, critical minerals, rare
earth elements, great State of Alaska. Some estimates more than
almost any other country in the world.
Yet the Biden Administration has issued 26 Executive Orders
and Executive Actions focused on shutting down these things. I
am going to talk about one because it is just remarkable, and
we have an area called the Ambler Mining District that is
considered one of the most extensive mineral resources,
critical minerals of undeveloped zinc, copper, lead, gold,
silver of anywhere in the world.
We have no transportation to it, so for decades we have
worked on a road to the Ambler Mining District. This project
began under the Obama Administration. Seven years of
permitting, millions and millions of dollars. Got the final
record of decision on this in July of 2020 to start the road to
the Ambler Mining District.
Everybody supported it. On February 22nd, 2022, the same
day the President hosted a summit to announce steps to enhance
America's critical minerals supply chains, the Department of
Interior reversed the previous Administration's record of
decision and shut down the record of decision for the road to
the Ambler Mining District.
So, the President is holding a summit on these issues.
Other part of the Administration, as they do on most things in
Alaska, shut it down, crushing jobs, of course, but really
undermining our National Security, defense issues.
The President then in March announced his plan to use the
Defense Production Act to secure reliable supply chains for
critical minerals used in batteries in the power electric
vehicles, which include those from the Ambler Mining District.
How smart do you think that move was in Alaska to shut down
critical mineral production? By the way, seven year EIS, 36,000
public comments, 30 public hearings, 30 consultations with
tribal groups. How smart do you think that is for our
industrial base, the defense industrial base, which the two of
you will oversee?
Dr. Plum. Senator, as you noted at the beginning, we need
to figure out ways to get onshore more reliable access to
critical minerals. If confirmed, I would absolutely work on
making sure I understand these cases, other cases like this,
and make sure we robustly advocate for the right mix of
investments and support to get that reliable supply chain for
those critical minerals.
Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, how--do you think this
makes sense?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Senator, I understand how important this
Ambler mine is to the people of Alaska. I thank you for raising
the issue and for bringing this up. I am not familiar with the
decision making process and the details, but I want to
reiterate my colleague in noting that, you know, general
looking at the case by case understanding of how we can better
improve access to critical minerals and strategic materials
will be absolutely important----
Senator Sullivan. Well, look, I appreciate your answers.
This is an ongoing--I can't get answers from anybody in the
Pentagon, at the Department of Interior. Why would you do this?
Why would you do this? Okay.
This thing has the highest environmental standards. So
until I get answers--I think both of you are qualified. Until I
get answers, I am going to put a hold on both of your
nominations, until I get answers from high level Administration
officials. I am sick and tired of the targeting of my great
State.
26 Executive Orders. Can you imagine, Mr. Chairman, if they
did that to Rhode Island? It is hurting not just my State, my
workers, it is hurting the National Security of America. So
until I get answers on Ambler at high levels, unfortunately, I
am not going to help move your nominations forward, even though
I think you are qualified to have important positions. But this
is important.
The same day the President holds a summit on critical
minerals, they shut down one of the biggest critical minerals
supplies in America, maybe in the world, because of their
relentless war on the State of Alaska. So I need answers, and
then your nominations can move. I have more questions for the
record that I will submit. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Sullivan. Senator Hawley,
please.
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations to
the nominees. Thank you for being here. Mr. Owens, if I could
just start with you. If confirmed, you would oversee the
military private housing initiative.
That is something that is of great interest to us in the
State of Missouri, particularly as it concerns Fort Leonard
Wood, where you may know, hopefully know that we have many
aging homes and facilities that are in need of replacement.
My question is this, if you are confirmed, would I have
your commitment to prioritize those aging facilities at Fort
Leonard Wood so we can make sure that our servicemembers there
and their families get the quality housing that they deserve?
Mr. Owens. Senator Hawley, I think you have hit exactly
what I would say is a critical area in terms of health and
well-being of servicemembers and their families. If confirmed,
I will work with the Army and make sure that we are providing
the resources necessary to recapitalize those houses.
Senator Hawley. Very good. Thank you for that. Dr. Taylor-
Kale, if I could come to you. I have made it a priority over
the last two years that I have been in the Senate to try and
end DOD's use of Chinese printed circuit boards in our critical
defense systems.
We have made some progress on this over pretty significant
industry opposition, I might note. But there is a lot more that
remains to be done to end DOD's reliance on Chinese suppliers.
So my question is, if you are confirmed, what steps would
you advocate in taking to reduce DOD's reliance on Chinese
suppliers and strengthen our own industrial base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Thank you, Senator. I think you have
raised the key issue that is facing the defense industrial base
and the strategic threat of China. I agree with the
Administration, with Secretary Austin, that China is the pacing
threat. Taiwan is the pacing scenario. I don't believe that we
can afford to sit back on this.
If confirmed, I will work closely with this Committee, with
industry, and across the Department enterprise to address these
issues and to see how we can come up with solutions to reduce
our dependance on China.
Senator Hawley. Very good. Let me just ask you a little bit
broader question. Give me your sense of how consolidation in
the defense industrial base has affected the Department's
ability to promote competition and secure the kind of
capabilities that we need in a manner that is timely and also
cost effective.
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Senator, from my understanding,
consolidation has over, you know, years has edged out a lot of
small businesses. I am concerned about this. I think small
businesses are important for the defense industrial base. They
bring in innovation. They bring in new ideas and creativity.
I think we need that in the defense industrial base now
more so than ever. I think that really also understanding how
consolidation is part of a process of just, you know, economic
principles. It is really also a big part of the concern as
well. I think in Government we need to be attentive to the
challenges that industry faces in the capital market.
So if confirmed, I will work closely across the Department
enterprise and also with the interagency, with the appropriate
agencies that oversee and look at mergers and acquisitions in
particular, to better understand how consolidation is helping,
or hurting actually, the defense industrial base.
Senator Hawley. Very good. Dr. Plum, speaking of
consolidation, you are being nominated for an acquisition and
sustainment position. Are you concerned that the military won't
be able to obtain its objectives in this area if it has to
contract with monopolists on a regular basis?
Dr. Plum. Senator Hawley, you rightly note, and I agree
with my colleague, Dr. Taylor-Kale, that competition is
absolutely critical for helping us leverage our vibrant
industrial base and make sure we get the capabilities we need.
So, consolidation in that context, especially where it
drives out competition and innovation, is going to be
problematic. If confirmed, I will--this is one of the areas I
intend to focus on.
Senator Hawley. I ask in part because you have spent a
number of years at Google and Facebook, the two largest
monopolists arguably in the world, certainly in this country.
There is, I think it is safe to say, a lot of bipartisan
concern about the concentrated power of these companies have
exercised across industries, and frankly, how they have used
that power, which has been pretty disturbing in both of their
cases.
Talk to me about that. Are you--let's start with this, are
you concerned that, let's take Google, that Google's market
power is an impediment to the operations that you would need
to, the mission that you would have at DOD?
Is it an impediment to the sort of cooperation between
private industry and the Department of Defense that we need to
have in order for DOD and our military to be successful?
Dr. Plum. Senator, I think any time you have a large
concentration of market share in individual companies without
real competition, you need to start worrying about innovation
and whether the right sort of new technologies are rising to
the top.
So in that context, consolidation in any of the sectors is
something that, if confirmed, I would want to look at and make
sure we were taking steps to reduce barriers for small
businesses, creating pathways for new innovative technologies
to make sure we are getting the best things that our
warfighters require.
Senator Hawley. Let me just--my time has expired, so I will
ask this question, then I will yield my time back, Mr.
Chairman, or I will yield the floor.
I guess I have taken all my time. But here is the question,
let me just give you a chance, Dr. Plum, to address more
broadly why shouldn't we be concerned about your past work with
Google and Facebook, given those companies histories, given
their monopoly power, given how they have leveraged and used
their monopoly power across industries, and frankly, some of
the pretty disturbing things they have done from censorship to
the targeting of young children to the addiction model that
they have promoted.
I have been, as have many on this Committee to be fair,
vocal, vocal critics of this. So let me just give you a chance
to respond to that, and with that, I yield.
Dr. Plum. Senator, appreciate the opportunity. My role at
both Facebook and Google was really focused on taking data and
analysis and using it to solve specific problems, ISIS
recruiting, online child pornography, improving business
operations to address copyright violations, financial fraud.
So there are certainly bigger issues with both companies
and understand this Committee and many more publicly have been
critical of them. But if confirmed, what I could offer is that
my skills in taking data and analysis, in understanding the
software development and production cycle, and really how that
type of software innovation can be integrated into products at
speed and scale, are really key capabilities that we need for
our warfighters.
While recognizing there are a range of concerns on the
companies, those skills are something I hope to bring to bear
to make sure we can effectively and efficiently get the
capabilities our warfighters need to match the pacing threat of
China.
Chairman Reed. Well, thank you very much, Senator Hawley,
and thank you all our witnesses for your testimony today. As I
said, we will try to compress the questions to the record so
that we can be in a position to move the nominations as quickly
as possible. Thank you very, very much. With that, I will
adjourn the hearing.
[Whereupon, at 11:18 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
[Prepared questions submitted to Dr. Radha I. Plumb by
Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties
Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment?
Answer. The Deputy Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment
DUSD(A&S) serves as the principal assistant to, and under the
authority, direction, and control of, the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD(A&S)). My role will be to support
the USD(A&S) to carry out responsibilities, fulfill functions, manage
relationships, and exercise authorities, as provided in law. This
includes maintaining oversight of the Department's entire acquisition
and sustainment enterprise and working with him to review and revise
policies and processes as appropriate to meet Department level
priorities. Some areas USD(A&S) has identified as clear priorities are
aligning policies and processes to drive innovation; enabling
modernization of our weapons systems; developing and retaining a modern
and agile acquisition workforce; enabling a robust defense industrial
base; ensuring a resilient mission support and logistics enterprise;
and meeting our commitment to Service Members that their housing and
military installations are safe and healthy environments in which to
live and work.
Question. What background and experience do you possess that
qualify you to perform these duties? What background or experience, if
any, do you have in the acquisition of major weapon systems?
Answer. I have over twenty years of experience in national
security, technology, and research. This includes significant executive
leadership experience managing budgets, recruiting and retaining
talent, and driving culture change. I have a proven track record of
delivering high quality, analytically driven innovations. Most recently
as Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of Defense, I have led cross-
functional strategic initiatives and ensured budgets, programs and
investments were aligned to deliver priority capabilities. This
includes providing analysis and recommendations regarding high-impact
decisions on major defense programs across the Services. If confirmed,
I expect to continue these efforts to drive priority acquisition and
sustainment issues as DUSD(A&S).
Question. If you are confirmed, what duties and functions do you
expect that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment will assign to you?
Answer. If confirmed, I expect USD(A&S) will prescribe duties to me
in accordance with 10 U.S.C. Sec. 137a(b). My likely areas of focus
include ensuring software modernization and other new acquisition
pathways are executed consistent with Congressional intent; sustainment
costs on priority systems are more controlled; military housing is safe
and healthy; and that we have the right approaches to recruit and
retain the talent we need in the acquisition workforce.
qualifications
Question. The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment (USD(A&S)) is the Chief Acquisition and Sustainment Officer
of the Department of Defense. If confirmed, in supporting the USD(A&S),
you will be responsible for establishing policy and conducting
oversight of an acquisition and sustainment system through which the
Department spends more than $500 billion each year. What background and
experience do you have that qualify you for this position? In
particular:
What background or experience, if any, do you have in executing
programs to acquire products and/or services?
Answer. In my past role as a senior economist at RAND and
researcher at Facebook and Google, as well as previous roles in
government, such as with Special Operations/Low Intensity Conflict and
Department of Energy, I have executed multi-million dollar technical
and research programs. In these roles, I was charged with scoping,
acquiring, and then ensuring on-time execution of programs, services,
and analytic products.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
overseeing the execution of programs to acquire products and/or
services?
Answer. My past executive roles at Facebook and Google applied data
analytic and other technical expertise to programmatic, financial, and
talent management oversight to ensure relevant internal products as
well as investment in external products and services were appropriately
acquired, integrated, and executed. In my current role as Chief of
Staff to the Deputy Secretary of Defense, I support the full range of
major program execution and ensure appropriate senior level oversight
is present for priority mission capabilities.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
managing portfolios of programs?
Answer. My past roles at RAND, Facebook, and Google involved
managing portfolios of programs aligned to different substantive or
product areas. In my current role as Chief of Staff to the Deputy
Secretary of Defense, I support the execution of portfolios of programs
including those overseen by the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD) and the Military Departments.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
developing policy and processes for programs to acquire products and/or
services, as well as policies and processes for oversight of such
programs?
Answer. In my past role as Deputy Chief of Staff to the Deputy
Secretary of Energy and senior economist at RAND, I led and managed
policies and processes on a range of products and services. In these
roles, I was charged with defining policy and processes for science and
technology as well as major programs in the national security sector.
Question. What qualifications do you have using modern data
approaches, tools, and methods that prepare you to maintain visibility
of, analyze, and manage data on the volume, variety, and complexity of
the inventory of acquisition and sustainment initiatives and programs
in the Department?
Answer. In all of my professional roles to date I have leveraged
best in class data approaches to improve decision making and
investments. Most recently at Google, I led the development of cross-
product data systems to improve business practices, including
acquisition and management of contractor operations. At the Department
of Defense, I have served as a chief architect and advisor to the
Deputy Secretary and the Secretary in applying modern data practices to
the Department, to build the data foundations necessary to support the
billions of dollars in investment executed annually at the Department.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
managing contracts for services?
Answer. My past executive roles at Facebook and Google I managed
contracts for services including research and analytic consulting work.
In my current role as Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of
Defense, I support the execution of a full range of service contracts
for the OSD working closely with the Director of Administration and
Management.
relations with congress
Question. What are your views on the state of the relationship
between the Office of the USD(A&S) and the Senate Armed Services
Committee in particular, and with Congress in general?
Answer. I understand that the teams within the Office of USD(A&S)
meet regularly with professional staff members of the Senate Armed
Services Committee and other members of Congress. Such regular
engagements are critical to identify areas of potential mutual
interest, potential gaps, and areas to focus to ensure progress in
priority areas.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to sustain a
productive and mutually beneficial relationship between Congress and
the Office of the USD(A&S)?
Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to engage Congress and
support broader Office of USD(A&S) engagement. Such engagements are
critical to foster understanding, enable transparency, and support the
critical oversight function of Congress.
priorities and challenges
Question. If confirmed, what are the top priorities you would plan
to focus on during your tenure as the DUSD(A&S)? What would be your
plans for achieving these priorities?
Answer. If confirmed, my priority focus areas include (1) ensuring
critical new authorities--including software acquisition pathways--are
leveraged and integrated into priority systems; (2) building ongoing
work to identify and control drivers of sustainment costs in priority
programs; (3) developing an integrated strategy with the military
departments to ensure military housing is safe and healthy; and (4)
leveraging new hiring and retention authorities and programs to recruit
and retain the talent we need in the acquisition workforce.
Question. In your opinion, what are the greatest challenges facing
the DOD's acquisition and sustainment communities?
Answer. I believe the greatest challenge facing these communities
is the shift in focus and changing requirements needed to align the
Department to meet the pacing threat of China, balanced with the
ongoing acute threats including Russia, Iran, and violent extremist
organizations. This has impact on acquisition and sustainment
priorities, and will require adjustments to the posture of our
workforce in OSD and the Military Departments to deliver warfighters
the capabilities they need on the time schedule they need it.
Question. What would be your plans for addressing these challenges,
if confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I would work closely with the USD(A&S), the
Undersecretary for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)), and the Service
Acquisition Executives (SAE) in the Military Departments to develop,
exercise, and streamline the pathways to bring innovative new
capabilities to scale. This would include leveraging the Adaptive
Acquisition Framework to ensure we have agile and responsive policy and
are using data and analytics across the department to build a data-
driven approach to mission capability management.
Question. By what metrics will you measure your progress towards
achieving these priorities and addressing these challenges?
Answer. The defense acquisition and sustainment system suffers from
disjointed, decentralized data. If confirmed, I will fully support and
lend my energy to ensuring that A&S leads the Department driving
integrated, systems level performance data to ensure the Department's
leadership is making informed decisions on critical mission
capabilities. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Chief Digital
and Artificial Intelligence Office (CDAO) as well as the SAEs to
identify clear deliverables, targets, and associated metrics and host
regular reviews. I will also ensure support to the Deputy Secretary of
Defense-led business health metrics and will ensure meaningful and
accurate metrics help drive delivery and sustainment of on-time
capabilities to the warfighter and at target installations and
facilitates.
implementation of acquisition reforms
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the
Department continues its progress in implementing Congressionally-
mandated and Department-driven reforms to the acquisition system?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to ensure that
we are utilizing innovation to continue our progress toward acquisition
reform. By prioritizing innovation and the timely fielding of needed
capabilities to address key challenges, we can work within the
authorities provided to us via Congressional mandates and promote
additional Department-driven reforms.
Question. Are there any Congressionally-mandated or Department-
driven reforms that you would recommend be modified or suspended? If
so, why?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) and my staff to
carefully review the impact of recent changes to the acquisition system
in the last few years, and consider modification legislation or
Department policy as appropriate.
Question. If confirmed, what additional acquisition reforms, if
any, would you recommend?
Answer. The Deputy Secretary of Defense recently approved six
Competitive Advantage Pathfinder efforts to speed the delivery of
capabilities to the warfighter. If confirmed, I will work with the
USD(A&S) to deliver on this effort and coordinate between the
requirements, resourcing, and acquisition communities to find other
Pathfinder efforts to speed delivery and inform the acquisition
enterprise of lessons learned on how to reduce road blocks.
Question. In your view, of the Congressionally-mandated or
Department-driven reforms, which specifically have been the most
successful and impactful acquisition reform initiatives of the past
decade?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the USD(A&S)
in reviewing the reform of the Defense Acquisition System. The
expansion of Other Transaction Authorities provides increased
flexibility to acquire innovative technologies more rapidly, increases
competition, and ensures requirements are incorporated into future
technologies and products. Similarly, the middle-tier acquisition
pathway provides flexibility to move faster and get to operational
capabilities.
key relationships
Question. Recent National Defense Authorization Acts have directed
significant changes to the assignment of responsibilities within the
defense acquisition system. For example, the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 split the former
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) into the USD(A&S) and the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering (USD(R&E)).
In your view, what are the advantages and disadvantages of having
two separate organizations: one to manage acquisition and sustainment,
and one to manage research and engineering?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) and USD(R&E)
leadership to focus on the broad challenges we face in accelerating
innovation and more quickly fielding capability to the warfighter. I
will be mindful that transition areas between these portfolios may be
created, thus introducing challenges and risks as we transition
emerging technologies from research and development programs into
fielded capabilities. Strong, close collaboration between A&S and R&E
and other stakeholders can prevent these challenges and risks.
Question. In recent years, considerable authority and
responsibility for acquisition activities have been given to the
Services through: (1) the Secretary's delegation of Milestone Decision
Authority for most acquisition programs to the Service Acquisition
Executives (SAEs) and (2) Congress' emphasis on the Service Chiefs'
role in requirements development, resourcing discussions, and tradeoff
decisions for major defense acquisition programs.
In your view, what are the advantages and disadvantages of
delegating more responsibility for managing acquisition programs to the
Services and away from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)?
Answer. It is my understanding that shifting program management to
the Services has led OSD to focus on implementing reform efforts and
improving the Defense Acquisition System. If confirmed, I will work
with the USD(A&S) to fully review the advantages and disadvantages of
this shift and make recommendations as appropriate to Congress.
Question. In this construct where more responsibility for managing
acquisition programs has been delegated to the Services, what
suggestions would you make for the USD(A&S) to maintain oversight over
and insight into programs while reducing bureaucratic drag on the
process?
Answer. The Department has made major investments in increasing
transparency in acquisition data through the analytics effort. This
data-driven oversight reduces the amount of time taken away from
service program managers in providing information to USD(A&S) while
providing the OUSD(A&S) staff with greater understanding of their
portfolio areas and potential areas of risk. The Department needs to
continue with the analytics and advanced forecasting and modeling
capabilities to identify areas for improvement across the enterprise to
enable service program managers to be more effective and efficient.
Question. If confirmed as the DUSD(A&S), how would you structure
your relationship with the SAEs and the Service Chiefs? Are there any
programs for which Milestone Decision Authority should be moved to the
OSD-level or, conversely, returned to the SAEs?
Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the SAEs and their civilian
and military deputies to understand their issues with executing efforts
under the current Defense Acquisition System. I would also work with
the Service Chiefs' staffs to understand their roles in determining
capabilities. I will work with the USD(A&S) to ensure the milestone
decision authority is aligned between OSD and Services.
Question. What do you believe should be the respective roles and
responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense, USD(A&S), and the SAEs in
ensuring acquisition programs deliver promised capabilities to the end
user on time and on budget? How should the role of the DUSD(A&S)
support that?
Answer. I believe the role of the Secretary of Defense, the
USD(A&S) and the (SAE) is to operate in combination, consistent with
their statutory responsibilities, to ensure the effective operation of
the Defense Acquisition System. If confirmed as the DUSD(A&S) I would
work with the USD(A&S) and my counterparts in the Services to support
delivering capabilities to the end user on time and on budget.
Question. What further steps do you believe are necessary to align
authority and accountability in the acquisition system, if any?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to assess the
authorities and accountability within the acquisition system to ensure
they are appropriately aligned, as this is critical to ensure the
effectiveness of the system as a whole.
Question. In your view, who should provide independent oversight
within the acquisition system, and specifically, who should ensure that
acquisition strategies are based on prudent technical risk, subsystem
technology maturation prototyping when necessary, and realistic cost
estimating while allowing for sufficient time in the program schedule
to accomplish these tasks?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to balance
statutory requirements, Department policy, and independent oversight
within the acquisition system. The decision authority for acquisition
strategies and other aspects of the acquisition system must be
maintained at the proper level to account for program complexity,
dollar value, and technological maturity.
Question. The acquisition of information technology, ranging from
embedded software in weapons systems to the procurement of commercial
cloud computing services, is an increasingly important challenge for
defense acquisition programs.
If confirmed, what role will you have in developing acquisition
strategies for information technology systems and services and how is
that role different, in your view, from that of the Chief Information
Officer?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the USD(A&S),
the CIO, the newly-established CDAO, and the Components to pursue
unique and informative acquisition strategies for information
technology solutions. The Office of the USD(A&S) can complement the
CIO's role in identifying solutions from a technical view to ensure
integration of information systems to meet the Department's mission by
providing oversight and offering guidance to ensure those systems and
services are effectively and efficiently developed and integrated with
hardware and service contracts.
Question. If confirmed, what responsibilities related to policies
for and oversight of the acquisition of information technology systems
and services should be delegated to the Chief Information Officer, as
opposed to the USD(A&S)?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure an effective partnership
between the USD(A&S), CIO, and CDAO and determine an appropriate
balance of technical, functional and acquisition oversight. Current
statute is clear regarding the Defense Acquisition Executive role and
ability to delegate responsibilities. If confirmed, I will work with
the CIO office and the USD A&S to determine the optimal path regarding
delegation of responsibilities.
Question. If confirmed as the DUSD(A&S), how would you structure
your relationship with the Chief Data and Artificial Intelligence
Officer (CDAO)?
Answer. If confirmed, I would build off my current working
relationships established as the Chief of Staff for the Deputy
Secretary of Defense. I would actively partner with CDAO, in pursuit of
synergizing CDAO and USD A&S efforts to leverage the breath of data and
information available to the Department. Data, artificial intelligence
and innovation must become the cornerstone of the Department's
abilities to measure, monitor and transform. No one office will
succeed. It is only through strong partnerships across the Department,
and in particular with the CDAO, will the Department move forward.
managing the performance of the defense acquisition system
Question. Many of the Department's major defense acquisition
programs have established overly optimistic cost, schedule, and
performance goals that they have subsequently struggled to achieve,
resulting in cost growth and schedule delays.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to address cost growth,
schedule delays, and performance shortfalls on the Department's major
warfighting and business system programs?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), my staff, and
the Service and Component Acquisition Executives to address cost
growth, schedule delays, and performance shortfalls on major programs.
Working with the Joint Staff and Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation
(CAPE) will be a key element to align the Joint Capabilities
Integration and Development System (JCIDS) and Planning, Programming,
Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) processes within the acquisition
system. I will focus on the early phases of program and technology
development to provide these programs with a solid foundation, and I
will emphasize the need for rigorous independent cost and schedule
estimates. I believe setting realistic cost, schedule, and technical
baselines is a vital starting point for all programs. We should also
utilize lessons learned from successful programs that do better than
originally planned.
Question. What is your assessment of the Department's ability to
estimate lifecycle costs for its programs and activities? If
applicable, what specific changes would you make to improve this
ability?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with Assistant Secretary
of Defense (ASD) for Sustainment, CAPE, and the SAEs to develop and
refine accurate lifecycle cost estimates. Both estimation and
management of sustainment costs is a significant challenge, but I will
utilize proven methodologies to assist in making accurate assessments
of lifecycle costs.
Question. What is your assessment of the Department's ability to
assess and appropriately manage programs based on the programs'
technical maturity?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the USD(A&S),
USD(R&E), and SAEs to review the Department's ability to assess
technical risk for programs and make improvements as appropriate.
Question. What is your assessment of the Department's ability to
assess a program's health over its lifecycle, with respect to the
necessary industrial base and availability of the supply chain?
Answer. The Department's capabilities are dependent on reliable
access to a robust and ready supply chain. Risks develop when our
defense systems depend on outdated technologies with diminishing
manufacturing or foreign sources of supplies. If confirmed, I will work
closely with the ASD for Industrial Base Policy (ASD(IBP))to assess a
program's health over its lifetime, with respect to the defense
industrial base and supply chain risk management.
Question. Traditionally, acquisition programs are managed on a
program-by-program basis. Do you see advantages of moving toward a more
portfolio-based management approach? What would be the disadvantages of
adopting such an approach?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S), USD(R&E), the
SAEs, and CAPE to review the advantages and disadvantages of moving
toward a more portfolio-based management approach.
Question. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the current
Adaptive Acquisition Framework?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S)'s data driven
review of the advantages and disadvantages of the Adaptive Acquisition
Framework.
Question. What further changes, if any, should be made to DOD's
Adaptive Acquisition Framework?
Answer. Working with the USD(A&S), the SAEs and my staff, I will
use a data driven review to recommend ways to improve the performance
of the Adaptive Acquisition Framework.
acquisition data
Question. Selected Acquisition Reports are set to be sunset in the
near future and need to be replaced with a modernized reporting
requirement that can be tailored to different acquisition strategies
and pathways based on existing data sources and systems. In order to
implement a risk-based approach for managing acquisition programs, many
experts believe that DOD needs to adopt modern tools and methods for
collecting and analyzing large amounts of acquisition data.
In your opinion, does the Department have sufficient and timely
data to assess the full range of risks facing acquisition programs,
including risks pertaining to development and sustainment costs,
schedule, performance, integration, supply chains, and technical
maturity, among others?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to prioritize
assessing the status of relevant data, its availability and
accessibility, as well as our tools and human capital to use that data
to inform decision-making. We can build on the progress made thus far
to make data accessible and usable at all levels of the Department. I
will work with Department leadership, the Executive Branch, Congress,
and industry to address any identified shortcomings.
Question. What specific steps would you take, if confirmed, to
ensure the acquisition enterprise is collecting authoritative data,
including data from industry partners and other DOD organizations, to
effectively model risk, and use appropriate indicators of program and
portfolio health?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to continue
efforts across the Department to ensure the availability and effective
use of authoritative data while preserving transparency to Congress. I
will work with USD(A&S) to evaluate current data collection to ensure
alignment with industry best practices. Accurate, timely, clearly
understood and authoritative data is absolutely essential to
understanding our performance and areas for improvement.
Question. In what ways do you think the Department could be better
using the acquisition data it collects (or could collect) in order to
improve decision making for both the acquisition and sustainment of
systems and services in the Department?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) to review the
quality, accuracy, and timeliness of the acquisition data we collect to
determine how well the Department is utilizing that data to improve
decision-making.
Question. What are your suggestions for the format, content, and
tailoring of future Congressional reporting on acquisition programs?
Answer. My understanding is that the Department is currently
building the capability to provide automated acquisition program
dashboards, beginning with the Major Capability Acquisition and Middle
Tier of Acquisition pathways; other pathways will follow as metrics are
developed. CAPE is currently researching improvements to the Selected
Acquisition Reports; however, legally required content in Selected
Acquisition Reports remains the same for at least the next two years.
If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) to review these plans and make
adjustments as appropriate with the goal of maintaining transparency
while modernizing format.
software and it acquisition
Question. Software has become one of the most critical components
of DOD systems, but recent studies by the Government Accountability
Office (GAO), the Defense Innovation Board, and the Defense Science
Board, among others, show the Department's software development
practices have not kept up with leading industry practices. While DOD
has taken significant steps in the last few years, such as establishing
a software acquisition pathway emphasizing rapid delivery and user
engagement, programs have yet to consistently incorporate leading
software development practices.
What do you believe are the major barriers to DOD fully adopting
modern software development approaches and what additional steps would
you take to drive their adoption throughout DOD?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to coordinate
with OSD, Joint Staff, the Services and others in an effort to build on
the Department's initial momentum to modernize enterprise processes,
strategies, and tools for rapid digital capability delivery. I believe
it is essential to tailor Department interoperability and requirements
processes for software.
Question. What is your assessment of the current capabilities of
the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) to properly execute agile software
development?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to promote
incorporating leading private-sector industry practices throughout DOD
where delivery of capability is done iteratively and collaboratively
with the government to reduce cycle times and respond to changing
technologies, operations, and threats.
Question. How are initiatives like the Defense Digital Service and
Software Factories helping or hindering the Department's progress in
acquiring software intensive systems?
Answer. DOD is scaling its software production capabilities by
adopting a framework that follows commercial industry's model for
modern infrastructure and deploying digital products with security,
reliability, and speed. DOD must build on this momentum and modernize
its enterprise processes, strategies, and culture for rapid digital
capability delivery, including improving transparency and understanding
of the transition to scale. If confirmed I will work with DOD CIO, the
CDAO, and USD(A&S) to enable our programs with the enterprise tools and
processes it needs to support more rapid and secure digital product
delivery.
iterative development approaches
Question. What is your opinion on ways DOD could incorporate
iterative development approaches centered on fielding minimum viable
capabilities?
Answer. DOD should work to embrace rapid, iterative product
development that creates innovation and gives us competitive advantage
over our adversaries. If DOD builds capabilities in iterations similar
to industry, it can reduce cycle times and be more responsive to
changing technologies, operations, priorities, and threats. This is
particularly true for software which is central to every major DOD
mission and weapon system. My understanding is that similar to
industry, DOD's Software Acquisition Pathway policy focuses on
iterative delivery of Minimum Viable Products and Capabilities to the
warfighter which enables the learning and feedback that will help
continuously improve our products.
Question. To what extent do you believe DOD has broadly implemented
commercial best practice agile development approaches adequately for
software and hardware systems?
Answer. Thanks in large part to strong Congressional support, DOD
has made significant progress over the last few years to enable more
modern agile development and acquisition practices, policies, pilots,
and training. In particular, Congress provided DOD greater speed and
flexibility to develop the new Software Acquisition Pathway to acquire
and deliver software using modern, commercial software development
practices including agile software development. DOD should continue to
modernize its enterprise processes, strategies, and culture for agility
and rapid digital capability delivery. DOD can also learn how to extend
the rapid innovation cycles for software into more agile hardware
deliveries.
advanced technology adoption
Question. The rapid pace at which our adversaries are fielding
technological advancements demands the Department establish an
acquisition system that can deliver capabilities that are responsive to
new threats and emerging technological opportunities.
In your view, do the current policies and practices of the defense
acquisition system sufficiently encourage and support the adoption of
disruptive technologies in the Department's acquisition programs? If
not, what changes would you recommend in support of these initiatives?
Answer. At this time, I do not believe there are any necessary
recommended changes, but if confirmed, I will endeavor to evaluate and
identify where improvements can be made. I believe the Defense
Acquisition System has allowed for improved flexibility, but the
Department must continue to evolve to become more agile and leverage
these innovative technologies. The Department must meet the imperative
to offer a range of options to the programs, such as the application of
new technologies and concepts. Further, the use of the Acquisition
Innovation Research Center will be essential to research, model and
pilot innovative practices.
Question. What do you believe are the specific technologies that
will be critical to defeating a near-peer competitor?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), the Services,
the Combatant Commands, and the USD(R&E) to partner with commercial
industry partners in key areas, such as AI, autonomy, and advanced
computing.
Question. In your opinion, how should the Department define and
manage concepts like risk and failure so that program managers can try
new technologies and acquisition practices, derive lessons learned and
establish a common understanding of best practices, and more quickly
drive technological advancement in ongoing acquisition programs and
into current fielded capabilities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the Department learns
from both successes and failures that occur during the development of
acquisition practices throughout the lifecycle. I will focus on the
appropriate application of prototyping and experimentation to identify
issues as early as possible.
Question. What do you view as the major barriers to entry for new
companies that want to do business with DOD? How would you address
these barriers, if confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to encourage engagements with
industry, work with the Services to simplify requirements, stress the
use of novel strategies, and work to ensure we can provide the required
capabilities at the best cost possible. Transparency between industry
and government is critical to deliver the capabilities we need at costs
we can afford.
DOD continues to struggle with the transition of new technologies
into existing programs of record. The USD(R&E) enterprise has primary
responsibility for development of new advanced technologies, but the
Acquisition and Sustainment enterprise must do its part to address
transition of technology development programs into procurement and
fielding.
Question. What impediments to technology transition do you see
within the Department?
Answer. As the USD(A&S) has noted, budgeting timelines with the
PPBE process and the traditional requirements systems can prevent rapid
movement of programs through the defense acquisition system.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take increase the rate
and frequency at which proven technologies developed by DOD, defense
industry, or the commercial sector are transitioned into programs of
record?
Answer. I believe that the Department should deliver and build
capabilities in iterations--similar to industry--to reduce cycle times
and be more responsive to changing technologies, operations, and
threats. For software specifically, the continued employment of
modular, open systems approaches as well as commercial as-a-service
models is critical, given its reliance for most major weapon systems.
The Department must organize around capability or mission area
portfolios that rapidly harnesses a wide-array of commercial and
defense solutions and enable rapid insertion of emerging technology.
other transactions authority (ota)
Question. What steps will you take to promote the appropriate use
of OTAs to encourage the participation of new and non-traditional
defense contractors in the defense industrial base?
Answer. I am aware that DOD successfully uses Other Transaction
Authority (OTA) to attract new and non-traditional entrants to the
Defense Industrial Base. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to
ensure that the DOD acquisition community is properly trained and has
the tools to effectively leverage this important capability.
Question. What do you see as the benefits and downsides of using
OTA consortium agreements?
Answer. Consortia may offer valuable services that facilitate
access to a wide range of sources that might not otherwise participate
in the Department's research and development and prototyping efforts.
This has the potential to accelerate innovative technology into
capabilities for DOD. However, I also understand the need for
transparency in using consortia, including the need to ensure they
effectively attract and identify non-traditional Defense contractors in
the performance of individual projects awarded to a consortium.
earned value management
Question. The earned value management system (EVMS) is used to
assess the cost, schedule, and technical performance of major
capability acquisitions for proactive course correction. However, the
Section 809 Panel reported that EVM does not measure product quality
and concluded, ``EVM has been required on most large software programs
but has not prevented cost, schedule, or performance issues.'' In 2009
DOD reported to the Committee that ``a program could perform ahead of
schedule and under cost according to EVM metrics but deliver a
capability that is unusable by the customer'' and stated the program
manager should ensure that the EVM process measures the quality and
technical maturity of technical work products instead of just the
quantity of work performed.
If confirmed, what steps would you take, if any, to require
contractors to report valid measures of cost, schedule, and technical
performance for all acquisition pathways?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), the CDAO, and
Department leaders to establish or improve appropriate, executable
metrics across the acquisition pathways and to ensure the industrial
base can work within those metrics. I will work to continually improve
and refine approaches to best meet warfighter needs.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take, if any, to
require contractors that employ the DOD Digital Engineering (DE)
Strategy to maintain valid information in the digital authoritative
source of truth that is sufficient for program managers to make
informed and timely decisions to manage cost, schedule, performance,
and risk?
Answer. If confirmed, I would assist the USD(A&S) in engagements
with industry and Service representatives to better understand how the
digital engineering strategy is currently employed. I will foster
collaboration to ensure proper training of our acquisition corps and
development of contract and data rights guidance.
planning, programming, budgeting, and execution (ppbe)
Question. The Department's acquisition process is closely linked
with its PPBE process, and acquisition programs can move only as nimbly
as the budget processes that fund them. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 established a Commission to
examine and make recommendations for PPBE reform.
In your view, what changes are needed to the PPBE process to ensure
it can effectively support ongoing acquisition reforms, including by
improving timeliness, reducing bureaucracy, and increasing flexibility?
Answer. Refining the PPBE process is important to realizing agile
and timely procurement of key emerging technology. If confirmed, I look
forward to working with the PPBE Commission and stakeholders across the
Department and in Congress to examine the system issues and develop
proposals to address these challenges.
Question. What steps can the Department take under the current PPBE
construct to ensure acquisition programs are appropriately resourced in
a timely manner?
Answer. The Competitive Advantage Pathfinders (CAPs) initiative is
aimed at identifying ways to align the PPBE with the requirements and
acquisition systems. If confirmed, I will work to identify solutions
that support the acquisition system with our partners in CAPE, the
Comptroller, and Congress to apply lessons learned to accelerate
acquisition of important technologies.
One of the major obstacles to successfully bringing emerging
technologies into the Department's acquisition system is the so-called
``valley of death,'' partially caused by the gap in funding between the
development of a new technology and its transition into a program of
record.
Question. What changes are needed to the PPBE and other processes
to help bridge the ``valley of death''?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the USD(A&S) to
assess the PPBE process and to ensure transparency and security while
balancing the imperative for speed, in order to bridge the ``valley of
death.''
To what extent should the role of the government's systems
engineering commands (e.g., Naval Warfare Centers and the Air Force
Research Laboratory), as the government's technical experts in
particular technology areas, be used to help emerging technologies
bridge the ``valley of death''?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) and USD(R&E)
leadership to ensure the warfighter's prioritized capability gaps are
appropriately communicated and aligned with the efforts of our
laboratories and industry partners.
Question. In your view, do the military departments and defense
agencies have different results in transitioning technology developed
``in-house'' versus technology developed by others, such as DARPA, the
Strategic Capabilities Office, or the commercial sector?
Answer. In my view, aligning the requirements, resources and
development communities is critical to reversing the erosion of
technical advantage. The Military Departments have processes in place
to align technology investments from within their own centers to
acquisition partners. Defense agencies have the ability to look at
needs in a different way and bring cross functional and joint
requirements to the forefront of emerging technologies development.
The Goldwater-Nichols Act (GNA) of 1986 was enacted just prior to
the explosion in information technology. The GNA successfully instilled
a ``joint'' culture in the Department's warfighting operations, but the
PPBE, requirements, and systems acquisition processes remained service-
centric. Today's information technology could enable interoperability
between ground, maritime, air, space, and cyber systems to proliferate
options to detect, locate, identify, track and guide weapons to
targets. However, systematically constructing ``kill chains'' across
domains, systems, and services and managing such joint operations may
be very difficult given that the ``man, train, and equip'' role is
performed by the separate military departments and a small number of
defense agencies. To take a concrete example, DARPA is struggling to
determine how it can ``transition'' its Assault Breaker II initiative,
since the interconnectedness it is working on transcends any one
military service or department.
Question. What are your views on how to address this problem?
Answer. The Integrated Acquisition Portfolio Reviews started last
year indicate the Services are developing and fielding capabilities
that support their Title 10 responsibilities, without taking into
account the interoperability needed to achieve the goals of the
National Defense Strategy. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S),
my staff, and the SAEs to identify ways to increase interoperability.
Question. As there are few options other than the military
departments, Special Operations Command, and Cyber Command to field and
maintain systems, do you believe consideration should be given to
creating some joint acquisition and sustainment capabilities? Please
explain your answer.
Answer. Ensuring acquisition and sustainment of joint capabilities
is critical to meeting warfighter requirements. If confirmed, I would
work with USD(A&S) and Department leaders to review the effects of
previous joint efforts to understand the utility of applying those
concepts to future efforts.
requirements
Question. The Joint Capabilities and Integration Development System
(JCIDS) process was established nearly twenty years ago with the
intention of addressing overlap and duplication in the Military
Services' acquisition programs.
With respect to driving the acquisition system to deliver
capabilities that meet the national security needs of the nation, what
do you see as the primary shortfalls of the current requirements
building process?
Answer. The Joint Staff has made strides in the last few years to
take a more strategic look at requirements through the Joint
Warfighting Concept (JWC) and the Capability Portfolio Management
Reviews (CPMRs). These efforts provide the acquisition community with a
clear signal on the highest priority capabilities in the Department. If
confirmed, I would work with my colleagues in the acquisition community
and the Joint Staff to translate these capabilities into requirements
documents.
Question. If confirmed, how would you propose to reform the
process?
Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the USD(A&S) and my staff
to understand the application of the JWC and CPMRs to the acquisition
planning process. The CAPs efforts are focused to integrate the
requirements, budgeting and acquisition processes to provide
capabilities in a shorter time frame, and lessons learned will lead to
changes in all three defense decision making process areas.
The requirements process has often been incapable of developing
requirements that consider technological advances made by DOD's own
research programs. In recent years, DOD has also undertaken a number of
initiatives to improve the Department's connectivity with commercial
technology companies.
Question. What changes would you suggest to ensure that emerging
technologies from within DOD, defense industry, and the commercial
sector are better accounted for and leveraged within the requirements
process?
Answer. The Department has established two efforts, Rapid Defense
Experimentation Reserve (RDER) and CAPs, to find ways to accelerate the
introduction of new capabilities to the war fighter. If confirmed, I
would work with the USD(A&S), USD(R&E), and the Services to institute
the lessons learned from RDER and CAPs to identify how to rapidly and
efficiently transition capabilities from prototype, to production, to
fielding, into the hands of our warfighters.
Question. Many requirements are established with technical goals
that are unachievable at any reasonable cost or schedule.
What changes would you recommend to the requirements development
process (including workforce changes) to support the development of
requirements that allow for risk-informed tradeoffs that are
technically feasible at reasonable costs and schedules?
Answer. The JWC and CPMRs give the acquisition community an
understanding of the capability gaps we much address to reverse the
erosion of our technical edge. If confirmed, I would work with the
USD(A&S), the Joint Staff, CAPE and the Services to convert these
capability gaps into requirements.
Question. The USD(A&S) is not a member of the Joint Requirements
Oversight Council, but does advise the Secretary of Defense how to
acquire capabilities and what capabilities should be acquired.
In your opinion, should the requirements process for new
capabilities continue to be exclusively the province of the military
departments, and military officers of the Joint Staff and the combatant
commands?
Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the USD(A&S) and my staff
to understand the role of OUSD(A&S) in the requirements process. It is
my understanding that OUSD(A&S) staff members participate in the
Functional Capability Boards, Joint Capabilities Board and Joint
Requirements Oversight Council to provide an acquisition perspective on
all requirements.
Question. If confirmed, in what circumstances would you consider it
appropriate to recommend that the Secretary invest in a capability you
consider of high importance, for which there is either no formal
requirement or with respect to which no military department is funding
a solution to a requirement?
Answer. Ensuring we have the right mix of capabilities is critical
to effectively executing the National Defense Strategy. If confirmed, I
would work with the USD(A&S) and my staff to understand how we can
influence the Military Services' budget process and then work with CAPE
to identify areas of high importance to the joint fight that were not
prioritized by the Military Services.
Question. How would you recommend the Department handle
requirements oversight for cross-cutting capabilities, such as Joint
All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2), that require simultaneous
coordination and funding across multiple lines of effort for new
capabilities as well as modernization of existing systems?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), the Joint
Staff, and OSD leadership to review the oversight process for
requirements of cross cutting capabilities and identify any recommended
changes.
modularity and interoperability
Question. Section 805 of the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) established requirements for implementing
Modular Open Systems Approaches (MOSA) for all major systems
acquisitions in DOD and for rights in interface data for the critically
important objectives of improving interoperability and increasing
potential competition throughout the life cycle of the system. This
section further required the use of widely supported and consensus-
based standards for system interfaces. Since enactment of section 805,
DARPA has developed and transitioned technology that should
revolutionize interoperability, under the STICHES program (System of
Systems Technology Integration Tool Chain for Heterogeneous Electronic
Systems). STITCHES enables auto-generation of software to achieve
interoperability across any interface that has been properly
characterized and defined, including when neither system nor subsystem
has been built to a common standard. STITCHES achieves this
interoperability with less performance degradation than with a common
standard. Accordingly, Congress enacted section 804 of the Fiscal Year
2021 NDAA to require that all DOD programs characterize system
interfaces and that these interface specifications be available in
multiple databases for rapid integrations.
What is your judgment of the progress that DOD and the Defense
Industrial Base has made in implementing the MOSA mandate?
Answer. If confirmed I will work with USD(A&S) to understand if
additional progress can be made for full implementation and industry
acceptance of the MOSA mandate. This includes setting standards and
regulations, developing capability reference architectures, and
building repositories for modular systems interfaces.
Question. Are you familiar with DARPA's technical achievement in
the STITCHES program?
Answer. It is my understanding that DARPA recently transitioned the
STITCHES program to the Air Force. If confirmed, I look forward to
receiving more information on this innovative tool.
Question. If confirmed, will you commit to assisting in fulfilling
the requirements of section 804 with respect to defining interfaces and
making them accessible in databases?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to ensure the
Department meets the section 804 statutory requirements.
test and evaluation
Question. Test and evaluation activities work to meet
specifications and requirements, and that deployed capabilities are
operationally effective against threats.
In your opinion, what is the appropriate role of developmental,
operational, and live-fire testing in the acquisition process?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), USD(R&E),
Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E), and the Military
Service testing organizations to understand the appropriate role of all
testing in the acquisition process and the value of live-fire testing
in that broader context.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure
acquisition programs efficiently address issues and deficiencies
identified through test and evaluation?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), DOT&E, the
SAEs, and my staff to ensure acquisition programs address any issues
identified through test and evaluation.
Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe DOD
should procure weapon systems that have not demonstrated, through test
and evaluation, to be operationally effective, suitable, and
survivable?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), DOT&E, the
SAEs, and my staff to understand decisions made to procure weapon
systems that have not demonstrated to be operationally effective,
suitable and survivable.
Question. If confirmed, would you support programs accepting more
risk upfront for flight test failures, to accelerate fielding schedules
for a potential 82027-2030 China fight?
Answer. Acceptance of greater risk and even a ``fail fast''
approach is critical to accelerating progress in key technology areas.
If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), DOT&E, SAEs, and the Joint
Staff to understand where we can accept more risk for flight test
failures to accelerate fielding.
In recent years, the Department's test and evaluation community has
sought to integrate aspects of developmental and operational testing
and conduct such testing early in the acquisition process.
Question. In your view, what are the advantages and disadvantages
of increasing the integration among the developmental, acquisition, and
testing communities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), USD(R&E),
DOT&E, and the SAEs to understand where we are taking risk by
increasing integration between the developmental, acquisition and
testing communities.
Question. What other reforms would you recommend to improve the
timeliness, efficiency, and effectiveness of the test and evaluation
process to more quickly correct technical deficiencies in weapon
systems?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), USD(R&E),
DOT&E, and the SAEs to recommend improvements to the test and
evaluation process to more quickly correct technical deficiencies in
weapons systems.
Question. If confirmed, how would you work with USD(R&E), the
developmental test and modeling and simulation community, the Director
of Operational Test and Evaluation, and the Military Services to ensure
the Department has the testing infrastructure, workforce, and other
resources it needs to support the test and evaluation needs of current
and future acquisition programs?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), USD(R&E),
DOT&E, and the SAEs through my staff to ensure the infrastructure and
resources are available to support the test community.
defense industrial base (dib)
Question. Over the past several years, there have been increasing
concerns in Congress, industry, and the Department over the health of
the DIB and its ability to reliably meet current and future defense
needs.
What do you assess to be the most significant challenges facing the
DIB?
Answer. The most significant challenge is ensuring the DIB is
robust and ready to develop and sustain the capabilities required by
the National Defense Strategy. This includes having regular, on-time
funding, a stable workforce, and clear requirements in order to execute
at the speed and scale needed to match the pacing threat of China along
with a myriad of acute and persistent threats.
Question. How would you propose to address these challenges, if
confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I would focus on stabilizing investments in
key programs and systems and applying new funding and authorities to
increase resilience and reliability of both the organic and commercial
industrial base.
Question. What steps will you take to ensure the DIB has the
appropriate scientific, technical, and manufacturing workforces to
support current and future needs of DOD?
Answer. The ``graying'' of the workforce is a significant challenge
that cuts across almost every sector of the DIB. DOD has launched
several efforts through the Industrial Base Analysis & Sustainment
program to begin training the next generation of manufacturing workers.
If confirmed, I would work with USD (A&S) and USD (R&E) to invest in
workforce development as well as expanding the STEM talent across the
DIB.
Question. What steps will you take to ensure that the DIB has the
appropriate manufacturing and production infrastructure to support
current and future needs of DOD?
If confirmed, I will continue to work with Congress and Department
leadership to ensure that DOD has the resources and authorities needed
to invest in and support the sustainment and enhancement of the defense
production infrastructure.
Question. What steps should the Department take--on its own or as
part of a ``whole-of-government'' approach--to increase domestic
industrial capacity and reduce reliance on suppliers in China and on
other adversaries?
Answer. DOD procurement regulations can help reduce our reliance on
adversarial supply sources. DOD currently operates under numerous
sourcing restrictions related to critical materials from China and
Russia, such as rare earth elements and titanium, and I understand that
additional sourcing restrictions are under consideration for the FY
2023 National Defense Authorization Act. If confirmed, I would work
with USD (A&S) to understand how best to apply existing and future
activities to enhance capacity.
The Biden Administration has made domestic sourcing a key part of
its policy agenda. If confirmed, you would oversee the beginning of a
significant push to increase DOD's procurement of American-made goods,
products, and materials.
Question. Do you see any associated challenges or opportunities?
Please elaborate.
Answer. I strongly support the whole-of-government effort to expand
procurement policies. If confirmed, I will work with the interagency
and international partners to ensure access to critical capabilities,
while supporting the development of a competitive defense ecosystem.
Question. In your opinion, what role should domestic sourcing
requirements play in efforts to manage the DIB, support domestic
companies, and ensure trusted and reliable supplies of goods and
services?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the SAEs and interagency
partners to develop a consistent domestic sourcing policy across the
Federal Government, ensuring a robust domestic manufacturing base to
foster cooperation and innovation and supporting our international
partners.
Question. What steps should the Department take to ensure a secure
supply of strategic materials such as rare earth elements given the
scarcity of domestic or allied sources?
Answer. I understand the Department has recently made investments
to improve the supply chain resiliency of rare earth minerals. If
confirmed, I will work with interagency partners to develop a
consistent domestic sourcing policy across the Federal Government and
identify other approaches to secure a reliable supply of rare earth
elements.
Question. In your view, what steps should the Department take to
ensure that companies are able to find needed financing and resources
from trusted sources?
Answer. The Department has taken a number of actions to provide the
DIB with access to trusted financing and resources such as the
Strategic Investment Fund and the Defense Production Act. If confirmed,
I will continue to support efforts to facilitate better access to
vetted sources of capital.
Question. What actions should the Department take to address the
threat of ``adversarial capital'' from China and other sources that
seek to gain undue influence over the DIB?
Answer. As a member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the
United States, the Department should seek to mitigate adversarial
capital from China and other sources using all the tools at its
disposal and in concert with interagency partners, international
allies, and Congress. If confirmed, I will work with USD (A&S),
Department leadership and Congress to recommend additional actions as
necessary to ensure appropriate technology protections.
Question. In your view, what is the appropriate role for the
Department with respect to proposed and ongoing private sector merger
and acquisition activities of DOD contractors?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Department has an important
role in assessing the competitive and national security impacts of a
proposed activity and conveying that assessment to the regulators at
the Federal Trade Commission or Department of Justice. If confirmed, I
will work with the Department's senior leadership to review DOD's
current role and recommend adjustments as appropriate to strengthen the
Department's oversight role to appropriately balance the need for
growth with the risks of anti-competitive consideration.
Question. What are your views on defense industry mergers and
acquisitions in terms of Pentagon guidance to industry?
Answer. Industry mergers and acquisitions can be important to
growing, but can also risk limiting competition and reducing the
vibrancy of the DIB as a whole. The Department benefits most from a
robust and diversified DIB, which reduces costs, spurs innovation, and
generates new entrants.
Question. How can the Department better leverage suppliers in the
national technology and industrial base (NTIB) and among allies and
partners?
Answer. The recent events in Ukraine and supply chain impacts of
COVID have highlighted the benefits and risks of interdependent supply
chains. If confirmed, I will continue efforts to better leverage
suppliers in the NTIB and among partners and allies and build off
lessons learned from our combined support to Ukraine, while ensuring
the US has a robust and vibrant domestic industrial capacity.
Question. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base
Policy was recently created by Congress and is responsible for
overseeing the Department's efforts to manage and support the DIB.
In your view, what should be the key priorities and activities of
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy?
Answer. The new ASD(IBP), working with the USD(A&S) should focus on
strengthening the DIB and its supply chains to provide the capabilities
warfighters need. If confirmed, I will work closely with the ASD to
ensure the Department has the resources needed to strengthen the DIB
and its supply chains.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the office of this new
Assistant Secretary is adequately resourced (in terms of personnel,
budget, and authority) and provided with the high-level support
necessary to perform its duties and responsibilities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Department leadership to
develop a resourcing plan that will provide the personnel, budget, and
authority necessary.
Question. Section 4819 of title 10, United States Code established
a framework for modernizing and digitizing the approach for mitigating
risks to the defense industrial base.
What is the status of implementing that framework?
Answer. For the DIB to continue to provide current and future
warfighting capabilities it will need to continually evolve and
modernize. If confirmed, I will work with the ASD(IBP) to continue to
develop and refine a framework to modernize our supplier base to
include leveraging digital processes.
Question. What other steps would you take to assess the health of
the current and future defense industrial base?
Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to implement the findings in
the E.O. 14107 report, ``Securing Defense-Critical Supply Chains'', to
include improving the Department's visibility into its supply chains
and developing data-driven illumination of key dependencies and risk
areas.
organic industrial base
Question. In your opinion, what role does the organic industrial
base play in modernization efforts and in the sustainment of
warfighting capabilities?
Answer. The organic industrial base (OIB) plays a critical role in
the Department's ability to provide materiel readiness and operational
availability of warfighting weapon systems. The OIB provides a ready
and controlled source of capacity and capability, essentially serving
as the nation's readiness and industrial insurance policy by
safeguarding the readiness, sustainment, and modernization of the
Department's warfighting. As essential use for this capacity is
partnership with industry on efforts to modernize our currently
capabilities.
Question. What is your assessment of the status of the facilities
and workforce in DOD depots, logistics centers, arsenals, and other
elements of the organic industrial base?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Department's OIB facilities
and workforce are in need of dedicated and predictable investment to
modernize new capabilities, while renewing the existing facilities,
plants, and equipment. If confirmed, I will work with our DOD
leadership and Congress to ensure the necessary resources are requested
to modernize and optimize the facilities, workforce, and other key
elements of the OIB.
Question. What role should the organic industrial base play in the
sustainment of software in defense systems?
Answer. It is my understanding, the OIB plays a critical role in
sustaining software to support warfighting readiness and is focused on
improving planning early in the life cycle, to include efficient and
effective software sustainment strategies. If confirmed, I will work
with the Services to continue to improve OIB software sustainment
strategies.
Question. What role should the organic industrial base play in the
sustainment of dual use and commercial technologies used by DOD?
Answer. I support continued collaboration and, if confirmed, will
work with senior leaders in the DOD sustainment communities and
industry to enhance and build upon existing mechanisms like cooperative
agreements and technology transfer authorizations from Congress. If
confirmed, I would also work to identify new opportunities to expand
and strengthen these relationships.
Question. What role, if any, does USD(A&S) have in ensuring that
the facilities and equipment at military depots are modern, operable,
and effective?
Answer. It's my understanding, the Department delivered to Congress
a comprehensive strategy for improving the depot infrastructure to
ensure the OIB has the resiliency, capacity, and capability to support
the materiel readiness goals of current and future DOD weapon systems.
In addition, I believe that the Military Services are actively working
on Infrastructure Optimization Plans (IOPs) that will improve and
extend OIB facilities service life. If confirmed, I will work with
Congress to ensure the Military Services' depot maintenance strategic
plans are properly aligned and resourced with the National Defense
Strategy readiness priorities.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to strengthen the
Department's organic industrial base?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to working closely with the Military
Services to understand their current and future OIB requirements,
ensure weapon system depot activations are resourced, and reinforce
OSD's oversight role. Additionally, I will work collaboratively with
Congress to ensure that our limited sustainment resources are directed
toward efforts to strengthen the OIB.
defense industrial base cybersecurity
Question. Section 1648 of the FY 2020 NDAA requires the Secretary
of Defense to develop a comprehensive framework to enhance
cybersecurity for the DIB.
What is your understanding of the challenges of enhancing
cybersecurity of the DIB?
Answer. Ensuring cybersecurity capabilities across the DIB is
critical to safeguard intellectual property and sensitive information
from malicious activity that threatens economic and national security.
However, small and medium sized businesses face particular challenges
in implementing the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) Special Publication 800-171 cybersecurity guidance. I understand
OUSD(A&S) is working with NIST and the DOD CIO to help better
understand the cost and barriers to cybersecurity. If confirmed, I will
work with the CIO, NIST, and the DIB to tackle these challenges.
Question. If confirmed, how would you balance the needs of
improving cybersecurity with the burden of compliance on small and
medium sized businesses?
Answer. The Department must reduce the barriers to small businesses
in competing in the DIB. OUSD(A&S) is working with CIO on a DIB
cybersecurity pilot to cyber harden the supply chain for an important
weapons system that will help DOD better understand the level of
resourcing required for small and medium size companies to enhance
their cybersecurity in a meaningful way to protect our supply chains.
If confirmed, I will work with the CIO's office to enhance the
cybersecurity of the DIB.
Question. The framework required by Section 1648 has not yet been
completed and delivered to Congress. If confirmed, will you commit to
completing the work required by Section 1648?
Answer. It is my understanding that the CIO is responsible for
Section 1648. That said, I am aware that Section 1648 requires strong
collaboration across the Department and if confirmed, I will work with
the CIO to provide inputs to the framework as appropriate.
Question. In the last few years, the focus of the Acquisition &
Sustainment model has been on one element of the framework: the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model certification (CMMC).
What is your understanding of the current status of CMMC?
Answer. I understand that the CMMC model is being restructured and
that many decisions remain regarding what requirements to levy on which
programs or contractors. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that CMMC
requirements are applied consistently and fairly across the DIB.
Question. If confirmed, are there any changes you would make or
recommend to the CMMC efforts beyond those already mandated by the
Deputy Secretary?
Answer. If confirmed, I would review proposed changes around
feedback in the formal rule making process to inform any further
changes to recommend to the Deputy Secretary.
international armaments cooperation
Question. The Department conducts a number of activities that
support International Armaments Cooperation (IAC) that are used to
promote US strategic goals. IAC is defined as (1) cooperative research,
development, test, and evaluation of defense technologies, systems, or
equipment; (2) joint production and follow-on support of defense
articles or equipment and; (3) procurement of foreign technology,
equipment, systems or logistics support. In addition to activities like
information exchange agreements, defense trade, cooperative logistics,
the Department also funds activities that can be used to promote
interoperability and joint development, such as the Defense
Exportability Features (DEF) program, Coalition Warfare Support
Program, and Foreign Comparative Test Program.
How are international armaments cooperation activities used to
shape and support broader DOD warfighting needs and priorities? Are
there new approaches or activities we should consider to be more
effective and strategic?
Answer. Engaging our allies and partners in armaments cooperation
activities allows the United States to maximize coalition warfighting
capabilities--increasing warfighter interoperability while leveraging
resources and global innovation opportunities for collective defense
purposes. In my role as the Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of
Defense, I saw firsthand the importance of our international
partnerships as we organized our defense establishments to support of
Ukraine's defense against Russia's aggression. If confirmed, I look
forward to working within the Department, interagency, industry, and
with the Congress to implement plans and policies that support enhanced
international armaments cooperation.
Question. Based on current experiences with Ukraine, what
recommendations would you have to help streamline or improve our
security cooperation, foreign military sales and cooperative logistics
processes in order to be more responsive to rapidly changing security
situations?
Answer. Secretary Austin and the DOD leadership team are committed
to applying the lessons we are learning from Ukraine. If confirmed, I
look forward to working with USD (A&S) to assess how A&S can support
the larger security cooperation enterprise and will seek to implement
identified changes to drive improved agility and responsiveness.
Question. How are newer initiatives like the Defense Technology and
Trade Initiative (DTTI) with India, the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue
(or Quad), or the AUKUS initiative being used to support our defense
posture, and are there recommendations for improvements of those
activities that should be considered to make them more effective?
Answer. Initiatives such as DTTI, the Quad, and AUKUS offer
opportunities for the identification and pursuit of focused, mutually
beneficial activities, enabling the prioritization of resources for
execution and the advancement of shared goals. If confirmed, I will
work with stakeholders in government and industry to align plans and
objectives in support of our defense posture requirements.
microelectronics
Question. Over the last few decades, Taiwan, South Korea, and the
People's Republic of China have implemented large-scale national
industrial policies to build microelectronics manufacturing facilities.
In contrast, the availability of large-scale state-of-the-art
microelectronics manufacturing foundries in the United States has been
steadily declining. DOD has a diverse set of requirements and needs for
the domestic production of measurably secure state-of-the-art, state of
the practice, and legacy integrated circuits in low volumes to meet its
needs.
What is your assessment of the Department's microelectronics needs,
to include both legacy, state-of-the-practice, and state-of-the-art?
Answer. Reliable access to microelectronics is critical to the
Department's readiness and posture. Presently fielded systems, such as
the F-35 and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), require significant
commercial and dual-use state-of-the-practice microelectronics. The
Department also requires access to legacy microelectronics for
specialized applications, such as radiation hardened electronics. If
confirmed, I will work with all Department stakeholders on implementing
strategies which address the challenges for each type of
microelectronics to ensure access to assured resources.
Question. In your view, what role should the Department play in
working with the interagency and industry to increase domestic
production of dual use microelectronics?
Answer. Dual use and commercial microelectronics, such as state-of-
the-practice microelectronics, enable technologies, such as UAS and
fifth generation fighters. While these are critical for the Department,
they are only a small share of the overall market. If confirmed, I will
work extensively and diligently with interagency partners, such as the
Department of Commerce, to ensure that we enable U.S. industry to close
the gap in production.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you plan to take to
support increased domestic production of dual use microelectronics?
Answer. A key enabler of our current warfighting capability is dual
use and commercial microelectronics. Recent investments and work by USD
(R&E) and proposed legislation are aimed at increasing investment and
scale of chip manufacturing in the U.S. If confirmed, I will continue
to support the Department's investments in dual use microelectronics
and look for opportunities to enhance and accelerate the impact of
these investments.
Question. What actions would you take to partner with the USD(R&E)
on this issue?
Answer. If confirmed, I will promote enhanced collaboration between
acquisition and sustainment and research and engineering on efforts to
secure future access to new systems, while ensuring present and soon to
be fielded systems have access to legacy microelectronics.
defense production act
Question. The Covid-19 pandemic and Operation Warp Speed saw the
expanded use of Defense Production Act (DPA) authorities for DOD to
support national emergencies and other contingencies.
What do you see as the appropriate level of use of DPA for DOD
support to domestic, non-conflict related use-cases?
Answer. The DPA provides a broad base of authorities for
preparedness, response, and recovery from a national emergency. In any
domestic, non-conflict national emergency undertaking, the deployment
of DPA authority should be carefully tailored to the specific risk or
threat it is intended to mitigate.
Question. What lessons has DOD learned from Operation Warp Speed on
how to best utilize DPA authorities, and how have these lessons been
institutionalized within DOD?
Answer. It is my understanding that Operation Warp Speed
principally used authority under Title I of the Defense Production Act
to obtain priority ratings. Nearly all DOD contracts already have
priority ratings under DPA Title I, and this provides some measure of
assurance that defense needs would continue to be met during a national
emergency.
Question. How would you use DPA authorities to support
prioritization of federal contracts in areas of key supply chain
bottlenecks (ex. Microelectronics), if confirmed?
Answer. As noted previously, DPA authorities should be carefully
tailored to the specific problem they are intended to address, and
nearly all DOD contracts already use DPA Title I ratings.
Question. In your opinion, to what extent and how should DOD best
utilize DPA Title III authorities for loan guarantees, purchase
commitments, and grants and subsidies to expand domestic production in
areas of strategic interest?
Answer. DPA Title III is among the most cost-effective, expedient,
and practical alternative approach to meet the need. As important as it
is to ``build'' domestic capacity, it is equally essential that the
business case fundamentals (i.e., the ``buy'' side) will support the
sustainment of a proposed undertaking. If confirmed, I would work with
USD (A&S) to determine its applicability to mitigate DIB reliance on
foreign capital.
Question. Are there sectors or items you believe should see
expanded use of DPA Title III authorities to support domestic
production?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD (A&S) to review the
actions underway and in development for DPA Title III action to
determine whether additional resources, authorities, or increased scope
(e.g., sectors) are necessary.
sustainment
Question. The GAO has reported that operation & sustainment (O&S)
costs account for about 70 percent of a system's total lifecycle costs,
and that O&S costs are largely pre-determined by decisions made during
the acquisition process, such as decisions about requirements, system
design, and technical data. Given this, it is critically important that
programs effectively consider and plan for the sustainment of a system
early in the acquisition process.
In your opinion, how well are the Department's acquisition programs
planning for sustainment?
Answer. While the Department understands the need for robust
sustainment planning, there is always room for additional progress. If
confirmed, I will work with the Services and Defense Agencies to ensure
DOD continues to plan for sustainment and continues to instill
comprehensive sustainment planning early in the acquisition life cycle
for new programs. This includes refining sustainment planning for
existing programs across all stages of a weapon system's lifecycle.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure
acquisition programs are planning for sustainment early and often
during the acquisition process?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to integrate sustainment planning
into early stages of weapon system development. Comprehensive
sustainment planning must be part of the early acquisition process and
then continually refined throughout the weapons life-cycle. This
ensures delivery readiness at best cost.
Question. When faced with cost and schedule pressures during the
acquisition process, some programs have reduced or deferred activities
that would have improved long-term sustainment outcomes, in order to
save money and time in the near term.
How will you ensure acquisition programs make upfront investments
that could help keep sustainment costs down and improve readiness, such
as conducting reliability testing, designing for maintenance, and
negotiating for technical data rights, among others?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Services and Defense
Agencies to integrate sustainment analysis as part of initial weapon
system design. This includes cost and reliability considerations,
maintenance analysis, and access to data rights, where appropriate, to
enable sustainment planning and system maintenance.
Question. How will you ensure lifecycle operation and support costs
have appropriate visibility, as a key performance parameter or
equivalent consideration, in DOD's acquisition system and budget
presentations to Congress?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Services, Defense
Agencies, and DOD staff to support rigorous sustainment analysis as
part of weapon system design and development. Additionally, I will also
work to ensure key performance parameters are reflected in pertinent
budget presentations submitted to Congress.
Question. In your opinion, what opportunities exist to increase
coordination and communication between the Department's acquisition and
sustainment communities, to help ensure sustainment is adequately
considered during the acquisition process?
Answer. Continued coordination between the acquisition and
sustainment communities in the past has helped the Department arrive at
mutually beneficial strategies. If confirmed, I will work with both the
acquisition and sustainment communities to ensure they continue to
collaborate and share data to achieve optimal, data driven, mutually
beneficial decisions.
Question. If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure the
Department's Major Defense Acquisition Programs and large Middle Tier
Acquisition Programs effectively plan for sustainment?
Answer. Sustainment and life cycle continue to be an integral part
of weapon system design, development, and fielding. If confirmed, I
will work with the Services, Defense Agencies, and OSD staff to ensure
program offices are held accountable for sustainment outcomes
regardless of acquisition pathways.
DOD has committed to rebuild its readiness to conduct large-scale
combat operations against near-peer competitors such as China and
Russia. The readiness of critical weapon systems relies on the quantity
and timeliness of sustainment. However, sustainment challenges continue
to impede readiness across the warfighting domains and military
services.
Question. What is your assessment of the sustainment challenges
facing the Department's aviation fleets and what actions would you take
to improve mission capable rates for these fleets?
Answer. The Department's aviation fleets require a balance between
cutting edge, world-leading aircraft and aging enduring assets. While
many of our older platforms retain capability and have good mission
capable rates, there are other platforms with obsolete components and a
diminished support base.
If confirmed, I will drive innovative efforts to field enabling
sustainment technology like conditions based maintenance plus,
improving our organic industrial base capabilities and capacity to
support higher fleet availability, advocate for digital twin
initiatives, and apply rigorous sustaining engineering resources across
the life cycle. I will also look at where our maintainers can make the
greatest impact across our most capable platforms, while seeking
Congress's support to divest legacy capability that does not contribute
to the high end fight.
Question. What is your assessment of the sustainment challenges
facing the F-35 program and what steps should the Department take to
mitigate or resolve those challenges to improve sustainment outcomes
and availability of the aircraft?
Answer. The Department must take steps to improve F-35 fleet
readiness in a contested logistics environment, to meet readiness
requirements and to reduce sustainment cost within the Services'
broader tactical aircraft sustainment portfolios. The Department must
mature the long-term F-35 sustainment strategy to support the National
Defense Strategy. If confirmed, I will ensure that the F-35 program is
closely managed to ensure that it supports the Military Services' and
our international partners' sustainment requirements.
Question. What are the most viable options for the Department to
reduce F-35 sustainment costs?
Answer. I understand the Department is conducting an initiative to
evaluate supply chain pathfinders to reduce F-35 sustainment costs.
This initiative leverages the Services' organic capacity to manage
aspects of the F-35 supply chain, and is consistent with the
Department's assessment of the proper balance between organic and
contractor logistics support to achieve life cycle sustainment cost
savings. If confirmed, I will work with the F-35 Joint Program Office
and Military Services to review this initiative and identify additional
opportunities to reduce sustainment costs.
Question. What steps should DOD take to ensure our ability to
handle the current and expected volume of ship maintenance and
modernization?
Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to working with the Navy to
improve the Department's ship maintenance and modernization capability
and capacity. It's my understanding that the Navy's Shipyard
Infrastructure Optimization Plan (SIOP) will improve the capabilities
and capacity of the public shipyards, and I plan to learn more about
how SIOP will better posture the Navy to meet the needs of the future
fleet. Understanding the constraints in the supply chain, workforce,
capacity and capability of the nation's ship repair infrastructure is
critical to planning effective improvements.
Question. What are the biggest challenges in sustainment of
software systems and embedded software in systems?
Answer. The rapid growth and use of software systems and embedded
software has demonstrated the need for the Department to engage early
in acquisition processes to improve design and access to source code,
increase use of modular open architecture, and develop processes that
reduce sustainment cost. Investment in organic software laboratories is
critical for us to keep pace with industry, enhance cyber resilience
and remain ahead of our peers. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that
we implement and share best practices across the acquisition and
sustainment communities and work to develop and refine policies and
oversight necessary to support sustainment of software systems.
Question. What are the biggest challenges in the sustainment of
commercial technologies that are fielded to warfighters?
Answer. Challenges to the sustainment of commercial technologies
continue to be our acquisition process and the retention of
intellectual property (IP) data rights. Recent reform actions have
helped to streamline our acquisition process, but there are still
structural challenges remaining, which we must continue to refine and
improve. Acquiring, licensing, and managing the appropriate IP and
technical data is vital to ensure DOD systems remain operational,
sustainable, upgradable, and affordable. If confirmed, I will work with
the OSD staff and SAEs to better enable our workforce to exploit
innovative technologies both more easily and rapidly.
facilities sustainment
Question. In fiscal year 2020, DOD reported a deferred maintenance
backlog of $137 billion, which equates to about 12 years of facility
sustainment funding at fiscal year 2020 levels.
What approach will you take to address this backlog and to ensure
that facility sustainment funding is sufficiently prioritized and
funded? Please specify aspects of the approach such as increased
funding, elimination of excess infrastructure and infrastructure in
failing condition.
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments and
Comptroller to advocate for the appropriate level of resourcing to
ensure critical missions are not jeopardized due to
inadequate Facility Sustainment Restoration and Modernization
funding. Additionally, I will urge the Military Departments to identify
opportunities to eliminate underutilized facilities or those in the
worst condition.
Question. DOD's facility sustainment funding primarily focuses on
mission-critical facilities. Given the chronic underfunding of facility
sustainment, lower-priority facilities, such as unaccompanied housing
(barracks) and childcare centers, have experienced increased
deterioration-to the point where they need more costly repairs to
prevent their failure.
What actions, if any, will you take to fund facilities that have
been treated as lower priority, such as unaccompanied housing and
childcare centers--but are facilities that contribute directly to
servicemembers' and their families' quality of life--to assure their
continued availability?
Answer. Quality of life facilities are essential to the readiness
of DOD. If confirmed, I will work with the relevant OSD organizations
who oversee these programs to identify approaches to prioritize quality
of life facilities to inform the Military Departments' budget
development.
logistics
Question. The war in the Ukraine has highlighted the need for
logistics interoperability in a contested environment. One of the Joint
Staff Strategic Imperatives is on Contested Logistics.
What will you do, as DUSD(A&S) to improve the department's ability
to conduct logistics in a contested environment?
Answer. The Department's logistics presence and posture enables the
nation to project and sustain the force in contested domains. I
understand the Joint Staff has an on-going effort to develop contested
logistics concepts within the JWC. If confirmed, I will work closely
with the Joint Staff to understand the insights gained and
transformation necessary to support acceleration of technologies,
logistics, and broader capabilities required to meet mission objectives
in that setting.
Question. What will you do to ensure that equipment used by
deployed US forces will be logistically interoperable with partners and
allies?
Answer. If confirmed, maintaining ready and interoperable forces
and capabilities will be among my highest priorities. The United
States' global network of alliances and partnerships is a strategic
advantage our competitors cannot match. If confirmed, I will pursue
interoperability with allies and coalition partners to ensure systems
are able to provide and accept data, information, materiel, and
services to and from allies and partners. I will also ensure that
equipment procured for U.S. forces is interoperable with the equipment
of our allies and partners.
Question. What would you do to address the challenges of
modernizing the services' maintenance and logistic depots? What would
be your priorities?
Answer. I am aware of several initiatives within the Department to
posture the OIB to support current and future complex and technically
advanced maintenance requirements. These include the Military Services'
Infrastructure Optimization Plans and a number of OIB workforce
development programs. If confirmed, I will work with senior leaders
within the Department and Military Services to provide robust oversight
of these efforts and ensure they are adequately resourced.
Question. Over the last several years, the DOD has submitted
significant reprogramming requests for the DLA Working Capital Fund.
What will you do to ensure this does not keep happening?
Answer. The Department must balance the solvency of the Defense
Working Capital Fund (DWCF), readiness of the force, and the health of
the defense industrial base. My understanding is that the Department
has taken actions to maintain the DLAWorking Capital Fund cash position
to include reducing overall inventory levels and managing the frequency
of replacement part purchases. However, current energy prices and
inflation may require reprogramming actions to ensure the Department
retains buying power to meet requirements. If confirmed, I will work to
improve the condition of the DWCF in close collaboration with the Under
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and Congress.
contracting for services
Question. In FY 2019, the Department obligated about $190 billion
on services acquisitions, which accounted for nearly half of the
Department's total contract obligations. The GAO has identified a
number of shortcomings with the Department's management of services
contracts and has placed this oversight challenge on its High Risk list
since 2001.
What is your assessment of the Department's ability to manage its
services contracts?
Answer. The Department's ability to manage services contracts
reflects the performance of contracting officers and their designated
representatives. If confirmed, I will review the policies and guidance
provided to contracting officers and contracting officer's
representatives (CORs) to ensure that contracts are appropriately
managed. I will also review assignment and training requirements for
CORs to ensure that they have the skills and tools necessary to perform
necessary contract management functions.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to improve the
Department's ability to strategically assess and manage its
requirements for services contracts?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to strategically improve the
requirements process for service contracts by infusing decisions with
improved data to inform tradeoff decisions. This assessment will
require working closely with the Services to leverage review processes
they may already have in place.
Question. What steps would you take, if confirmed, to improve the
quality of data collected on services contracts and the analysis
performed on such data, so as to better understand and control spending
on service contracts and improve management of these activities?
Answer. I believe the Department should continually improve its
ability to collect, disseminate, analyze, and use data to support
decision makers. If confirmed, I will work to ensure decision makers
have the data they need to assess key requirements and funding tradeoff
decisions and evaluate the success of the resulting tradeoffs. I expect
the data that they will need will come not only from Department-wide
repositories of awarded contract documents, but also from their own
systems for services requirements, financial management, contract
writing, and contract management.
Question. What do you believe is the most important factor in
determining whether a service role should be performed by government or
contractor personnel, i.e., cost, flexibility, efficiency, ability to
meet mission, or some combination thereof?
Answer. Functions that are inherently governmental must be
performed by government personnel. Where activities are commercial,
they can be performed by contractor personnel subject to the forces of
competition. If confirmed, I would work with the personnel community to
ensure the appropriate factors are considered for the specific service
including a balanced and cost effective mix of labor and/or other
factors depending on the specific requirement being considered.
acquiring commercial technology
Question. Since the end of the Cold War, Congress and successive
leaders in DOD have recognized that the technological superiority and
modernization that is critical to national security increasingly takes
place in the commercial sector, and that in many technical areas, the
pace of commercial technological advance is much quicker than that of
the government.
In your view, does DOD adequately consider commercially available
solutions to meet its requirements?
Answer. The Department's ability to leverage commercially available
solutions is dependent on the way it specifies its requirements. I
believe the Department can do better, both in market research to inform
development of its requirements and in using common, commercial
technical (or open) standards in contract specifications. This will
allow system developers to select the best available technology
solutions.
Question. Are there new ways to reward and incentivize the
acquisition workforce and programs to choose commercial solutions, if
available?
Answer. The ability of the acquisition workforce to choose
commercial solutions depends on the ability of the requirements
community to write requirements that do not bias the solution set. The
entire DOD culture needs to shift to a focus on open systems
architectures and the ability to insert new technology, including
commercial solutions. I will work with leadership throughout the
Department to support a culture of innovation and flexibility.
Question. In your view, how should the USD(A&S) work with the
Chairman of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council to promote the
acquisition of commercial technologies?
Answer. I believe there should be a close partnership between
USD(A&S), the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and their
counterparts in the Services to modernize DOD's requirements system. We
need a system that integrates operational needs ``requirements pull''
with commercial solutions ``tech push,'' informed by experimentation,
via a collaborative, iterative approach to exploit new technologies and
adapt our ways of fighting.
Question. Do you believe that current bid protest processes are
adequate to enable commercial firms to protest DOD acquisition
decisions that may be inconsistent with the statutory preference for
commercial products?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the acquisition process is
sufficiently transparent to provide all potential sources with timely
awareness of acquisition decisions. I am committed to a process that
offers providers of commercial products a fair opportunity to compete
for DOD contracts.
Question. Do you believe the Department is making the best use of
both Part 12 and Part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulations in
developing acquisition strategies for programs?
Answer. If confirmed, I will look to use the most appropriate tools
and techniques for each acquisition. I will assess each acquisition
strategy to determine whether it is best to use FAR Part 12 commercial
procedures, where price competition is paramount, or Part 15,
contracting by negotiation, which is appropriate for more complex
acquisitions.
Question. Federal Acquisition Regulations and statutes establish a
clear preference for commercial capabilities, products, and services
wherever commercial solutions are able to reasonably meet DOD's needs
at reasonable cost. Faithfully pursuing this preference is all the more
important today when commercial technological innovations could play a
pivotal role in great power competition. Section 807 of the Fiscal Year
2022 National Defense Authorization Act requires the USD(A&S) and the
Chairman of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council to jointly assess
the impediments and incentives for pursuing commercial capabilities,
products, and services wherever commercial solutions are able to
reasonably meet DOD's needs at reasonable cost.
If confirmed, based on your experience, how do you believe DOD
could improve its adoption of commercial solutions?
Answer. I am aware of the requirement for the Department to assess
impediments and incentives to improve the acquisition of commercial
products and services. I look forward to working with USD(A&S) to
improve adoption of commercial solutions.
Question. In your view, can improvements be made without mandates
and additional processes?
Answer. If confirmed, I will assess our process and identify what
changes, if any, are necessary.
intellectual property/technical data rights
Question. Do you believe that DOD has sufficiently 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 federal research and development (R&D), retain the
ability to re-compete programs to control costs, and exercise better
control over program sustainment costs?
Answer. The Department has made strong strides in the
implementation of IP best practices and must continue to make
addressing IP a high strategic priority. This issue must be addressed
to ensure that sustainment costs are more affordable and to ensure DOD
can take full advantage of industry's faster pace in technology
innovation. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) and Office of
General Counsel to ensure IP and technical rights are considered early
in the acquisition process.
Question. If confirmed, what adjustments would you make to DOD's
practices in negotiating IP and technical data rights for programs to
improve DOD's ability to develop, procure, and sustain new systems and
technologies affordably?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) to improve our
training for the DOD acquisition workforce to take greater advantage of
agile tools and techniques, and fully implement modular open systems
approaches in DOD programs.
Question. Do you think that the Department of Defense has
appropriate access to technical data packages for weapons systems and
software in development and sustainment?
Answer. The determination of whether the Department has obtained
appropriate access or delivery of the technical data and software is
dependent on the specific circumstances for each program. If confirmed,
I will place greater emphasis on planning for data and software needs
throughout the program life cycle, and ensure such planning is
happening earlier, especially (when applicable) during the competitive
phases of a program.
Question. In your view, is it worth spending more money in programs
earlier in order to obtain technical data packages?
Answer. Technical data or computer software should be acquired
earlier in the program life cycle. By doing so, the Department should
be able to leverage the competitive environment in early phases of the
program to acquire the needed data or software by spending less money,
not more, than seeking to acquire those same items later without the
benefit of competitive pricing.
Question. How will the use of open systems architectures and
acquisition strategies improve the Department's ability to modernize
and sustain its systems?
Answer. The use of modular open systems approaches (MOSA) should be
a key aspect of the Department's approach to implementing flexible,
tailored IP strategies. MOSA allows greater tailoring and flexibility
when allocating IP rights to better balance DOD and industry return on
investment in individual system components, and is enabled more
efficiently by the emerging best practices in digital engineering.
Question. Does the Department need a different approach to access
to technical data when dealing with primarily commercial companies?
Answer. I believe it is important to first understand how the
Department is implementing its IP policies for commercial technologies.
I understand the DOD policy is generally to acquire the same data and
software deliverables and license rights that are provided to
commercial customers, except in cases when DOD's needs require
additional or specialized arrangement--which are to be negotiated by
mutual agreement with the vendor. If implemented appropriately, this
policy should be effective at allowing the Department and commercial
vendors to leverage best commercial practices, including negotiating
specialized licenses when doing so is a better balance of the parties'
interests.
reform of the protest process
Question. To what extent do you think that the time required to
settle protests warrants reform to protect the interests of both
industry and the government?
Answer. The right to protest is important to ensure transparency
and fairness in the procurement process. If confirmed, I will review
relevant data, along with recent DOD studies and reports to the
Congress, to assess whether regulations and policies should be reformed
to reduce the time required to resolve protests.
Question. Do you have any recommendations to improve the protest
process?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to review the
previously submitted recommendations and determine if there are any
additional recommendations that would improve the protest process.
small business
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to increase the
participation of small businesses in the defense technology and
industrial base?
Answer. If confirmed, I will support A&S's work to enhance
participation of small businesses in the defense technology and
industrial base by increasing outreach to small businesses including
new entrants, ensuring the acquisition workforce is conducting
effective market research to maximize the use of small business set-
asides and improving dissemination of information to small businesses
on upcoming procurement opportunities. I will collaborate with others
in the Department to apply those opportunities more holistically
alongside other small business activities.
Question. In your view, what are the biggest barriers that prevent
small businesses from becoming prime contractors to the Department?
Answer. I believe some of the biggest barriers to small business
include difficulty navigating the defense acquisition process and
complex structure of DOD, often lengthy procurement timelines from
opportunity announcement to contract award, and limited access to
information on upcoming procurement opportunities.
Question. Do you believe the Department is using all available
authorities to provide small businesses the opportunity to subcontract
with existing prime contractors to ensure programs of record have
access to the most advanced and effective technologies?
Answer. Although the DOD manages various small business programs
that assist with opportunities to subcontract with existing prime
contractors, I believe these programs can be better applied to ensure
the Department has the most advanced and effective technologies. If
confirmed, I will work to better leverage these programs through
internally increasing awareness about the value of creating more
connectivity between programs such as Small Business Innovation
Research (SBIR) Program, Small Business Technology Transfer (SBTT)
Program, Mentor Protege Program and programs of record, Procurement
Technical Assistance Program and the Indian Incentive Program.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
small businesses that provide goods and services to the Department of
Defense are monitored and supported when facing financial pressures
that challenge their viability?
Answer. My understanding is that the Military Services' and
Components' Offices of Small Business Programs maintain constant
communication with industry associations and small businesses on a
variety of issues. The Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP) within
A&S also sets policies and provides programs to support small business
across a range of challenges. Additionally, Procurement Technical
Assistance Centers (PTACs) work closely with the Department on
monitoring small businesses around the country and communicating the
challenges they face. If confirmed, I will work with OSBP and the PTACs
to ensure that we supporting small businesses and small business
programs.
Question. What do you see as the benefits of diversifying the
defense industrial base through more engagement with small and
disadvantaged businesses?
Answer. Small business participation in defense procurements as
prime and subcontractors is vital to the defense mission, competition,
and the health of the DIB. Small businesses represent the majority of
new entrants into the DIB and their growth creates a pipeline of the
next generation of suppliers with diverse capabilities to support the
DOD mission.
Question. What recommendations would you have to improve the
Department's use of the Small Business Innovation Research programs to
develop and field new, advanced capabilities?
Answer. Small businesses are a critical part of the DIB. The
USD(R&E) oversees the SBIR and STTR programs. If confirmed, I will work
with my counterpart in OUSD(R&E) to ensure the Department's effective
use of the SBIR/STTR programs.
acquisition workforce education and training
Question. A well-trained and empowered acquisition workforce is a
critical enabler in the implementation of acquisition reform and in the
management of acquisition programs.
What is your assessment of the Department's acquisition workforce,
both in terms of its capacity and capability? Does the Department have
enough acquisition professionals with the right skills?
Answer. A capable and agile acquisition workforce is critical to
delivering necessary and cutting-edge capabilities to our warfighters.
Over the last several years, the Department has made significant
efforts to develop the skills of its acquisition professionals through
upskilling and recruitment. If confirmed, I will carefully examine the
results of these efforts and collaborate with the Services and
Components to understand their concerns. Additionally, I will look
across the Department to identify the specialty knowledge areas and
skills the workforce requires to operate in the current threat
environment. I anticipate we will need to study how we can make the
best use of existing talent in addition to how we recruit, develop, and
retain top performers.
If confirmed, I will assess our capacity and skill needs to ensure
the Department has the right number of acquisition professionals--
equipped with the appropriate skills--to deliver overmatch capabilities
to the warfighter.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the
acquisition workforce is fully trained on new acquisition authorities
and best practices, so that it can make informed decisions about when
and how to use the different acquisition pathways and tools?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Service
and Component Acquisition Executives, functional leaders, and the
leadership at Defense Acquisition University (DAU) to ensure the
acquisition workforce is both empowered and trained to make full use of
its available authorities, pathways, and tools.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to empower
program managers to execute acquisition programs and hold them
accountable for how their decisions contributed to program performance,
including over the life of the system?
Answer. I believe program managers will be successful if they are
empowered to execute their programs using all of the currently
available legal and policy authorities as well as functional support.
Fundamentally, program managers are accountable for cost, schedule, and
performance of their programs. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S)
and the SAEs to ensure the program managers have the training they need
to be successful and the robust oversight to ensure they are
appropriately accountable for performance.
Question. What is your assessment of the Department's training,
education, certification, and credentialing programs for the
acquisition workforce?
Answer. Delivering the latest in technologies and capabilities to
the warfighter, requires a workforce that can respond to a variety of
rapidly evolving threats. Operating in this environment calls for
professionals who can think critically and apply novel approaches to
challenges. This requires DOD to ensure we have the training and
learning resources that focus on new and emerging areas, spread across
an entire career, not just during the first few years on the job. It is
my understanding that DAU, the Services, and Components are
collaborating to better meet the training needs of the workforce. If
confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) and my staff to review such
efforts to make sure we have effective planning and investments.
Question. What role should the Department play in ensuring that
there is an adequate supply of technical talent available for the
Department and industry partners to meet the challenges of the future?
Answer. The most important resource of any organization is the
talent of its employees. The Defense Acquisition is significantly
oriented toward science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
fields. Strengthening the pipeline of STEM talent is a national need
and must be a priority as we revitalize the national security
workforce. Additionally, new and emerging fields--including
biotechnology, artificial intelligence, quantum sciences, renewable
energy platforms, directed energy, and hypersonics, to name a few--will
likely represent key talent investment areas for the Department.
If confirmed, I will work across the Department and with industry
to examine possibilities for accelerating and growing the pipeline of
talent in key technology areas and broadly across STEM fields.
Question. What specific steps would you take to improve the
effectiveness of the Defense Acquisition University?
Answer. Developing the skills and abilities of the workforce is key
to delivering capabilities for our warfighters. It is my understanding
that DAU is undergoing a significant transformation in the way it
develops and delivers training--including streamlining requirements to
create additional opportunities for job and role-based training.
If confirmed, I will work closely the USD(A&S) and with DAU to
assess its current transformation initiative and ensure its supporting
activities are aligned to strategic workforce readiness needs.
Question. What specific steps would you take to assess and ensure
the Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Account (DAWDA) is
adequately resourced to meet the needs of the Department?
Answer. DAWDA is a critical tool to ensure the acquisition
workforce has the skills and training needed in a dynamic and evolving
threat environment. If confirmed, I would work with the USD(A&S) to
review the processes in place to assess workforce development,
retention, and recruitment needs, and ensure the requested budget
levels meet requirements. I would also ensure DAWDA resources are
allocated to meet the urgent requirements of the Department.
Question. How would you engage with the Congressionally-mandated
Acquisition Innovation Research Center (AIRC) to perform research on
acquisition issues of interest, and to engage a future workforce for
defense acquisition?
Answer. AIRC is an important mechanism to enable evidence and data-
driven decision making to drive improvement in defense acquisition. I
believe it is important to understand how the AIRC supports and enables
the A&S mission. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) and ASD
for Acquisition (ASD(A)) to gain greater knowledge of the center, its
research and ongoing projects.
nunn-mccurdy process
Question. The Nunn-McCurdy process, as established by sections
4371-4377 of title 10, United States Code, has not been revisited since
Congress and the Department began implementing significant acquisition
reforms five years ago.
Given recent acquisition reforms, is the Nunn-McCurdy process still
an appropriate and effective mechanism for reporting to Congress on
troubled acquisition programs?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) and ASD(A) to
review the Nunn-McCurdy process and recommend changes, as appropriate.
This process remains a significant metric and an important process for
major defense acquisition program reporting and accountability.
Question. Do you perceive a need for changes to the Nunn-McCurdy
process, such as expanding its scope beyond major defense acquisition
programs or adjusting the thresholds for significant and critical
breaches?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) and ASD(A) to
review the Nunn-McCurdy process to determine if changes are necessary.
At this time, it is my understanding that thresholds for significant
and critical breaches are appropriate and do not think a change is
needed.
Question. If confirmed, what principles would guide your thinking
on whether to recommend terminating a program that has experienced
significant or critical cost growth under Nunn-McCurdy?
Answer. Program decisions must balance between delivering
warfighter capability and controlling further cost growth. Programs
that experience significant or critical cost breaches must present a
credible plan to meet performance requirements at acceptable cost
levels. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) and ASD(A) to use the
principles of the Nunn-McCurdy law itself along with data driven
analyses to inform my recommendation.
nuclear deterrence
Question. If you are confirmed, you will support the USD(A&S) in
overseeing recapitalization of the nuclear triad, which is rapidly
aging out. The B-2 and B-1 bombers are being replaced by the B-21
bomber. The Air Launched Cruise Missile is being replaced by the Long
Range Stand-Off Weapon (LRSO). The Minuteman III is being replaced by
the Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Weapon System. The
Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine is being replaced by the
Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine. The B-21, Sentinel, LRSO
and Columbia-class submarines are Major Defense Acquisition Programs
that will have to operate well into the 2070s. These are in addition to
efforts to sustain, recapitalize in the near term, and design a Next
Generation Nuclear Command, Control and Communications (NC3) system.
Do you support the B-21, LRSO, Sentinel and Columbia-class
programs?
Answer. Yes, the on-time modernization of all three legs of our
nuclear triad is critical. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) to
support modernization of the nuclear forces and associated systems.
Question. Please describe what you see as the major acquisition
issues with each of the above.
Answer. The U.S. nuclear deterrent is the bedrock of our strategic
deterrence, and modernizing our nuclear forces is a critical national
security priority. If confirmed, I will review our modernization
programs with USD(A&S) to understand any associated acquisition
challenges, and I will work with leadership through the Department,
Congress, and our industry partners to ensure our modernization
programs deliver the capabilities needed to meet the dynamic security
environment.
Question. Do you support sustaining, recapitalizing, and designing
the Next Generation NC3 systems?
Answer. Our NC3 system underpins our entire nuclear deterrent, and
must reliably ensure the President can exercise command and control of
our nuclear forces--even under the most stressful circumstances. If
confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) to support sustainment,
recapitalization and design of the Next Generation NC3 systems. A
reliable and modern NC3 is essential to ensuring a safe, secure and
effective nuclear deterrent.
Question. Please describe what you see as the major acquisition
issues with each element.
Answer. Ensuring nuclear deterrence and modernizing our Nation's
nuclear forces is a critical national security priority. Modernizing
our NC3 capabilities requires relatively modest funding but is crucial
to strategic deterrence. We must maintain our existing NC3 capability
while simultaneously delivering a reliable and modern NC3 enterprise.
If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) to review major NC3
recapitalization efforts, including the development, production, and
fielding of space, air, ground, and maritime infrastructure, platforms,
terminals, and key enablers of hardening and cybersecurity. Further, I
will work with leadership throughout the Department, Congress, and our
industry partners to provide robust and survivable Next Generation NC3
systems.
sexual harassment
Question. In responding to the 2018 DOD Civilian Employee Workplace
and Gender Relations survey, approximately 17.7 percent of female and
5.8 percent of male DOD respondents 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 USD(A&S)?
Answer. OUSD(A&S) has zero tolerance for sexual harassment or
gender discrimination and is aligned with the Secretary Austin's and
Deputy Secretary Hicks' emphasis on eliminating sexual harassment and
gender discrimination. If confirmed, I will ensure that these critical
priorities are embedded through the A&S workplace and operations.
Question. In your view, is the civilian workforce harassment
prevention and response training for civilian employees in the Office
of the USD(A&S) adequate and effective?
Answer. It is my understanding that civilian employees in OUSD(A&S)
are required to complete mandatory training on sexual harassment, like
all Federal employees. If confirmed, I will review A&S's training
programs and policies for preventing and responding to harassment to
ensure that they are adequate and effective.
Question. In your view, does the Office of the USD(A&S) program for
response to complaints of harassment or discrimination provide
appropriate care and services to civilian employee victims?
Answer. It is my understanding that the OUSD(A&S) program for
response to complaints of harassment and discrimination aligns with the
Department's. When harassment concerns are raised, OUSD(A&S) conducts a
prompt, thorough, and impartial inquiry into the matter, and if
misconduct is substantiated, disciplinary action is taken without
delay.
If confirmed, I will review OUSD(A&S)'s programs and policies for
responding to incidents and complaints to ensure that they provide
effective protections, care, and avenues of recourse for A&S employees.
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 USD(A&S)?
Answer. We have an obligation to our workforce and the DOD to have
zero tolerance for sexual harassment or gender discrimination. If I am
confirmed and I receive a complaint from an employee, I would take
immediate action to ensure that their complaint is appropriately
investigated and addressed consistent with Federal law and Department
policies. I would ensure that this employee is treated fairly and with
respect and that they have access to the support they need as they
navigate the process.
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
shipbuilding industrial base
1. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Plumb, the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering recently expressed concern about
the fact that the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small
Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs have not been
reauthorized, noting that these programs ``provide a unique and
critical funding source to develop some of the most important
technologies for the DOD [Department of Defense]''. Do you share these
views, and will you commit to working with relevant offices within the
Department of Defense and with Congress to support reauthorization of
these programs?
Dr. Plumb. Yes, I strongly share this view. Reauthorizing the SBIR/
STTR programs is critical to allow the DOD to continue publishing SBIR/
STTR Broad Agency Announcements/Commercial Solutions Openings as well
as to fund new and ongoing SBIR/STTR projects. The Department is
working with the Small Business Administration and Congressional
Committees to avoid a lapse in program reauthorization and impact on
small businesses and the DOD. If confirmed, I commit to working within
the Department and with Congress to support the SBIR/ STTR programs
being reauthorized and made permanent to allow a strong return on
investment for DOD and a positive impact to the Nation's overall
economy.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
accelerating innovative technologies
2. Senator Hirono. Dr. Plumb, last week the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering announced the first
set of projects to receive funding via the pilot program called
``Accelerate the Procurement and Fielding of Innovative Technologies,''
which is designed to expeditiously transition technologies from pilot
programs, prototype projects, and research projects into production.
The project gives priority to those developed by small businesses or
non-traditional defense contractors. If confirmed, will you support
similar initiatives from the acquisition side to help avoid the dreaded
``Valley of Death?''
Dr. Plumb. The Department must do more to support small businesses
and non-traditional contractors and help them cross ``the Valley of
Death'' when developing innovative solutions. If confirmed I will work
within Acquisition and Sustainment and across the DOD components to
support the successful transition of new technologies as efficiently as
possible.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
defense mergers
3. Senator Warren. Dr. Plumb, press reports indicate the Federal
Trade Commission is reviewing whether Northrop Grumman violated the
behavioral remedy it entered as a condition for its acquisition of
Orbital. The Department of Defense's insights and expertise are
essential in reviewing whether these mergers serve our national
security interests. If confirmed, do you promise your offices will
cooperate with the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission
when they review mergers involving major defense suppliers?
Dr. Plumb. Yes, if confirmed, my office will fully cooperate with
all merger reviews.
4. Senator Warren. Dr. Plumb, protecting the health and
competitiveness of our defense industrial base will require stopping
bad defense deals in the future and breaking up the runaway
consolidation of the last 30 years. Critics say it's too difficult to
unwind mergers, but I disagree. Defense companies have demonstrated
time and again that they can divest and spin off integrated divisions
to win government approval before a merger. Those divestitures are
analogous to breaking up a big defense firm after a merger. Will your
offices recommend breaking up harmful defense mergers if you believe
such an action would serve our national security interests or bolster
competition in the defense industrial base?
Dr. Plumb. If confirmed, I commit to following the lead of the
Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense in bolstering competition in
the defense industrial base. I will work closely with our analytical
teams within A&S to ensure that senior leaders have the best data
available to make decisions related to mergers and acquisitions,
competition, and industrial base health.
5. Senator Warren. Dr. Plumb, I'm concerned that the Department of
Defense has acquiesced to too many harmful mergers and relied too
heavily on divestitures and ``behavioral remedies'' instead of opposing
outright mergers that clearly raise competitive concerns. Will your
offices recommend the Justice Department or the Federal Trade
Commission oppose mergers that you assess to harm our national security
or competition in the defense industrial base?
Dr. Plumb. If confirmed, I commit to making recommendations based
on the best-in-class data and analysis. If the data and supporting
analysis indicate that a merger would harm our national security, I
would recommend against supporting that action.
6. Senator Warren. Dr. Plumb, do you support codifying the
Department of Defense's advisory role in the antitrust review process
in statute?
Dr. Plumb. I believe that the Department has an important oversight
role in reviewing merger and acquisitions to ensure that the DIB
remains strong and competitive. If confirmed, I would review the
potential benefits from codifying DOD's advisory role in this antitrust
review process.
progress payments
7. Senator Warren. Dr. Plumb, section 827 of the Senate version of
the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes a proposal first
put forward by the Trump administration to authorize a progress payment
pilot program to tie those payments more closely to performance. If
included in the final bill would you consider using this as a tool to
reduce costs, improve the quality of goods and services acquired by
DOD, and improve on-time delivery?
Dr. Plumb. If confirmed, I would work with Department's subject
matter experts to review this proposal and assess the merits of using
it as a tool particularly in the context of the Department's on-going
Finance Study.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jacky Rosen
investing in advanced defense technologies
8. Senator Rosen. Dr. Plumb, to stay ahead of our adversaries, it's
critical that the United States maintains its technological competitive
edge by investing in our defense-focused small businesses. That's why,
Senator Blackburn and I introduced bipartisan legislation establishing
a public-private partnership to leverage domestic private capital to
help grow our domestic defense technology capabilities. If confirmed,
how will you help support advanced technology small businesses--
especially those that struggle to find private capital--to be more
attractive for investment so they can survive the ``Valley of Death'',
accomplish technology transition, and become part of the defense
industrial base?
Dr. Plumb. I share your concern with the challenges facing small
businesses working on advanced technologies. The question of how best
to raise money outside of traditional venture capital channels is an
important one. If confirmed, I would work closely with the Office of
Small Business Programs, ASD-Acquisition, and our colleagues in OUSD
Research and Engineering to review the polices and authorities in place
to help small businesses traverse the Valley of Death as efficiently as
possible.
9. Senator Rosen. Dr. Plumb, for defense-focused advanced
technology small businesses that cannot find private capital and thus
do NOT cross the Valley of Death, how might a public-private
partnership to incentivize domestic investors help support our nation's
innovators?
Dr. Plumb. The Department's contracting actions and investment
priorities provide important signals to investor groups. Public private
partnerships could help cover initial startup capital, provide access
to advantageous manufacturing sites, or otherwise burn down risks
associated with new businesses and thus make them more attractive to
private investors.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Mark Kelly
acquisition of emerging technologies
10. Senator Kelly. Dr. Plumb, during our meeting last week, we
briefly discussed the need to leverage work being done in the
commercial sector to speed development and integration of advanced
technology solutions. You've worked in the private sector and seen this
first-hand: where the Defense Department takes years to develop
technology to initial operating capability, the commercial sector can
develop it in months. In this era of near-peer competition, these
development timelines will put our military at a tremendous
disadvantage. In your view, what tools can the Department develop to
shorten the acquisition timeline for emerging technologies?
Dr. Plumb. The Department has benefited from several new
authorities granted by Congress to accelerate a range of acquisition
processes. To apply those to critical technologies, I am also aware of
the new Competitive Advantage Pathfinders initiatives to identify ways
to align the acquisition, requirements, and budgeting systems to
shorten the acquisition timelines for emerging technologies. We need to
continue to leverage these to their fullest effect. In addition, some
services and agencies are experiencing success with ``spiral''
development models. The Department can also leverage new tools for
model-based system engineering and ``digital twins'' as we have seen on
some current development programs. If confirmed, I will work with my
staff to assess the changes that have been made in acquisition over the
last few years, and determine what additional tools from my time in
private industry I can bring to bear.
11. Senator Kelly. Dr. Plumb, in your view, are there any
additional authorities that Congress needs to provide the Department in
order to speed up the timeline?
Dr. Plumb. Congress has provided the Department with a number of
new authorities and at this time I am not aware of any specific changes
to acquisition authority that could help speed processes. If confirmed,
I will work with my staff to determine where we can streamline and
speed processes and identify any additional authorities that may be
helpful.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator James M. Inhofe
software integration and acquisition
12. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, based on your acquisition
experience, what do you consider the pros and cons of using indefinite
delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts, Broad Agency
Announcement (BAA) contracts, and Other Transaction Authority (OTA)
contracts are part of your acquisition toolbox?
Dr. Plumb. In my experience, IDIQ contracts are more flexible than
more definitive contract types. IDIQ contracts facilitate competition,
including competitive small business set-asides when qualified small
businesses are available.
BAAs provide a more streamlined, competitive process for selection
of promising research or technology development proposals.
Other Transaction Authority is a key tool for attracting non-
traditional contractors to do business with DOD, since they allow
flexibility not available under Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)
contracts.
13. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, are these useful tools and under
what circumstances should they be used?
Dr. Plumb. Each of these contracting tools are valuable that can be
helpful in a range of circumstances. IDIQ contracts should be used when
required quantities and delivery schedules are uncertain. BAAs are for
the acquisition of basic and applied research. OTAs are appropriate
when innovative technology solutions are available, but from a company
that has chosen not to do business with DOD due to the constraints
imposed by the FAR.
14. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, if confirmed, what actions would you
look at taking that would allow swift adoption of software and software
development cycles that replicate the successes in the commercial
industry, particularly among non-traditional defense companies and
small businesses?
Dr. Plumb. It is my understanding, that similar to industry, the
Department's Software Acquisition Pathway policy is based on modern,
commercial software models, including iterative delivery of Minimum
Viable Products and Capabilities to the Warfighter. This enables the
learning and feedback that will help continuously improve our products.
If confirmed, I will seek to build on this momentum, and continue to
modernize our enterprise processes, strategies, and culture for agility
and rapid digital capability delivery.
exploring directed energy and high-power microwave technology and
solutions
15. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, do you support Under Secretary of
Defense for Research and Engineering Heidi Shyu's priority of exploring
directed energy technology and solutions, specifically high-power
microwave?
Dr. Plumb. Yes, I support Ms. Shyu's priority of exploring directed
energy technology and solutions, including high-power microwave. High-
power microwave technology offers the potential of providing a
continues non-kinetic response against a long list of threats that can
continue to operate as long as there is a sufficient power source
versus kinetic responses that are limited by your amount of ammunition
in a system or at a location.
16. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, if confirmed, how would you ensure
rapid acquisition and fielding of direct energy and high-power
microwave systems?
Dr. Plumb. If confirmed, I will work with my staff to coordinate
with the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering (OUSD(R&E)) to ensure we understand the investments being
made in directed energy and identify transition opportunities for
promising technologies and investments.
urgent operational need for counter unmanned aerial systems
capabilities
17. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, what is DOD currently doing to
rapidly field counter drones systems?
Dr. Plumb. The Department of Defense has assigned the Army as the
Executive Agent for Countering Small Unmanned Aerial Systems (C-sUAS).
The Department has also fielded hundreds of pieces of C-sUAS equipment
under multiple Joint Urgent Operational Needs and Joint Emerging
Operational Needs in the United States, in the CENTCOM area of
operation and other Combatant Commander areas of operation. As
Executive Agent, the Army is coordinating the efforts of the other
services and working on joint future solutions for command, detection,
and neutralization of sUAS. The Army Joint Counter UAS Office (JCO) is
working to ensure that joint doctrine and training is available to
ensure proper utilization of the equipment. As part of the C-sUAS
mission, the Army is also working with CENTCOM and other Combatant
Commanders to provide capability against larger UAS threats using
existing Army and other service equipment.
18. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, do you have any concerns about DOD's
ability to field counter drone systems fast enough to mitigate the
growing threat?
Dr. Plumb. I am aware the Department has requested to use Above
Threshold Reprogramming actions in the last two years to more rapidly
develop and field C-UAS capabilities. The Army is currently executing
those funds in a joint manner to quickly provide more capability. The
Presidents Fiscal Year 2023 includes funding to continue their work to
develop new solutions and integrate those solutions into fielded and
new systems. If confirmed, I would work to ensure we were applying this
money to field c-UAS technologies rapidly and identify where additional
resources or approaches might be helpful in accelerating progress.
swift deployment of trusted autonomous capabilities
19. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, if confirmed, how will you
prioritize acquiring the means to ensure development of autonomy in the
Department?
Dr. Plumb. If confirmed, I will work with my staff to coordinate
with the Principal Director of Trusted AI and Autonomy within
OUSD(R&E), to ensure we understand the investments being made in
autonomy and identify transition opportunities to planned and existing
programs of record.
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances/environmental cleanup
20. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Plumb, Mr. Owens, when it comes to per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) cleanup, or any environmental
remediation, do you commit to following the process laid out in the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) and other controlling laws and regulations, to include
prioritizing projects as dictated by those laws and regulations?
Dr. Plumb. Yes. If confirmed, I will commit to following applicable
laws and regulations, including CERCLA, and work with the ASD(EI&E) and
the Military Departments to ensure the Department follows the
prescribed environmental remediation processes.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Joni Ernst
implementing national defense authorization acts
21. Senator Ernst. Dr. Plumb, will you commit to implementing laws
as promulgated by Congress, to include past and future Defense
Authorization Acts?
Dr. Plumb. Yes.
22. Senator Ernst. Dr. Plumb, if confirmed, what steps will you
take to ensure DOD implements section 321 of the fiscal year 2021 NDAA
as directed by Congress?
Dr. Plumb. My understanding is that the Department's inventory of
alternative fuel vehicles has grown significantly in recent years, and
this inventory is expected to keep growing as the Department continues
to migrate to zero emission non-tactical vehicles. If confirmed, I will
work with the Department of Energy, General Services Administration,
Military Departments, and the ASD(EI&E) to ensure the Department
continues to purchase vehicles as appropriate, and to implement section
321.
23. Senator Ernst. Dr. Plumb, what role do you believe domestic
alternative fuels, specifically biodiesel, ethanol, and propane, can
play in reducing emissions?
Dr. Plumb. Domestic alternative fuels can play an important role in
reducing emissions while diversifying our fuel sources to create more
resilient support for our warfighters. If confirmed, I will support the
development and use of domestic alternative fuel solutions that can
reduce emissions, enhance resilience, and increase the lethality of our
warfighters.
24. Senator Ernst. Dr. Plumb, if confirmed, what steps will you
take to ensure domestic alternative fuels, specifically biodiesel,
ethanol, and propane, will be a part of DOD's energy portfolio?
Dr. Plumb. I believe that domestic alternative fuels can play a
major role in enhancing resiliency and enabling reliable sources of
energy, reducing our dependency on foreign sources. If confirmed, I
will support the development and use of domestic alternative fuel
solutions that can promote energy resiliency and aid the Department in
reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
big tech content moderation
25. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Plumb, considering your background in
analytically driven innovations, to what degree do analytics, as
opposed to ideology or other outside factors, drive decision-making in
the tech sector?
Dr. Plumb. My role was to offer data-driven insights for
consideration by product, operations, and policy teams. Based on my
experience leading research and analytics teams, decision making in the
technology sector can be impacted by a number of factors including
analytics, business considerations, and the regulatory environment,
among others.
26. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Plumb, can you elaborate on a time at
Google or Facebook where your focus on analytics had to be set aside
for policy or political reasons?
Dr. Plumb. At both Facebook and Google, my focus was solely on
research and analysis and my focus always remained on analytics. If
other considerations led company decision makers on a different path,
my team would remain focused on analytically driven projects. At all
times, my priority was on ensuring potential decision makers had access
to the best available analysis to inform their decisions.
acquisition reporting
27. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Plumb, the fiscal year 2020 NDAA,
mandated that DOD propose a new method for reporting on acquisition
programs. What is the current web-based report approach deficit?
Dr. Plumb. I am aware of improvements the Department has made in
data-driven approaches through the Advanced Analytics (Advana) tool,
which may lead to improved visibility of and reporting on acquisition
programs. These types of software enabled solutions can help improve
timeliness and transparency of programmatic details to this Committee.
If confirmed, one of my first actions will be to review the current
web-based report approach deficit and devise appropriate mitigating
strategies. I will also review the current plans to meet the 2020 NDAA
reporting requirement and make those plans available to this Committee.
28. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Plumb, in your view, is the Department
under-resourcing the requirement for reporting on acquisition programs?
Why?
Dr. Plumb. The Department must be as transparent as possible to
engender the trust of the American people and Congress of our
acquisition programs. If confirmed, I will ensure that adequate
resources are in place to support the transparency of acquisition
program information to Congress and the American people.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Josh Hawley
u.s. companies operating in china
29. Senator Hawley. Dr. Plumb, during a Senate Armed Services
Hearing in 2019, then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General
Joseph Dunford, UMSC, testified that ``the work Google is doing in
China is [ . . . ] indirectly benefiting the Chinese military.'' He
went on to say, ``And, frankly, indirect may be not a full
characterization of the way it really is. It's more of a direct benefit
to the Chinese military.'' Do you agree with General Dunford's
assessment of the implications of Google's work in China at the time?
Dr. Plumb. I am not aware of the specific work Google conducted in
China or the specific factors that informed Gen Dunford's assessment.
30. Senator Hawley. Dr. Plumb, did you have any concerns about
Google's work in China when you joined Google as an employee in 2020?
Dr. Plumb. I was not aware of the specifics of Google's work in
China. My role focused on using data and analysis to improve business
processes that supported efforts like removing copyright violations and
identifying financial fraud.
31. Senator Hawley. Dr. Plumb, while at Google, did you ever work
on or otherwise support projects involving the Chinese Government or
other Chinese entities?
Dr. Plumb. No. My team focused on using data and analysis to
improve business processes that supported efforts like removing
copyright violations and identifying financial fraud.
32. Senator Hawley. Dr. Plumb, if confirmed, would you support
efforts to ensure U.S. companies like Google are no longer able to do
work that benefits the Chinese state, directly or otherwise?
Dr. Plumb. Yes.
33. Senator Hawley. Dr. Plumb do you think it should be considered
a conflict of interests for American companies to work for the Chinese
Government or its affiliates--thereby strengthening China's ability to
use military and economic coercion against the United States--while
simultaneously pursuing contracts with the Department of Defense?
Dr. Plumb. The Chinese Government and its affiliates leverage its
coercive authoritarian means to threaten American interests and its
economic investments are part of their approach. I am aware that the
Department reviews companies it is considering contracting with for
conflicts and risks. If confirmed, I would work to ensure work for or
investments by Chinese Government or its affiliates are proactively
identified and reviewed in the DOD contracting process.
34. Senator Hawley. Dr. Plumb what responsibility do you believe
American companies--like Google and Facebook--have to support our
national defense?
Dr. Plumb. U.S. companies benefit from the incentives for
innovation that derive from our democratic values and a free society.
America has a vibrant industrial base that is one of our enduring
advantages and US companies have a responsibility and an important role
to play in supporting US Department of Defense and more broadly the
American system that enabled their growth.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
critical minerals
35. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, how important is it that the
United States can mine and refine critical minerals to manufacture
equipment with defense and national security applications?
Dr. Plumb. Domestic production of critical minerals and other
strategic materials is critical to securing supply chains and ensuring
the resilience of the defense industrial base. The Department has
highlighted this as an area of focused investment and, if confirmed, I
would prioritize these types of efforts and identify any additional
areas where investments might accelerate progress.
36. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, our critical minerals problem is
two-fold. One, our national stockpile has dwindled from $42 billion in
1952 to just $888 million as of last year; and two, we possess no
domestic refining capacity, whereas China controls 80 percent of global
refining capacity. This year I offered an amendment to the NDAA to
increase our national defense stockpile by $750 million. While this is
a good start in addressing the issue, how do better support private
sector initiatives to bolster U.S. refining capacity?
Dr. Plumb. I appreciate your ongoing support for our national
defense stockpiles. There are a number of factors that affect the
overall market for domestic refining and it will require continued
focus to make progress. If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity
to work with your staff on how we might increase private sector support
of domestic refining of critical minerals.
37. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, in Alaska, we have a tremendous
amount of critical mineral reserves, especially of graphite. How do we
more efficiently get from locating mineral deposits to mining and
processing?
Dr. Plumb. While I am aware of the broader challenges related to
securing critical minerals for defense specific production, I am less
familiar with the specific factors that are impacting the development
of new mines and bringing those minerals to market. If confirmed, I
would look forward to working with your staff to better understand the
barriers companies in Alaska are facing.
38. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, are we quick enough to domesticate
the sourcing of critical defense production materials we have
identified as susceptible to adversarial disruption?
Dr. Plumb. The Department is moving quickly to implement the
finding of its Security of Domestic Supply Chains report issued earlier
this year, but there is more to be done to accelerate these types of
large-scale investments. If confirmed, I would look forward to working
with your office to identify options for accelerating the sourcing and
production of this critical materials.
iterative acquisition
39. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, the inability of our defense
industrial base to continually modernize and mass produce expendable,
lower-cost items such as the Stinger, Javelin, and Mark 48 torpedoes,
calls into question whether we can sustain both the supplying of our
partners and allies with these weapons, and our own inventory to
prevail in conflict. It is clear that the episodic acquisition of
defense items like these has resulted in an alarming degradation of
stockpile readiness. Should we create a more consistent demand signal
for these smaller, more expendable items?
Dr. Plumb. I am aware the Department is currently reviewing the
Munitions Requirements Process and discussing lessons learned from the
Ukraine conflict in the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Review to determine
proper resource levels to ensure a healthy munitions stockpile. If
confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), my staff, the Joint Staff,
CAPE, Comptroller, and the Military Services to understand how to
create a more consistent demand signal for all munitions and where
additional support from the Department to key industry partners would
be most impactful.
40. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, could you explain how a more
consistent demand signal for items like Javelins, Stingers, and Mark 48
torpedoes would better enable sustained competition, scale production,
and incentivize modernization?
Dr. Plumb. The Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense have made
munitions a top priority for the Department. Based on the lessons we
are learning in support Ukraine it is clear the Department needs to
provide clear and consistent investments to stabilize and grow the
industrial base. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) and
ASD(Industrial Base Policy) to understand how we can ensure a
consistent demand signal for munitions to enable sustained competition,
scale production and incentivize modernization.
41. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, we have sent over 6,500 Javelins
to Ukraine--a third of our inventory. A Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS) report estimates that it will take us up
to 4 years to replace those. We have sent 2,000 Stingers to Ukraine--a
quarter of our inventory. The same CSIS report estimates it will take 5
years to replace those, and because we haven't purchased any Stingers
since 2003, the labor force to produce them no longer exists. Just 2
years ago, the Navy re-started procurement of the Mark 48 torpedo,
which had ceased in 1990, to shore up its inventory. How do we develop
a more iterative development approach for these types of weapon
systems?
Dr. Plumb. Ensuring a ready and robust supply of munitions is a top
priority issue for the Department and efforts to increase our
stockpiles are part of the Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Review. If
confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S) and the Services Acquisition
Executives to adjust and adapt how we develop requirements and acquire
munitions for the Department.
protest period
42. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, in your estimation, what is the
ideal time required to settle contract protests to pct the interest of
both industry and Government?
Dr. Plumb. I understand there are standard timelines associated
with government protests that allow for adequate review and
adjudication. If confirmed, I will review the regulatory and policy
approaches to determine what changes, if any, are necessary.
43. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, how should we reform the protest
period to prevent unnecessary delays in the acquisition process?
Dr. Plumb. I understand the Department previously submitted reports
to the Congress on protest timeframes along with recommendations for
change. If confirmed, I will review the recommendations and determine
if there are any policy changes that might improve the protest process.
wartime capacity
44. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, do you believe our defense
industrial base is adequately prepared to enable sustained combat
operations in the event of a peer conflict?
Dr. Plumb. The American defense industry is the envy of the world,
but the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing conflict in Ukraine have
reinforced many of the known challenges in our defense industrial base.
These current crises have, however, given us an opportunity to make
crucial investments in the DIB. If confirmed, I commit to pursuing
these and other investments that would expand industrial capacity,
reduce supplier fragility, and increase the domestic production of key
materials and components.
requirements
45. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Plumb, how do we better harmonize the
requirements-to-acquisitions process to ensure the most advanced and
useful technologies are integrated into our warfighting communities?
Dr. Plumb. If confirmed, I will work with the USD(A&S), my staff,
the Joint Staff, CAPE, and Comptroller to identify ways to better
harmonize the requirements-to-acquisitions process. I am aware the
Department recently started six Competitive Advantage Pathfinder
efforts to speed delivery of capability to the warfighting communities
by better aligning the acquisition, requirements, and budgeting
processes. I will work to increase the number of pathfinder efforts and
more importantly institute the lessons learned from the pathfinders for
all acquisition efforts.
______
[The nomination reference of Dr. Radha I. Plumb follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of Dr. Radha I. Plumb, 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. Radha I.
Plumb in connection with her nomination follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of Dr. Radha I. Plumb was reported to the
Senate by Chairman Reed on September 28, 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 Ms. Milancy D. Harris by
Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties, qualifications, and relationships
Question. If confirmed as the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security (DUSD(I&S)) what do you believe would be your
most critical duties and responsibilities?
Answer. The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and
Security (DUSD(I&S)) is the first assistant to the Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)) and is responsible for
assisting the Under Secretary in the performance of all of his or her
duties.
I understand that the responsibilities of the DUSD(I&S) are
assigned in DOD Directive 5143.02. This directive provides that as the
principal assistant to and under the authority, direction, and control
of the USD(I&S), the DUSD(I&S) exercises full powers of the USD(I&S) on
any and all matters on which the USD(I&S) is authorized to act, except
in those areas where delegation of the USD(I&S) authority is otherwise
restricted; helps the USD(I&S) carry out responsibilities, fulfill
functions, manage relationships, and exercise authorities as provided
for in law and DODD 5143.01; and advises on and assists the USD(I&S)
with all responsibilities in providing staff advice and assistance to
the Secretary of Defense.
Question. What is your understanding of the differences between the
title 10 and title 50 duties of the DUSD(I&S)?
Answer. My understanding is that the primary duty of the DUSD(I&S)
is as the first assistant to the USD(I&S) and, therefore, the duties
are similar. The USD(I&S) assists the Secretary of Defense in
satisfying all of the Secretary's Title 10 and Title 50 statutory
responsibilities in the areas of intelligence and security, and that
the duties of the USD(I&S) are prescribed in DOD Directive (DODD)
5143.01.
Pursuant to subsection 3038(a) of Title 50, the Secretary of
Defense has the following responsibilities pertaining to the National
Intelligence Program (NIP), which are to be conducted in consultation
with the Director of National Intelligence: (1) ensure that the budgets
of the Intelligence Community (IC) elements within the Department of
Defense (DOD) are adequate to satisfy the overall DOD intelligence
needs; (2) ensure appropriate implementation of the policies and
resource decisions of the Director of National Intelligence by DOD
Components within the NIP; (3) ensure that DOD tactical intelligence
activities complement and are compatible with intelligence activities
under the NIP; (4) ensure that the IC elements within DOD are
responsive and timely with respect to satisfying the needs of
operational military forces; (5) eliminate waste and unnecessary
duplication among the DOD intelligence activities; and (6) ensure that
DOD intelligence activities are conducted jointly where appropriate.
Question. What leadership and management experience do you possess
that you would apply to your service as DUSD(I&S), if confirmed?
Answer. I have had the privilege of serving in the Defense
Intelligence Enterprise and the Intelligence Community for more than 15
years, including experience at the Defense Intelligence Agency, Office
of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), and on detail to the
National Security Council (NSC) Staff. Additionally, I have experience
in industry, managing governance and strategic intitiatives at Facebook
and leading the establishment of the Oversight Board. I currently serve
the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Irregular Warfare and
Counterterrorism and have served in that position since February 2021.
These experiences have provided me with a broad appreciation for
the responsibilities and contributions of our nation's intelligence
professionals ranging from the foundational daily duties of our
intelligence officers and briefers, the integration of multiple IC
capabilities at ODNI, and the provision of intelligence support to our
nation's most senior leaders. During my time in industry, I had the
opportunity to experience different organizational management styles
and varied approaches to levering emerging technology. In my current
duties related to counterterrorism and irregular warfare, I have gained
a deeper appreciation of the relationship between the IC and our
warfighters.
If confirmed, I would use my experience to strengthen the
development of our current and future generation of defense
intelligence and security professionals within the broader IC and
security communities to improve support to our warfighters. I would
also pursue opportunities to rapidly and effectively leverage emerging
technology for intelligence and security to enable our nation to stay
ahead of its adversaries.
Question. What is your experience across the domain of intelligence
matters? What is your experience across the domain of security matters?
Answer. My career began with a series of foundational intelligence
experiences and assignments, each preparing me for additional
responsibility. I was initially trained as an intelligence analyst,
focused on support to DOD acquisition decisions and then on analysis of
global technology employment. I had the opportunity to serve as an
executive intelligence briefer assigned to the Joint Staff, J2, and
gained critical insight into the role intelligence plays in informing
the Department's senior leaders. As I transitioned to counterterrorism,
I had the opportunity to work in roles across the enterprise, including
at the NSC Staff, where I gained valuable insights into warfighter
requirements, policy maker needs, and operational analysis.
As a ODNI career officer, I also gained valuable experience working
with the broader IC and understanding the domain of security matters.
Given the unique role of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), I
had an opportunity to work closely with law enforcement agencies and
understand the U.S. Government's screening and vetting enterprise.
While working as a Chief of Staff for NCTC's largest component, I
gained an in-depth understanding of the personnel security role,
including security clearances and IC reciprocity, as well as
installation security.
Question. Are there are any actions you would take to enhance your
ability to perform the duties and exercise the powers of the DUSD(I&S)?
Answer. If confirmed, I would immediately begin to broaden my
network and working relationships across the broader IC and security
communities, including those within the ODNI, the other IC elements,
and other defense elements and interagency partners within the security
community.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security (OUSD(I&S)) and the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), particularly with regard to
oversight and management of the Defense Intelligence Agencies? On what
matters would you expect to collaborate with the ODNI, if confirmed?
Answer. I am aware that the OUSD(I&S) works closely with the ODNI.
The partnership and integration between OUSD(I&S) and ODNI enables the
IC to deliver national intelligence support to policymakers and
warfighters on threats to our national security.
The USD(I&S) is dual-hatted as the Director of Defense Intelligence
within the ODNI. Additionally, as a principal member of the Suitability
and Security Clearance Performance Accountability Council (PAC), the
USD(I&S) works with the DNI, who is the Security Executive Agent and
also a principal member of the PAC.
If confirmed, I expect to assist the USD(I&S) in fulfilling these
responsibilities through collaboration with my counterparts within ODNI
and the Defense Intelligence Community elements.
Question. What is your understanding of the relationship and
division of responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the Office of
the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (OUSD(P)), particularly as
regards policy and programs for information operations, including
military deception and operations security?
Answer. My understanding is that the Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense for Policy (OUSD(P)) is the Principal Staff Assistant for
Information Operations (IO). I also understand that the OUSD(I&S) has
responsibility for coordination of DOD IO activities with the IC, as
well as the development and implementation of DOD policy, programs, and
guidance for DOD deception and operations security.
Question. In your understanding, how are responsibilities for the
oversight of the activities and programs of special operations forces
delineated between the OUSD(I&S) and the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD(SOLIC))?
Answer. My experience and understanding is that Office of the
USD(I&S) (OUSD(I&S)) and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special
Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (ASD(SO/LIC)) acting together are
the primary oversight officials for all U.S. Special Operations Forces
(USSOF) intelligence and intelligence-related activities and programs.
If confirmed, I look forward to continuing this close partnership,
working with ASD(SO/LIC) to ensure that our oversight of USSOF
intelligence and intelligence-related activities and programs is
coordinated and collaborative.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between OUSD(I&S) and the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment (OUSD(A&S)) in
regard to both unclassified and classified contract efforts?
Answer. I understand the relationship between OUSD(I&S) and the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment
(OUSD(A&S)) is one of cooperation and collaboration. If confirmed, I
look forward to partnering with the OUSD(A&S) to ensure that DOD
acquisition programs receive the intelligence needed to acquire
superior defense capabilities and that appropriate consideration is
given to the central role of security throughout the acquisition
process to protect the integrity of our acquisitions in the face of the
persistent threat of compromise by our adversaries.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the DOD Chief Information
Officer, particularly with respect to the cyber mission; developing
interoperability requirements applicable to information systems
architectures for processing intelligence and counterintelligence
information; and the certification of intelligence information systems?
Answer. I view the relationship between the OUSD(I&S) and the
Department of Defense Chief Information Officer (DOD CIO) as one
predicated on collaboration and partnership to ensure synchronization
between security policy makers and information technology service
providers. I understand that OUSD(I&S) is responsible for development
and oversight of information security and physical security policy. The
DOD CIO advises the Secretary of Defense on information technology,
including national security systems and defense business systems, and
develops DOD strategy and policy for all DOD information technology and
information systems. If confirmed, I will ensure OUSD(I&S) maintains a
close partnership with the DOD CIO to enable the necessary security
architecture to protect intelligence and counterintelligence
information while effectively enabling the mission.
Question. What is your understanding of the relationship and
division of responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)) for the
Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel System (DCIPS)? For the
identification of DOD language capability requirements?
Answer. It is my understanding that the OUSD(I&S) establishes
policy for the Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel System in
partnership with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness (OUSD(P&R)). I also understand that OUSD(P&R)
coordinates with OUSD(I&S) and the IC to identify and prioritize DOD
foreign language capability requirements. If confirmed, I will examine
the relationship between OUSD(I&S) and OUSD(P&R) to include the process
for identifying DOD language capability requirements.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the heads of the
Intelligence Components of the Military Departments?
Answer. I understand that the OUSD(I&S) staff works closely with
the heads of the intelligence and counterintelligence components of the
Military Departments. I understand that the USD(I&S) provides input to
the Secretaries of the Military Departments on the duty performance of
the senior intelligence officer within each Military Department.
The USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense with authority delegated from the Secretary of Defense to
establish policy for DOD intelligence, counterintelligence, security,
sensitive activities, and other intelligence-related matters. The
Directors for Defense Intelligence within the OUSD(I&S) have specific
programmatic responsibilities and support the Under Secretary in
carrying out the responsibilities assigned and exercising the
authorities delegated to the USD(I&S) by the Secretary of Defense.
The Secretaries of the Military Departments exercise authority,
direction, and control over all components within their respective
Departments. So the heads of the intelligence and counterintelligence
components within the Military Departments are under the authority,
direction, and control of the Secretary of the Military Department and
subject to policy oversight of the OUSD(I&S).
Question. What do you perceive to be the role of the OUSD(I&S) with
regard to the Reserve Component intelligence elements of Military
Services?
Answer. I understand that, in accordance with DOD Instruction
5143.01, which outlines the responsibilities and functions,
relationships, and authorities of the USD(I&S), OUSD(I&S) develops and
provides policy guidance, resource advocacy, and oversight for the
integration of Reserve Component intelligence elements, and ensures the
Department effectively employs and resources Reserve Component
intelligence elements to best support the National Defense Strategy
(NDS). The programmatic role of OUSD(I&S) is the same with respect to
the Active and Reserve Components of the Military Services. Like the
Active Components, the Reserve Components intelligence elements are
under the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of the
relevant Military Department in which they are located and subject to
policy oversight of the OUSD(I&S).
Question. What is your understanding of the USD(I&S)'s
responsibility and authority for the management and oversight of
Military Intelligence Program (MIP) and National Intelligence Program
(NIP) funding? How do the processes employed by the OUSD(I&S) in the
execution of these responsibilities differ from the Planning,
Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process applicable to all
other DOD organizations and funding?
Answer. As the MIP Executive Agent, the USD(I&S) has management and
oversight of the Military Intelligence Program (MIP). The USD(I&S), in
his role as the Director of Defense Intelligence, has visibility into
the NIP through participation in the ODNI resource decision forums.
Additionally, I understand that the DNI and the USD(I&S) jointly sign
out intelligence programming guidance to closely synchronize NIP and
MIP programs to ensure that the Department's priorities are
communicated to the IC. If confirmed, I will work closely with the ODNI
in ensuring that DOD intelligence requirements are supported within the
NIP budget.
With respect to the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution
(PPBE) process, it is my understanding the USD(I&S) is a full
participant in the Department's PPBE process and that military
intelligence requirements compete with the other DOD requirements.
Question. If confirmed, specifically what actions would you take to
develop and sustain an open, transparent, and productive relationship
between Congress--the Senate Armed Services and Senate Appropriations
Committees, in particular--and the OUSD(I&S) and the Defense Agencies
under the authority, direction, and control of the OUSD(I&S)?
Answer. I am committed to assist the USD(I&S) and Secretary of
Defense in sustaining an open, transparent, and productive relationship
between the Department and Congress. If confirmed, I look forward to
engaging with the defense oversight committees on a routine basis to
discuss the Department's defense intelligence, counterintelligence,
security, sensitive activities, and other intelligence-related
activities.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure both
that this Committee is provided with the notifications required under
provisions of title 10, U.S. Code, section 2723, and that any such
notification is accurate, complete, and timely?
Answer. I am committed to assist the USD(I&S) fulfill his
responsibility under DOD Directive 5143.01 to make determinations on
behalf of the Secretary of Defense, except for those related to
nuclear, chemical, and biological security, in consultation with the
DNI and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), as
appropriate, and to notify Congress, as required by section 2723. If
confirmed, I will ensure such notifications are accurate, complete, and
timely.
major challenges and priorities
Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
challenges you would face if confirmed as the DUSD(I&S) and what
specific actions would you take to address each of these challenges?
Answer. I consider supporting the NDS our most important
responsibility. I anticipate strategic competition with China,
deterring Russian aggression, and managing other persistant threats,
including those from North Korea, Iran, and violent extremist
organizations will be the most significant challenges. The Defense
Intelligence and Security Enterprises have key responsibilities
critical to the accomplishment of the 2022 NDS. They are responsible
for providing intelligence that enables decision advantage for U.S.
warfighters, decision makers, and Allies and partners. The Defense
Security Enterprise must also safeguard personnel, information,
operations, resources, technologies, and facilities against a wide
range of threats and challenges.
If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring the Defense Intelligence
and Security Enterprises further strengthen and provide the
capabilities necessary to defend the Homeland, deter strategic attacks,
deter aggression and prepare for conflict when necessary, and support
building a resilient Joint Force and defense ecosystem.
supervision, and oversight of the defense intelligence and security
enterprise
Question. The USD(I&S) is vested with responsibility for the
overall direction and supervision of the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise in the execution of intelligence,
counterintelligence, security, sensitive activities, and other
intelligence-related matters across DOD. Subject to USD(I&S) oversight,
responsibility for executing policies and programs in these domains
vests primarily in the Military Departments and Services, elements of
the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Defense Agencies.
What is your understanding of the role of the OUSD(I&S) in
coordinating the activities of the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise?
Answer. Intelligence and security are mutually-reinforcing mission
areas supporting NDS objectives. The Department must understand the
intentions, capabilities, and activities of strategic competitors and
other adversaries. Similarly, the security apparatus must safeguard our
personnel, information, capabilities, and infrastructures, both
physical and logical. The combination of these disciplines enables
DOD's contributions to the United States' enduring advantage.
Question. In your view, does the USD(I&S) have the authority,
organizational structure, and resources to provide appropriate
oversight of the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise? If not,
what additional authorities or resources does the OUSD(I&S) require, in
your view?
Answer. In my view, the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprises represent a unity of effort, as they are mutually
reinforcing mission areas. From my current vantage point, I believe the
USD(I&S) has the authority and organizational structure to conduct
appropriate oversight. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the
resources of OUSD(I&S) and working with the Under Secretary to ensure
that the resources and authorities necessary for oversight are
available.
2022 national defense strategy (nds)
Question. In March, the Department of Defense transmitted to
Congress the classified 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) and
indicated that an unclassified NDS would be forthcoming. The 2022 NDS
designates China as the pacing challenge for the United States, but it
also states that Russia remains an acute threat to U.S. national
interests. In addition, the Department must also manage the persistent
threats posed by rogue regimes and violent extremist organizations.
In your view, how does the Office of the DUSD(I&S) directly support
the NDS?
Answer. I believe the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprises
are critical to supporting the NDS. They are responsible for providing
intelligence that enables decision advantage for U.S. warfighters,
decision makers, and Allies and partners, while supporting integrated
deterrence in support of NDS priorities. They are also responsible to
safeguard personnel, information, operations, resources, technologies,
and facilities against a wide range of threats and challenges.
If confirmed, as the first assistant to USD(I&S), I will work to
ensure OUSD(I&S) efforts align to support the NDS and are resourced
appropriately.
Question. In your view, how would you assess the current readiness
and capabilities of the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to
execute the NDS?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprises are well-postured to support the Department's
execution of the NDS and are ensuring the proper alignment and
allocation of resources.
If confirmed, I will prioritize developing my own assessment of the
enterprises' readiness and capabilities to execute the NDS and working
with the USD(I&S) to ensure the enterprises remain well-postured.
Question. What do you believe are the main resource or capability
shortfalls, if any, that could hamper the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise's execution of the NDS?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Department has realigned
Military Intelligence Program (MIP) resources to better support the
NDS.
As the Department makes further adjustments to its warfighting
capabilities to support the NDS, I expect this will impose additional
requirements on intelligence and security that will need to be
addressed. If confirmed, I will work with the OUSD(I&S) staff to
identify promptly any obstacles likely to hamper execution of the NDS.
Question. If confirmed, how would you propose to address any gaps
or shortfalls in the ability of the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise to meet the demands placed on it by the NDS?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work across the Department to ensure
any capability gaps and shortfalls are identified and resourced
throughout the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE)
process.
strengthening alliances and attracting new partners
Question. Mutually beneficial alliances and partnerships are
crucial to U.S. success in competition and conflict against a great
power.
If confirmed as DUSD(I&S), what specific actions would you take to
strengthen and synchronize existing intelligence and
counterintelligence relationships with foreign governments and
international organizations?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to strengthening defense
intelligence and counterintelligence relationships with allies and
partners on issues of mutual concern such as Russian and Chinese malign
activities, including ensuring we have the intelligence sharing
relationships needed and the technology in place to facilitate sharing.
The unique access and expertise of our Allies and partners enable us to
close intelligence gaps and improve our mutual understanding of
security issues that we face.
Question. If confirmed, what factors would you consider in
recommending decisions on the disclosure and release of intelligence to
foreign governments and international organizations, including in
support of combatant commanders' expressed desire for better
intelligence and intelligence sharing to counter foreign malign
activities?
Answer. I understand the factors that must be considered for
foreign disclosure and release of U.S. classified military information,
to include military intelligence, are stipulated in the National
Disclosure Policy. If confirmed, I would support combatant command
requirements for intelligence support to counter foreign malign
activities and responsible foreign disclosure of military intelligence
to friendly foreign governments and international organizations.
joint requirements oversight council (jroc) and the joint capabilities
integration and development systems (jcids)
Question. Per section 181 of title 10, U.S. Code, the JROC is
vested with the responsibility to assess joint military capabilities;
establish and approve joint performance requirements that ensure
interoperability between military capabilities; and identify new joint
military capabilities based on advances in technology and concepts of
operation. The JCIDS process was established to address overlap and
duplication in Military Services' programs by providing the information
the JROC needs to identify the capabilities and associated operational
performance requirements needed by the joint warfighter.
How do you assess the effectiveness of the JROC and JCIDS in
identifying and establishing joint warfighter capability requirements
in the domains of military intelligence, counterintelligence, and
security?
Answer. The Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) and Joint
Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) processes use
threat assessments from the IC to inform Joint Force capability
requirements and to guide requirements and capability development,
including in the areas of military intelligence, counterintelligence,
and security.
As a statutory advisor to the JROC and its subordinate boards,
USD(I&S) provides advice that supports effective intelligence-related
capability requirements and associated key performance parameters.
If confirmed, I would closely coordinate with JROC members to
ensure the JCIDS process continues to validate effective military
intelligence, counterintelligence, and security requirements.
Question. In your view, have recent acquisition reforms that
shifted authorities to the Military Services affected the JROC's
ability to assess joint performance requirements in the military
intelligence, counterintelligence, and security domains?
Answer. I understand that the recent reforms have transferred
acquisition Milestone Decision Authority (MDA), to include for
intelligence capabilities, from USD(A&S) to the Services. For example,
the U.S. Air Force is now the MDA for the MIP-funded Next Generation
Overhead Persistent Infrared satellites to provide missile warning.
However, changes to MDA have not altered how DOD addresses
requirements or changed the JCIDS or JROC processes. The JROC continues
its oversight of the JCIDS process and the assessment and validation of
effective joint performance requirements in the areas of military
intelligence, counterintelligence, and security. Additionally, an
Intelligence Support Certification is still required to complete the
requirements validation process needed prior to an Acquisition
Milestone Decision.
If confirmed, I will work closely with JROC members to ensure the
JCIDS process continues to validate effective military intelligence,
counterintelligence, and security requirements.
Question. Successive Vice Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
have emphasized joint and cross-domain capability requirements that the
Military Services have not prioritized or are not responsible for
developing, such as Joint All Domain Command and Control (JADC2). JADC2
demands ubiquitous interoperability, automated decision aids, and
systems-of-systems integration.
How would you ensure that the Defense combat support intelligence
agencies and the National Reconnaissance Office comply with the JADC2
requirements promulgated by the JROC?
Answer. In addition to participating in both the Department and IC
requirements development and system acquisition processes, OUSD(I&S)
conducts an annual portfolio review to ensure MIP-funded efforts
deliver the capabilities needed by the warfighters. If confirmed, I
would work to ensure the OUSD(I&S) processes are working to provide the
right data, to the right people, at the right time.
Question. Given the role that National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)
assets have in providing intelligence for warfighting functions, the
JROC reviews NRO acquisition programs to ensure DOD requirements are
being met.
If confirmed, how would you ensure that NRO's responsiveness to
JROC requirements continues?
Answer. Consideration of both DOD and IC requirements is central to
the USD(I&S) role. OUSD(I&S) facilitates the common gatekeeping
function between JCIDS and the Intelligence Community Capability
Requirements (ICCR) processes.
If confirmed, I will work to maintain open communication throughout
this process, and work closely with the Joint Staff and IC during the
requirements validation process for National Reconnaissance Office
(NRO) capabilities.
Question. The streamlined middle-tier acquisition authorities
enacted in section 804 of the fiscal year 2016 National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) sought to speed fielding of advanced
technologies and systems.
What is your opinion of the effects of efforts to use section 804
authorities in intelligence-, counterintelligence-, or security-related
acquisitions?
Answer. I believe that technological advances and development are
outpacing DOD's ability to modernize and field capability using
standard acquisition processes. Section 804 provides authority to the
DOD to rapidly prototype and/or rapidly field capabilities under a new
pathway, distinct from the traditional acquisition system.
I understand this authority provides a pathway for the Defense
Intelligence and Security Enterprises to develop, test, and field
emerging technology to maintain pace with, or counter, adversary
capability development.
If confirmed, I look forward to further reviewing the application
of section 804 to understand its applicability to, and value for,
intelligence, counterintelligence, or security-related acquisitions.
intelligence support to the warfighter
Question. If confirmed, how would you balance the need for the
combat support Defense intelligence agencies to provide intelligence
support to the warfighter with the need to provide intelligence support
to policy makers?
Answer. Balancing the intelligence needs of the warfighter and
policy makers is one of the primary responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S).
If confirmed, I will work with Department and IC stakeholders to ensure
the Defense Intelligence Enterprise continues to satisfy all
intelligence requirements for both our warfighters and senior policy
makers in order to support decision-making by our national leaders.
Question. In your view, what opportunities exist across the
Intelligence Community to improve intelligence support to the
warfighter, particularly in executing time-critical and complex kill
chains? If confirmed, what would you do to leverage these
opportunities?
Answer. I believe it is important to work across the Department and
IC to find opportunities to improve support to the warfighter,
including exploring technological innovations and process improvements.
If confirmed, I would engage with the combatant commanders to
improve my understanding of their requirements and challenges. I would
also frequently engage leaders within the IC and across the Department
to ensure I understand current efforts to improve intelligence support
to the warfighter.
Question. In your view, are the Defense intelligence agencies,
Joint Intelligence Operations Centers and Service Intelligence Centers
organized and resourced to most effectively support warfighter
requirements under the new NDS, to include support to near-real time,
multi-sensor joint detection, tracking, and targeting for the combatant
commands? What changes may be required to optimize cooperative, cross-
agency targeting support?
Answer. In today's threat environment, most issues are relevant to
both warfighting commands and policy makers, with targeting support
tactically and operationally arrayed across the Services and Agencies.
If confirmed, I will work to ensure the DIE continues to satisfy
requirements for operationally-relevant intelligence that directly
enables warfighter success.
If confirmed, I will also support periodic reviews and realignment
efforts to ensure priorities are met and resources effectively used to
support the warfighter. I understand that the Joint Intelligence
Operations Centers (JIOCs) have undergone various personnel reviews to
determine the appropriate personnel levels to effectively support the
mission requirements of the Combatant Commands. If confirmed, I will
evaluate how to best resource the competing requirements of the
Combatant Command JIOCs and the Service Intelligence Centers (SIC) to
support the NDS. I believe that balancing the Combatant Command needs
along with SIC requirements will be one of my primary responsibilities.
Question. In your view, how are intelligence operations carried out
by special operations forces different from those carried out by the
Intelligence Community?
Answer. I am fortunate to be able to leverage the experience in my
current role as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Irregular
Warfare and Counterterrorism where I work closely in this mission area
with OUSD(I&S).
Intelligence operations executed by U.S. special operations forces
(USSOF) are tactical operations in support of Combatant Commanders
military objectives. The range of missions carried out by USSOF are
unique because they executed on rapid timelines and in high-risk
environments. USSOF missions require accurate, detailed, and timely
intelligence that only integrated, multi-disciplined collection and
analysis can provide. This tactical intelligence enables a commander to
make rapid decisions while in contact with or close to the enemy. It is
collected, analyzed, and quickly disseminated to the force enabling an
integration of intelligence and operations that reducing risk to force
and often creates opportunities for further collection and
exploitation. Neither the capability nor the capacity is readily
available within the IC or within conventional forces at the speed and
scale required.
Other defense intelligence operations typically serve a more
strategic purpose and generally focus on national intelligence
requirements as part of the IC. While USSOF generally conduct
intelligence to meet their own unique tactical intelligence
requirements in support of the Combatant Commands, they are aware of
and leverage intelligence derived from national collection priorities.
If confirmed, I will seek to leverage opportunities where
intelligence operations carried out by USSOF will benefit the IC and
vice versa.
Question. If confirmed, how would you work across the Defense
Department, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and
the CIA to ensure that intelligence activities carried out by special
operations forces are properly coordinated with activities carried out
by the Intelligence Community?
Answer. In my current position, I am responsible for ensuring USSOF
intelligence activities are closely coordinated with the IC as directed
in applicable law, policy, and agreements. When USSOF engage in
intelligence, counterintelligence, security, sensitive activities or
other intelligence-related activities, the USD(I&S) and ASD(SO/LIC)
share responsibility for overseeing those activities. If confirmed, I
will continue to work closely with the ASD(SO/LIC), the Assistant to
the Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Oversight (ATSD(IO)), other
DOD senior intelligence officials, and the IC to ensure USSOF comply
with all applicable policies and directives to ensure Department
oversight and coordination of USSOF activities and programs.
I believe that it is essential that DOD and the IC closely
coordinate their activities, their training, the capabilities, and all
aspects of their operations to ensure that, together, we achieve
greater effects in protecting the United States. Additionally, I look
forward to continued dialogue with the Committee to ensure clear and
consistent reporting to the congressional oversight committees of
intelligence activities carried out by USSOF.
Question. The OUSD(I&S) is charged to develop and oversee
implementation of DOD strategy, programs, and policy for Intelligence,
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities and to integrate
tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination (TPED) solutions.
What is your understanding of the OUSD(I&S) participation in the
JADC2 cross-functional team led by the Joint Staff J6?
Answer. It is my understanding that the OUSD(I&S) is a full
participant in the Department's Joint All Domain Command and Control
(JADC2) initiative intended to connect distributed sensors, shooters,
and data from and in all domains to all forces.
If confirmed, I will work closely within OUSD(I&S), with other DOD
components, and with ODNI to make necessary improvements to the
Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence,
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) architecture to increase
timely support to decision making at the strategic and operational
levels.
Question. Do you intend to use the authorities delegated to the
USD(I&S) to leverage information technology and innovative concepts to
support the JADC2 initiative to develop an interoperable, joint
command, control, communications, computer intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance architecture and capability to support the warfare
of the future, including by participating in experiments and exercises?
Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will work closely with the USD(I&S) to
appropriately apply his delegated authorities to shape required
improvements to the C4ISR architecture to increase timely support to
decision making at the strategic and operational levels in support of
the Department's JADC2 initiative.
Question. In a February 27, 2020, New York Times Op-ed, Eric
Schmidt, the chairman of the National Security Commission on Artificial
Intelligence (NSCAI) and former chairman and CEO of Google, stated,
``[i]f A.I. advances elsewhere outpace those of U.S. companies and the
U.S. Government, and give commercial and military advantages to our
rivals, the resulting disadvantage to the United States could endanger
U.S. national security and global stability. The same could be said for
other emerging technologies.'' The report of the NSCAI emphasized this
fundamental conclusion.
Do you agree that American pre-eminence in AI is critical for
national and economic security? If confirmed, what priority would you
assign to ensuring that the Defense intelligence enterprise invests in
AI applications?
Answer. Yes. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is critical for national
and economic security. I concur with the NSCAI's conclusion that we
must win the AI competition.
With the continued increase in the amount of information available
both from traditional and open sources, the way to achieve a strategic
advantage and ensure U.S. military and information dominance in
competition and conflict is to develop and deploy world-class AI
technologies. OUSD(I&S) has many strategic AI investments and
partnerships that I understand will expand in the coming years, and if
confirmed, I will assign the highest priority to the development and
implementation of these capabilities.
Question. Do you agree that the Defense intelligence components
should take maximum advantage of the foundational AI platforms and
tools that the Chief Data and Artificial Intelligence Office (CDAO) is
sponsoring to develop AI applications for intelligence?
Answer. Yes. Defense intelligence components should take maximum
advantage of the foundational AI platforms, tools, and investments that
the CDAO sponsors.
If confirmed, I will work closely with the CDAO leadership to
ensure these investments are leveraged to maximum effect and benefit
for the Defense Intelligence Enterprise. I see the relationship between
the OUSD(I&S) and CDAO as essential to maintaining our strategic
advantage over our adversaries.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to support this
effort?
Answer. If confirmed, I would advocate for the development of a
robust partnership that fully integrates defense intelligence into the
capabilities and platforms produced by the CDAO. For the CDAO to
accomplish its mission, it must have access to data from the Defense
Intelligence Enterprise.
Question. Do you agree that the CDAO has oversight and supervisory
authority over the Defense intelligence enterprise, including the
intelligence agencies, with respect to data management and artificial
intelligence?
Answer. CDAO is responsible for accelerating DOD's adoption of data
and AI-enabled capabilities. They collaborate closely with Defense
Intellignece Enterprise leaders to identify and remove barriers to
effective data management and support the scaling of secure,
responsible AI across our community.
Question. What is your understanding of efforts by the OUSD(I&S) to
develop and implement systems for the use of Artificial Intelligence to
bring greater efficiencies to intelligence analysis, including
opportunities to condense the time required by a human analyst to
locate and prioritize potential targets and convert those observations
to actionable intelligence for input to military decision making?
Answer. I understand there have been several efforts instituted by
the Department that have achieved great success over the last five
years. These activities have spanned from fundamental research to the
rapid fielding of technologies, demonstrating both the current and
future potential of AI against the challenges we collectively face.
While the Department can be justifiably proud of these efforts, I
believe that in order to meet future threats these capabilities must be
scaled and refined. If confirmed, I would work with stakeholders across
the Department to continue to pursue the application of AI capabilities
to meet a variety of operational challenges.
counterintelligence, law enforcement, and security
Question. What is your assessment of current and anticipated
counterintelligence threats to DOD? Which threats do you assess to be
the most concerning and why?
Answer. DOD faces unprecedented foreign intelligence threats,
principally from China and Russia. These threats target our personnel,
capabilities, and infrastructure, across both the cyber and physical
domains.
Our adversaries operate asymmetrically below the level of armed
conflict using coercion, subversion, malign influence, disinformation,
cyber and economic espionage, and spies and non-traditional collectors.
In my opinion, the most concerning are those threats which aim to erode
our warfighting advantage through targeting and exploitation of the
industrial base.
Question. What is your understanding of the roles and
responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) to provide strategic direction and
oversight of implementation of counterintelligence policy, programs,
guidance, and training to ensure they are responsive to validated DOD
and national counterintelligence priorities? What changes, if any, in
these roles and responsibilities would you recommend, if confirmed?
Answer. I understand the USD(I&S) has broad responsibility for
oversight of DOD counterintelligence (CI) and recently released the
first DOD CI Strategy in more than a decade, ``Confronting Threats to
America's Military Advantage, 2021-2031.''
I also understand the USD(I&S) is a standing member of the National
CI and Security Center's National CI Policy Board along with the
Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, as the statutory Defense
CI Manager. Through this and other forums, the USD(I&S) coordinates and
collaborates DOD CI activities across the U.S. Government.
If confirmed, I will work with USD(I&S) to provide strategic
direction and leverage the Defense CI Manager and other critical
leaders across the CI enterprise to ensure national priorities are
addressed and the community continues to evolve to meet the future
needs of the Department in this dynamic environment.
Question. In your view, how has the Department's security posture
benefitted from the integration of the intelligence,
counterintelligence, and law enforcement policy functions under the
auspices of a single Under Secretary?
Answer. In my view, intelligence, counterintelligence, law
enforcement, and security are mutually-reinforcing functions. As we
face complex security challenges, DOD must integrate policy oversight
of intelligence, counterintelligence, and law enforcement, along with
foundational security functions, to enable the Department to better
leverage a wide variety of tools to protect our people, information,
and resources in support of NDS objectives.
Our intelligence professionals and special agents collect
information, detect, and disrupt the capabilities, opportunities, and
intentions of our adversaries. Working side by side with our security
professionals allows them to develop effective policies, standard and
repeatable procedures, and sufficient controls to deter and deny our
strategic competitors.
If confirmed, I will ensure that all communities under the
authority, direction, and control of the Under Secretary continue to
integrate and deny our adversaries freedom of maneuver.
Question. Does the integration of these functions under a single
official raise civil liberties concerns? If so, what do you believe to
be the most effective way to address those concerns? I do not believe
the integration of these functions raises civil liberties concerns.
Answer. In my view, integrating these functions under one Principal
Staff Assistant enables the alignment of policy, strategy, and resource
prioritization by providing Department-level oversight of these
disciplines.
It is my understanding that the OUSD(I&S) Counterintelligence, Law
Enforcement and Security team are experts in the relevant authorities,
privacy, civil liberties, and intelligence oversight laws and policies,
reinforced by a strong legal team.
If confirmed, I commit to ensuring the continued integration of
these complementary missions in a manner that respects civil liberties
and protects any right or privilege secured by the Constitution or the
laws of the United States.
Question. Does the USD(I&S) have adequate authorities and resources
to execute the law enforcement policy function? If not, what additional
authorities or resources are required, in your view?
Answer. I understand the Counterintelligence, Law Enforcement, and
Security portfolio within OUSD(I&S) has responsibility for the law
enforcement policy function. Although I have not been fully briefed on
current activities or resources, if confirmed I will review this
portfolio and ensure OUSD(I&S) has the right alignment of authorities
and resources to perform the policy oversight function.
Question. In the role of the DOD Senior Agency Official for
Security, the USD(I&S) represents the Department on the Interagency
Security Committee (ISC), created by President Clinton in 1995, six
months after the Oklahoma City bombing, to develop security standards
applicable to all non-military Federally-owned and leased facilities.
The Risk Management Process for Federal Facilities: An Interagency
Committee Standard, sets forth a number of ``best practices'' for
determining a facility's security level and customizing physical
security countermeasures.
In your view, has DOD benefitted from the adoption of any of the
``best practices'' endorsed by the ISC?
Answer. Yes, I believe that DOD has benefitted from adopting the
Interagency Security Committee's (ISC) security standards for DOD's
leased commercial space.
In addition to reducing build-out costs and reconstruction times
when DOD moves into a space previously occupied by another Federal
tenant, aligning our standards for these spaces makes DOD a better,
more-integrated co-tenant to other Federal tenants.
personnel security and insider threat
Question. The USD(I&S) is accountable for managing and overseeing
DOD's insider threat, personnel security, and National Industrial
Security programs. The Secretary of Defense established the Department
of Defense Insider Threat Management and Analysis Center (DITMAC) in
2014 to oversee the mitigation of insider threat risks to the
Department and specific actions on insider threat cases. In November
2018, the National Insider Threat Task Force published the Insider
Threat Program Maturity Framework.
In addition, Congress transferred responsibility for personnel
security from the Office of Personnel Management to DOD at a time when
a backlog of clearance investigations reached near-crisis levels, while
mandating that DOD transform the clearance process through modern data
acquisition and continuous monitoring technologies. Congress also
mandated that DOD significantly improve its abilities to support the
integrity of the acquisition process by determining the beneficial
ownership and responsibility determinations of companies and
individuals with whom the Department contracts by applying similar
continuous monitoring techniques. At the same time, the Department and
Congress expect the intelligence and security components of DOD under
the purview of the USD(I&S) to substantially increase the protection of
the National Security Innovation Base from technology theft and
subversion from foreign adversaries, while ensuring that American
industry and academic institutions continue to be welcoming magnets for
foreign personnel.
Most of these very challenging new and enhanced requirements have
been assigned to the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency
(DCSA). A recent report on the DCSA's Industrial Security Program found
that full implementation of these additional requirements would vastly
increase DCSA's workload above current caseloads.
What is your current assessment of the ability of DCSA to transform
itself to meet these objectives?
Answer. From what I have seen, the Defense Counterintelligence and
Security Agency (DCSA) has done incredible work in reducing the
investigation inventory and increasing its operational capability for
detecting and mitigating insider threats. I recognize that DCSA must
have the necessary support from OUSDI(I&S) leadership, as well as from
the rest of the Deparment and interagency partners, to continue to meet
its objectives.
If confirmed, I will be fully engaged with DCSA and the OUSD(I&S)
staff to ensure the agency is appropriately positioned for continued
success across all its missions.
Question. Does DCSA currently have the budget and manpower to
effectively execute these additional responsibilities?
Answer. DCSA is in a unique position where it is partially
appropriated and partially operating under a fee-for-service model. As
I understand it, DCSA is sufficiently resourced.
If confirmed, I would work closely with DCSA and appropriate
stakeholders to ensure this model's continued success, but to also take
a deep look into the appropriations to ensure the agency has what it
needs to perform its critical mission.
Question. These DCSA-assigned missions are critical to DOD's
innovation strategy led by the Under Secretaries of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment and Research and Engineering. How would you
ensure that DCSA is focused on meeting the needs of senior DOD
officials outside of the OUSD(I&S)?
Answer. I understand the DCSA recently issued its strategic plan, a
first for the agency since the integration of missions from across the
Defense enterprise and Office of Personnel Management. In issuing this
plan, I understand DCSA extensively collaborated with its customers and
external stakeholders to ensure it is meeting their needs.
If confirmed, I will work with DCSA leadership, as well as
leadership across the Department, other executive branch agencies, and
the Congress to support DCSA's implementation of its strategic plan.
Question. Specifically, if confirmed, how would you ensure that
DCSA is highly responsive to the needs of the OUSD(A&S) for vetting DOD
contractors in responsibility determinations?
Answer. If confirmed, understanding the consolidation and expansion
of acquisition security missions at DCSA will be an area of significant
focus for me.
Ensuring proper focus, partnership, and division of
responsibilities across these functions is key to advancing acquisition
security. I think an important step in the right direction,
particularly in level-setting the expectations of the agency and its
stakeholders, including OUSD(A&S) and the Military Departments, will be
the review of the DCSA Charter.
Question. What is your understanding of the status of development,
approval, and implementation of the Trusted Workforce 2.0 initiative?
Answer. As I understand it, Trusted Workforce 2.0 is a national-
level effort, led by the DNI through the PAC, to reform personnel
vetting across the Federal Government. This effort aims to improve
applicant engagement, effectiveness, and efficiency for personnel
security, suitability, and credentialing. I believe the Department is
deeply involved in this reform effort, as the USD(I&S) is a PAC
Principal, and DCSA is the investigative service provider for much of
the Federal Government.
If confirmed, I will ensure the Department remains engaged and that
DCSA is appropriately positioned for the success of this incredible
reform effort.
Question. What is your understanding of the remaining challenges in
achieving reciprocity of clearances and access to classified
information across government components and their contractors?
Answer. I understand there is an important need to continually
balance the tension between safeguarding classified information and
assuring that same information is available, when needed, for both
government components and their contractors. This is particularly
important for DOD, which I understand is the largest holder of
classified national security information in the Federal Government.
If confirmed, I look forward to supporting the review of
information security processes and clearance reciprocity to meet the
DOD's requirements to protect and appropriately share classified
information.
Question. How, if at all, should the Department change its data
ownership and governance policies to facilitate DITMAC's ability to
access data from, and make correlations across, the intelligence,
counter-intelligence, law enforcement, physical security, personnel
security, human resources, network monitoring, and cybersecurity
organizations across the DOD?
Answer. Although I have not yet been fully briefed on all of these
issues, I am aware that the Department is building a layered set of
capabilities to detect and mitigate the Insider Threat. To be effective
and efficient at the challenging mission of getting ``left of crisis,''
I believe it is critical that the DOD Insider Threat enterprise--
including the Defense Insider Threat Management and Analysis Center
(DITMAC), Component Hubs, and installation-level insider threat
personnel-- have access to a wide range of data within the
organization. This includes data from human resources, law enforcement,
counterintelligence, personnel security, among others.
If confirmed, I would work to ensure a sustained effort is underway
eliminate stove-piping and remove barriers to data sharing, as allowed
by law.
Question. In your view, how should insider threat architecture and
activities overseen by OUSD(I&S) be integrated and coordinated with the
Department's cybersecurity architecture and activities, especially with
respect to the new emphasis on ``zero trust'' cybersecurity
architectures and principles?
Answer. Success in areas of mission integration is founded in
partnership. I am aware USD(I&S) and CIO have a strong working
relationship and collaborate regularly on areas of mutual interest.
If confirmed, I will work to ensure this relationship continues and
seek ways to enhance our efforts to find areas of common interest,
force multiplication, and efficiencies across both missions of insider
threat detection and cybersecurity.
Question. Can zero trust practices, and network activity monitoring
for cybersecurity, especially on DOD's unclassified network, promote,
inform and augment insider threat detection? Can user activity
monitoring for insider threat detection inform cybersecurity?
Answer. Yes. I understand Zero Trust assumes a network or system
likely will be penetrated and builds internal cybersecurity controls to
constrain malicious actors when they are successful and alert DOD
security and law enforcement when needed. Cybersecurity tools, network
monitoring, and User Activity Monitoring (UAM) are valuable tools to
augment other sources of data for identifying behaviors of concern
early.
If confirmed, I will work to ensure policies and procedures are in
place for UAM to be shared appropriately, including with cybersecurity
elements as necessary.
Question. In your view, should the Department's zero trust
cybersecurity mandate and the CIO's role in supervising the
implementation of zero trust apply to the Defense intelligence
Agencies?
Answer. Yes. Zero Trust architecture benefits information systems
security regardless of a system's functional purpose.
If confirmed, I will continue and grow OUSD(I&S)'s strategic
partnership with DOD CIO and ODNI for IC systems regarding those
operated by DOD IC Entities.
Question. In your view, does the OUSD(I&S) have the requisite
authority and technical expertise to guide the development of a
comprehensive capability that uses modern information technology to
integrate all sources of information for identifying insider threats?
Answer. Although I have not yet been fully briefed on all of the
operational, technical, and acquisition programs, I believe the
Department should maximize technology and the use of authorities to
address the risk from the insider across all aspects of programs,
including information sharing.
If confirmed, I will ensure the Department's insider threat efforts
continue to integrate, innovate, and advance information sharing to
enable a robust perspective of potential insider risk and/or threats.
Question. What is your understanding of the technical and systems
integration challenges involved in improving personnel security
processes and insider threat detection and prevention within DOD?
Answer. The Department, as with all large institutions, faces
common technical challenges when addressing large scale information
technology systems that ingest, process, and store vast amounts of
data. These challenges multiply as more users are involved and when the
data is needed by multiple missions across different platforms. The
protection of data and data sources are important considerations when
addressing technical and system integration challenges.
If confirmed, I will work closely with the personnel security and
insider threat communities to ensure information is shared, protected,
and appropriately actioned.
Question. Given that several recent insider threats were from
contractor employees, is it advisable and appropriate, in your view,
for the DITMAC to have access to or be integrated with DOD contractors'
data systems? If so, how might such a program be implemented?
Answer. Although I have not been fully briefed on all the programs
and constraints, the efficient and effective sharing of information
between government and contractors is critical to detecting and
mitigating the risk from insiders.
If confirmed, I will examine more closely the flow of information
from contractor organizations in to the Department's Insider Threat
Program, including DITMAC, and assess how the process and capabilities
can be strengthened.
Question. If such a program is not feasible, advisable, or
suitable, what might you suggest as an alternative for mitigating the
risk that contractor employees will engage in insider threat
activities?
Answer. I have not been briefed on all aspects of these programs to
assess if such a program is feasible or not. If confirmed, I commit to
assessing all aspects of insider risk and ensure future goals and
objectives include steps to ensure efficient and effective processes
for passing information between contractors and the government.
Question. What can the OUSD(I&S) do to ensure that senior leaders
in each DOD Component--not only the intelligence or counterintelligence
communities--are fully invested in protecting their people, facilities,
information from insider threats as a core mission objective?
Answer. A key component to an effective Insider Threat programs is
the support of the Component's leadership. This requires senior leaders
to foster a positive workplace climate, encourage the reporting of
concerning behaviors, and take seriously the responsibility for
promoting awareness within the workforce. Additionally, senior leaders
need to validate that their Insider Threat programs and other security
functions, such as suitability and fitness determinations,
credentialing, and vetting are meeting their requirements and are
adequately resourced for success.
If confirmed, I will work with senior leaders across the Department
to prioritize Insider Threat programs, including appropriate funding
and resourcing to support this critical mission.
Question. How should vetting policies and processes applicable to
foreign military students enrolled in DOD training and educational
programs help to mitigate risk to U.S. personnel, facilities, and
equipment?
Answer. I understand that after the December 2019 terrorist attack
at Pensacola Naval Air Station DOD implemented new vetting policies for
International Military Students (IMS) and their accompanying family
members that more closely aligned with the vetting DOD applies to U.S.
military personnel.
If confirmed, I will work to continue to advance vetting policies
and processes within DOD to provide a greater level of security for all
personnel on DOD installations.
Question. The Department of Defense is pursuing a wide-ranging
strategy to engage with commercial entities engaged in cutting-edge
research and development. The Department recognizes that it needs new
acquisition policies and practices to enable the Department to engage
the private sector with the necessary speed, agility and flexibility.
Two related obstacles are the time and difficulty involved in the
personnel and facility clearance processes and the hurdles that non-
traditional contractors face in getting access to data to test and
demonstrate new information technology and software.
How should DOD's security apparatus adapt and tailor its
requirements and procedures better to support the Department's
innovation activities, in your view?
Answer. I understand efforts are underway across the Defense
Security Enterprise to meet the needs of the Department and keep pace
with the speed of innovation today, with a particular focus on the
clearance processes.
If confirmed, I would prioritize OUSD(I&S) security policy support
to the acquisition and research and engineering communities as we seek
to deliver uncompromised warfighting capability and enable the NDS.
Question. Then-Secretary of Defense Mattis established the
Protecting Critical Technology Task Force in late-2018, reporting to
the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Vice Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. The Task Force was one component of DOD's response to
Intelligence Community warnings that China and Russia are engaged in
campaigns to steal trade secrets, proprietary information, and other
forms of intellectual property from the United States, through
infiltration of the software supply chain, acquisition of knowledge by
foreign students at U.S. universities, and other nefarious means--all
as part of a strategic technology acquisition program.
How would you characterize the threat posed by foreign nations to
the integrity of the National Security Innovation Base? Which threats
do you assess as most concerning, and why?
Answer. I would characterize the threat as significant and growing.
The Department relies on U.S. innovation centers and academia, to
undertake and advance science and technology that will maintain the
lethality of the Joint Force and our allies. In my opinion, the most
concerning are those threats which aim to erode our warfighting
advantages through targeting and exploitation of the industrial base,
particularly small businesses.
Question. In your view, is the OUSD(I&S) and the DOD components it
oversees appropriately resourced and organized to ensure the security
of the National Security Innovation Base, critical technology, and
related intellectual property that are critical to the DOD? What
changes, if any, would you recommend?
Answer. I have not been fully briefed on the resourcing of
OUSD(I&S) and the DOD components. However, if confirmed, I would
recommend continued efforts to combat the misconception that security
stifles innovation with rigid controls that deny scientist and
engineers the ability to collaborate. Properly considered, properly
applied, and continuously managed security practices are a critical,
enabling element in research and innovation to encourage competition
and protect DOD interests.
If confirmed, I would also support continuing initiatives to
elevate, integrate, and optimize DOD security and counterintelligence
to support and enable the security of the National Security Innovation
Base.
Question. How would you propose to improve the support provided by
the DCSA, the DOD counterintelligence organizations, and the National
Intelligence Community to better protect the National Security
Innovation Base, and enhance the Department's innovation strategy,
especially with respect to technology companies that are non-
traditional DOD contractors?
Answer. If confirmed, I would support continuing initiatives, both
within OUSD(I&S) and across the Department, to elevate, integrate, and
optimize DOD security and counterintelligence to support and enable the
security of the National Security Innovation Base. Key to this support
is increased collaboration among the disciplines and across the
interagency to ensure we are drawing on the vast capabilities of the
National Security Innovation Base, including those with which would we
not traditionally engage.
classified programs and networks
Question. The Deputy Secretary of Defense is leading a ``zero-based
review'' of the status of special access programs (SAPs) to weed out
activities that should not be handled in special access security
channels and to enhance the protection of those that should remain
SAPs. In addition, the Department is enhancing SAP management resources
in order to cross-clear more personnel in industry and government to
achieve more effective operational integration of SAP capabilities. The
Department is also beginning to work on collapsing, integrating, and
modernizing the SAP networks to achieve efficiencies in infrastructure
and improve collaboration and integration.
In your view, how should the OUSD(I&S) be contributing to this
effort?
Answer. I understand that OUSD(I&S) is fully supporting the Deputy
Secretary's review. As the Department's Senior Agency Official for
Security, and as one of four oversight authorities for DOD Special
Access Programs (SAP), the OUSD(I&S) is participating in the methodical
and focused reviews of SAPs to ensure the information protected by
these SAPs continues to be deserving of these exquisite protections. As
determinations are made, if the information is deemed to no longer
require SAP protections, OUSD(I&S) should aid in identifying and
recommending other appropriate security protections.
Coming out of the review, OUSD(I&S) should continue to work with
our IC partners to drive collaboration and integration of SAPs with
other compartmented information, to include developing and leveraging
common information technology systems to break down stovepipes and
facilitate information sharing. Similarly, OUSD(I&S) should ensure that
DOD SAP security policy allows for the appropriate enhanced security
SAP information requires, while fostering integration and collaboration
across government and with industry.
If confirmed, I would seek to ensure OUSD(I&S) continues to work
collaboratively and effectively to support the Deputy's review and
continued modernization of SAP networks and policies.
Question. An expected benefit of accessing and cross-clearing more
government and industry personnel managing and executing special access
programs is the development of more effective ``kill chains'' and
``effects chains'' to support the Joint All-Domain Command and Control
(JADC2) initiative. Intelligence support for this effort is critical.
The JADC2 Implementation Plan issued by the Deputy Secretary of Defense
calls for campaigns of experimentation and exercises to develop, test,
and adopt novel kill chains.
If confirmed, how would you plan to ensure that the Defense
intelligence components under the oversight and supervision of
OUSD(I&S) prioritize support for this key warfighting and deterrence
initiative to develop, experiment with, and exercise numerous and
unexpected kill chains and effects chains?
Answer. It is my understanding that the USD(I&S) is a full
participant in the Department's Joint All-Domain Command and Control
(JADC2) initiative, which is intended to connect distributed sensors,
shooters, and data from and in all domains to all forces.
If confirmed, I will continue to work closely with Department and
IC stakeholders to shape required improvements to the C4ISR
architecture to increase timely support to decision making at the
strategic and operational levels.
intelligence oversight
Question. In your view, what is the role of the OUSD(I&S) in
ensuring that sensitive activities across DOD are consistently
conducted in accordance with standards of legality and propriety?
Answer. I understand the USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff Assistant
and advisor to the Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Defense
regarding intelligence, counterintelligence, security, sensitive
activities, and other intelligence-related matters. The USD(I&S)
establishes policy and provides oversight and direction for the
coordination, assessment, reporting, and conduct of Department of
Defense (DOD) intelligence and intelligence-related sensitive
activities, the Defense Cover Program, special communications,
technical collection support to intelligence activities, defense
sensitive support, and the clandestine use of technology.
If confirmed, I would work closely with relevant defense and
interagency stakeholders to ensure DOD sensitive activities are
conducted consistent with law and DOD policy.
Question. In your view, how should the OUSD(I&S) engage with the
President's Intelligence Oversight Board and on what matters?
Answer. Based on my experience, the current process, in which the
Principal Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Privacy,
Civil Liberties, and Transparency (PDATSD(PCLT))/Senior Intelligence
Oversight Official notifies the President's Intelligence Oversight
Board (PIOB) of Questionable Intelligence Activities and Significant or
Highly Sensitive Matters, is effective.
If confirmed, I look forward to fostering a positive relationship
between OUSD(I&S) and the PDATSD(PCLT)/Senior Intelligence Oversight
Official in engaging the PIOB, ensuring that my office provides
subject-matter expertise, as required by DOD policy, to support the
PDATSD(PCLT)/Senior Intelligence Oversight Official 's inspection,
investigative, and reporting activities, including its notifications to
the PIOB.
information operations
Question. The Russian Government conducted, mainly through
cyberspace, an aggressive information operations campaign against the
United States in 2016 and again in 2020, in an attempt to influence
presidential elections and undermine faith in America's democratic
system and institutions.
What are your views on the roles, responsibilities, and
preparedness of the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to
deter and defend against strategic information operations?
Answer. I believe that the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise must support the Department's efforts to compete in the
information environment and gain or maintain a competitive advantage.
My view is that the Department should conduct military operations in
the information environment across multiple domains to counter foreign
malign actors to advance U.S. national security interests.
Our efforts to deter and defend against foreign strategic
information operations should be prioritized and must include robust
coordination and collaboration across the Department, including with
the USD(P) acting as the Secretary of Defense's Principal Information
Operations Advisor, and the Executive Branch.
Question. What are your views on the role that the OUSD(I&S) should
play in the development and supervision of the implementation of
Information Operations policy, strategy, and resource sponsorship?
Should there be a separate OUSD(I&S) Task Force on Strategic
Competition and Influence in your view?
Answer. In my current role, I understand the USD(P) is the
Principal Staff Assistant for Information Operation (IO) and is
currently working on a Congressionally mandated posture review and
strategy for IO. The USD(I&S) has detailed personnel to support this
effort since the USD(I&S) has responsibility for coordination of DOD IO
activities within the IC, as well as the development and implementation
of DOD policy, programs, and guidance for DOD deception, operations
security, influence, and reveal/conceal activities.
I believe that USD(P) and USD(I&S) are important partners in the
effort to position the Department for the challenges in today's
information environment. If confirmed, I would seek to work with the
USD(P), the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other DOD
leaders to ensure our collective organizational approach on Information
Operations to optimized to achieve our national security goals while
also meeting the most rigorous standards for oversight.
I understand Secretary Austin directed the USD(I&S) establish an
Influence and Perception Management Office (IPMO). If confirmed, I will
seek to understand the status of IPMO's establishment and how it is
integrated with other elements across the Department.
Question. What are your views regarding the designation of an
Information Operations Joint Force Provider and Trainer, as mandated by
Congress but which DOD has yet to implement?
Answer. I have not been briefed on this initiative, but if
confirmed, I look forward to studying it in further detail.
Question. In your view, how can the Defense Intelligence Enterprise
better support the requirements of the combatant commanders?
Answer. I believe that the Defense Intelligence Enterprise must
improve their ability to support combatant commanders by fully
understanding the information environment and adversaries activities
within; by engaging and potentially partnering with those who are
impacted by foreign malign influence and coercive operations; and by
enabling efforts, in alignment with national and defense priorities, to
attain and sustain competitive U.S. national security advantages.
Question. In your view, would the illumination of these malign
activities help to dissuade or deter China and Russia?
Answer. I believe DOD efforts to expose Russian and Chinese
disinformation should be prioritized, supported, resourced, and
executed to dissuade or deter their malign activities. If confirmed, I
would make it a priority to attribute, expose, and counter foreign
malign activities that harm U.S. national security interests.
cyber strategy
Question. In September 2018, DOD released its 2018 Cyber Strategy.
The Strategy charges DOD to ``defend forward, shape the day-to-day
competition, and prepare for war'' in the cyber domain. Currently, DOD
is in the process of updating its cyber strategy.
In your view, what is the appropriate role for the Defense
Intelligence and Security Enterprise in operationalizing the ``defend
forward, shape the day-to-day competition, and prepare for war''
concepts animating the Department's 2018 Cyber Strategy and the current
updating of that Strategy?
Answer. My understanding is OUSD(I&S) has a developed a strategy
for intelligence support to cyberspace operations. In addition, I
understand that OUSD(I&S) is engaged with the Principal Cyber Advisor
(PCA) and OUSD(P) on the update of the DOD Cyber Strategy.
If confirmed, I will commit to ensuring the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise is well-postured to support the operationalization of the
Department's Cyber Strategy.
Question. What actions would you take, if confirmed, to remediate
any gap between Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise capacity
and capabilities and the goals of the current and emerging Cyber
Strategy?
Answer. If confirmed, I will commit to assessing the findings in
the Cyber Strategy to include any gaps between the Defense Intelligence
and Security Enterprise capacity and capability to support. If
confirmed, I will ensure that OUSD(I&S) fully participates in efforts
to address any of the potential gaps this future strategy may identify.
Question. What are your views as to whether the ``dual hatting'' of
the Commander of U.S. Cyber Command as the Director of the National
Security Agency should be maintained or terminated?
Answer. It is my understanding that Secretary Austin recognizes any
decision on the Dual-Hat should be based on comprehensive analysis of
the impact on both organizations' effectiveness and he will work with
the DNI as he assesses of the value and ongoing benefit of the Dual-Hat
leadership arrangement.
I believe that any recommendation about the future of the dual-hat
leadership arrangement must be based on a thorough understanding of the
operating environment, the military and intelligence priorities, and
the operational capability and capacity of both U.S. Cyber Command and
the National Security Agency. If confirmed, I will seek to support the
Secretary and USD(I&S) in conducting any assessments of the Dual-Hat
leadership arrangement.
Question. Should intelligence support (under the oversight of
OUSD(I&S)) to the overall DOD cybersecurity mission (under the
oversight of the Principal Cyber Advisor) be enhanced, in your view?
Answer. I understand that OUSD(I&S), in partnership with the PCA
and the Chief Information Officer, is committed to the cybersecurity
mission.
If confirmed, I will ensure that the OUSD(I&S) is well-postured to
support the Department's efforts to safeguard vital information and
technologies in DOD and in the Defense Industrial Base against evolving
and increasingly sophisticated threats in and thorough cyberspace,
including by ensuring adequate intelligence support to cyber
activities.
interrogation techniques and detainee treatment
Question. Do you support the standards for detainee treatment
specified in the revised Army Field Manual on Interrogations, FM 2-
22.3, issued in September 2006, and in DOD Directive 2310.01E, The
Department of Defense Detainee Program, dated March 15, 2022?
Answer. Yes. I believe these policies represent the values and
behavior expected of our military members.
imperative for independent intelligence analysis
Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
that DOD intelligence analysts, including those seconded to offices
that are not part of the defense intelligence structure, are
independent and free of pressure from influence from their chain of
command to reach a certain conclusion, including a conclusion that fits
a particular policy preference?
Answer. Independence and freedom from political bias are central to
the profession of intelligence analysis. If confirmed, I would
emphasize the importance of analytic integrity to all members of the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise, no matter their assigned location, and
work to ensure that they are free to conduct their work without
political pressure or influence.
the defense civilian intelligence workforce
Question. The OUSD(I&S) exercises policy oversight of the Defense
Civilian Intelligence Personnel System (DCIPS) to ensure that defense
intelligence, counterintelligence, and security components are
structured, manned, trained--including joint intelligence training,
certification, education, and professional development--and equipped to
execute their missions.
Is the DOD civilian intelligence workforce properly sized, in your
view? Please explain your answer.
Answer. I have not yet had an opportunity to analyze the defense
civilian intelligence workforce in its size and capability, but I
believe people are any organization's most important resource.
If confirmed, I will seek to ensure the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise is appropriately resourced to provide timely and reasoned
intelligence products to the warfighters and policy makers.
Question. Does the DOD civilian intelligence workforce have the
appropriate capabilities, and are those capabilities properly
distributed, in your view?
Answer. I do not have sufficient information to provide a
perspective at this time. However, based on my experience in the IC,
and particularly my time at the Defense Intelligence Agency, it is my
impression that the Defense Intelligence Enterprise is providing
quality and timely intelligence to the warfighter and policy maker.
However, as with any organization, missions evolve and adjustments to
the workforce may be needed.
If confirmed, I will analyze our workforce alignment to the NDS and
offer recommendations if needed.
Question. Are the number and quality of candidates referred and
available for consideration and selection by intelligence,
counterintelligence, and security community hiring officials adequate
to sustain and enhance the capabilities of the civilian intelligence
workforce?
Answer. I have not received any information on candidate pools.
However, I believe people are an organization's most important
resource. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the workforce is
comprised of the most qualified intelligence and security
professionals, and that opportunities to expand candidate pools to
acquire both the skills and diversity necessary to accomplish DOD
intelligence and security missions are aggressively pursued.
Question. If confirmed, what factors and characteristics would be
most important to you in selecting a candidate for appointment in the
Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service (DISES)? As a Defense
Intelligence Senior Level (DISL) official?
Answer. The Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service (DISES)
provides the executive leadership for the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise. I believe the Senior Executives Service Core
Qualifications--Leading Change, Leading People, Results Driven,
Business Acumen, and Building Coalitions--provide a sound underlying
basis for executive selections. I believe there should be a premium
placed on a proven ability to collaborate effectively across
boundaries.
Defense Intelligence Senior Level (DISL) employees complement the
executive leadership of DISES by providing the extraordinary
substantive and technical expertise, in combination with the
demonstrated talent for personal leadership, within critical career
fields.
If confirmed, I will focus on identifying, selecting, and
developing all personnel to accomplish our mission objectives,
including DISES and DISL.
Question. If confirmed, how would you go about ensuring that DISES
and DISL under your authority are held accountable for both
organizational performance and the rigorous performance management of
their subordinate employees?
Answer. If confirmed, I will follow the USD(I&S)'s plan to continue
using the executive performance management system to maintain oversight
of executive and senior level performance.
Question. What is your understanding of the subject matter and
rigor of DISES and DISL professional development programs currently
available across DOD? What changes, if any, would you make to these
programs, if confirmed?
Answer. I have not yet been briefed on these professional
development programs within the Department. However, if confirmed, I
plan to understand these programs effectiveness as a talented and
effective leadership cadre is critical to providing quality
intelligence to the warfighter and policy maker.
Question. What is your understanding of the effectiveness of the
process employed by the OUSD(I&S) to validate whether a vacant DISES/
DISL position should be rehired, restructured, or eliminated in
responding to current and emergent mission needs of the Defense
Intelligence and Security Enterprise? If confirmed as the USD(I&S),
what would be your role in this process?
Answer. I have not yet been fully briefed on the validation process
for DISES and DISL positions. However, I understand that continuous
evaluation of requirements is essential to ensuring leadership
positions are appropriately resourced and structured.
If confirmed, I will ensure the continued oversight of the
processes that support an agile and adaptive Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise.
The Intelligence Community ``Joint Duty'' program was established
in response to the requirements set forth in the 2004 Intelligence
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act that service in more than one IC
element be a condition for promotion to the senior executive level.
Question. What are your views on the merit and utility of the
``Joint Duty'' program as a professional development experience for
members of the DOD civilian intelligence workforce?
Answer. Joint experience supports a fully integrated and
collaborative IC. Similar to the way that the military joint duty
requirements from the Goldwater-Nichols Act have paid dividends for the
military services, the civilian joint duty program is vital to building
a more integrated, interoperable, and effective IC.
I believe the civilian joint duty program is an essential element
of the professional development experience for members of the DOD
civilian intelligence workforce. It is key that our civilian
intelligence professionals understand the relationships among the
members of the IC and that throughout their careers they build deep and
enduring professional relationships across the IC.
Question. What other innovative ideas do you have for the
professional development of non-executive members of the DOD civilian
intelligence workforce?
Answer. At this time, I do not have the requisite information about
current efforts to recommend specific ideas.
I believe that continuing professional development throughout one's
career is critical to both developing the most effective intelligence
capabilities and retaining the expertise behind it. Based on my
experience within the DOD and the ODNI, I believe that if we are to
maintain our competitive advantage, we will need to build more
effective public-private partnerships, both with academia and industry.
We must find ways to enable seamless mobility between government and
the private sector throughout an employee's career, particularly in our
most demanding technical areas, to ensure we have the expert,
professional, and motivated workforce the 21st century demands.
If confirmed, I will ensure continued support for the IC's efforts
to increase opportunities for professional development within the
workforce that enable the career mobility necessary to build the
diversity and capability of the workforce, and commit to engaging the
Committee on our recommendations.
Question. Does the USD(I&S) need additional hiring, development,
recruitment, retention, or compensation authorities to enable further
improvements in the capacity and capability of the DCIPS? Please
explain your answer.
Answer. In general, I understand that the authorities under Title
10 provide the Department with flexibility to address capacity and
capability requirements of the civilian workforce. However, I am also
aware that challenges continue to exist in DOD's ability to address
competitive requirements for certain key skill areas, such as those in
the cyber and STEM fields. I understand that the Department has limited
pay authorities applicable to the National Security Agency needed to
address a critical compensation shortfall in their cyber workforce.
If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s review of the
authorities available to the Department and assess whether any
additional authorities are required to address DCIPS challenges.
unidentified aerospace and transmedium phenomena
Question. Congress has enacted legislation, provided direction, and
authorized and appropriated funds for the Department of Defense and the
Intelligence Community to increase the scope, focus, and resources
devoted to identifying and understanding the many credible observations
spanning years of unidentified objects in restricted military training
areas and in areas where U.S. military forces are operating. These
congressional actions and mandates go beyond the tasking by the Deputy
Secretary for establishing a new task force under the USD(I&S).
What is your understanding of congressional mandates in this area?
Answer. I understand the congressional requirements for regular
briefings and reports to members and staff, including continuing the
DNI's annual unclassified report; the expansion of the scope to include
airborne, submerged and transmedium objects; and the importance of
coordinating DOD, IC, and U.S. Government efforts in this area.
Question. If confirmed, do you support fully executing the
congressional mandates for addressing this problem set?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will support fully executing the
requirements established in statute, while ensuring the Department is
properly postured to address the concerns and threats posed by
anomalous unidentified objects in all domains.
Question. How will you ensure that collection and analysis is not
confined to just events occurring in restricted DOD training airspace
and to objects observed in the atmosphere?
Answer. I believe it is critical that the Department works to
detect, analyze, identify, and, if necessary, mitigate anomalous
unidentified objects in all domains, including in space, air, and
underwater, as well as transmedium objects.
If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring that the Department is
adequately postured to address anomalous events regardless of the
domain or area in which they occur.
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. By definition, protected communications
include communications to certain individuals and organizations outside
of the chain of command, including the Congress.
If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure that military
and civilian members of the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross mismanagement--
including in classified programs--to appropriate authorities within or
outside the chain of command--are protected from reprisal and
retaliation, including from the very highest levels of DOD and the
broader Intelligence Community?
Answer. If confirmed, I will support USD(I&S)'s commitment in
ensuring protections are afforded to Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise personnel who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross
mismanagement, in a manner consistent with law and regulation.
Additionally, I will ensure that personnel who pursue retaliatory
actions upon protected personnel are addressed appropriately, as
established by law and regulation.
Question. If confirmed, what role would you play in ensuring
consistency in the application and interpretation of whistleblower
protections across the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise?
Answer. If confirmed, I will support USD(I&S)'s responsibilities in
ensuring DOD policy implementing such protections is applied
consistently and uniformly in accordance with law.
space
Question. In the past two years the United States has stood up the
U.S. Space Command (SPACECOM) and assigned it responsibility for the
operational planning of DOD space missions and activities. As well, the
U.S. Space Force was established as a sixth Military Service, charged
with the Title 10 responsibilities for the space domain.
If confirmed, specifically what would be your approach to enhancing
the interface and synchronization of space-based capabilities resident
in the Intelligence Community with military space organizations?
Answer. The DOD and IC have a long history of collaboration in
fielding and operating space systems and USD(I&S) plays an important
role in the synchronization of these efforts. Space system development
and operations benefits from collaboration across agency boundaries and
the effectiveness of those systems improves with improved integration.
If confirmed, I will continue to look for opportunities to expand
collaboration between DOD and IC space organizations to enable
collaborative work and the sharing of mutually-beneficial capabilities.
Question. How would you recommend deconflicting tasking
requirements in the space warfighting domain across DOD with tasking
requirements from Intelligence Community customers?
Answer. Deconfliction for tasking intelligence collection is
executed through the Functional Manager roles, which consider both DOD
and IC priorities. As with other domains, intelligence support to space
warfighting requires balancing tasking requirements among the numerous
stakeholders served by national collection.
As there is growth in the collection and analytical needs of space
intelligence and defense missions, it will be important to look for
process improvements to streamline relevant processes. If confirmed, I
will work with the Functional Managers on ways to increase access,
agility, and responsiveness to best satisfy these unique space
intelligence requirements.
Question. The NRO is the only defense intelligence agency not
designated as a combat support agency (CSA). Historically, the NRO has
asserted that it should not be designated as a CSA because it does not
make operational decisions regarding the satellites that it builds and
controls. In NRO's view, others, principally its mission partners--NSA
and NGA--which are designated as CSAs, are responsible for determining
the requirements that guide NRO satellite designs and the operational
tasking of deployed satellites. Now, however, there exists a class of
operational decisions for which the NRO Director is responsible: in
situations in which U.S. satellites are under attack or threat of same,
the NRO Director has the authority to make operational decisions
regarding space control.
If confirmed, how would you ensure that the NRO is sufficiently
integrated with and responsive to the U.S. Space Force? To U.S. Space
Command?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen collaboration
between NRO, U.S. Space Force, and U.S. Space Command in both
development and operations.
I believe the addition of the Director of the NRO as a member of
the Space Acquisition Council improves collaboration in space system
development. The National Space Defense Center (NSDC) is the central
point of integration and unity of effort for operations. Accordingly,
if confirmed, I would work with U.S. Space Command to ensure NSDC has a
structure that fully enables integrated DOD and IC space defense plans
and capabilities.
Question. Given that NRO would be required to respond operationally
to active threats to reconnaissance satellites by adversaries in a
conflict, should the Department consider designating NRO as a CSA?
Answer. No. I believe the NRO has a unique role which is different
from that of any of the Combat Support Agencies (CSA) in that NRO
develops capabilities that fulfill requirements from the NSA and NGA as
the Defense Intelligence Enterprise Managers (DIEMs) and IC Functional
Managers.
For operational decisions regarding space control, the NRO and U.S.
Space Command have established a unified defense concept of operations
at the National Space Defense Center to ensure integrated operations in
times of conflict. In my opinion, this agreement provides the necessary
unity of effort without designating NRO as a Combat Support Agency.
Question. How is the NRO synchronizing its acquisition efforts with
the DOD Space enterprise and architecture?
Answer. Space system development benefits from collaboration across
agency boundaries and the effectiveness of those systems improves with
better interagency integration.
If confirmed, I will consider how OUSD(I&S) can expand
collaboration opportunities as the Department and the IC move forward
to orchestrate the development and fielding of a future threat-driven
resilient National Defense Space Architecture.
sexual harassment
Question. In responding to the 2018 DOD Civilian Employee Workplace
and Gender Relations survey, approximately 17.7 percent of female and
5.8 percent of male DOD employees indicated that they had experienced
sexual harassment and/or gender discrimination by ``someone at work''
in the 12 months prior to completing the survey.
What is your assessment of the current climate regarding sexual
harassment and gender discrimination in the DOD?
Answer. As a member of the Department, I support the actions
directed in the Secretary's February 2021 memo to senior DOD Leadership
in countering sexual assault and harassment. With the Secretary's focus
on this important issue, we as leaders must be held accountable in
driving meaningful change and be part of the solution to improve the
climate allowing all members of the DOD to serve with dignity and
respect.
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 OUSD(I&S)?
Answer. There is no place for this conduct in DOD or the IC. If
confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s oversight responsibilities for
the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to ensure that reports
of sexual harassment or gender discrimination are dealt with swiftly
and in accordance with law and policy.
congressional oversight
Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
responsibilities, it is important that this Committee, its
subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
electronic communications, and other information from the executive
branch.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
to appear and testify before this Committee, its subcommittees, and
other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
provide this Committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
communications, and other information, as may be requested of you, and
to do so in a timely manner? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
consult with this Committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
keep this Committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
request, to provide this Committee and its subcommittees with records
and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
a formal Committee request? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
this Committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
retaliation any military member, federal employee, or contractor
employee who testifies before, or communicates with this Committee, its
subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
______
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
servicemembers and social media
1. Senator Hirono. Ms. Harris, you went from focusing on technology
governance within Facebook to becoming a founding member of the
leadership team at the Oversight Board, an independent initiative
seeking to provide oversight over Facebook's content moderation
decisions. Last year I co-sponsored the SAFE TECH Act which would allow
social media companies to be held accountable for enabling cyber-
stalking, targeted harassment, and discrimination on their platforms.
If confirmed, how do you intend you work to protect DOD members from
harmful content on social media platforms, including the influence and
recruiting tactics of extremist groups?
Ms. Harris. I understand this is a focus area for the Department.
Increasing the workforce's awareness of manipulated information and
attempts at online social engineering is critical to ensuring our
workforce remains resilient and vigilant against these threats. It is
increasingly imperative that we arm our workforce with the skills to
counter progressively sophisticated attempts to exploit our personnel,
information, and resources. The focus should be on education and
awareness, including ensuring that personnel are aware of the intent of
extremist groups to target military members and DOD employees for
recruitment. If confirmed, I will continue to ensure our workforce is
provided the appropriate tools to build awareness and resilience, which
are vital to supporting and empowering our workforce and reducing
vulnerabilities.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jacky Rosen
protecting businesses from cyber attacks
2. Senator Rosen. Ms. Harris, the Defense Industrial Base develops
and maintains sensitive technology and intellectual property vital to
protecting our Nation. Knowing this, malicious cyber actors regularly
target these private sector entities looking for ways to access company
networks and obtain valuable information that may compromise our
national security and warfighting capabilities, in addition to holding
that information for ransom. While the fiscal year 2021 NDAA last
Congress included my bipartisan bill with Senator Young to provide
cybersecurity services to small manufacturers in the defense industrial
supply chain, I'd like to know if more needs to be done to combat cyber
threats. Do you believe DOD is effectively assessing cybersecurity
risks to defense industrial base vendors, informing them of those
risks, and educating them on what they can do to mitigate them?
Ms. Harris. Today's cyber environment is complex and evolving. The
cyber threats from our adversaries are increasing in frequency,
sophistication, and potential impact. In the face of these challenges,
I understand that the Department remains focused with our interagency
partners on countering cybersecurity risks, with increasing emphasis on
small businesses that are both the cradle of warfighting innovation and
the most susceptible to cyber-attack. In the face of this growing
threat, however, more must be done. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
we have the appropriate focus in the Defense Intelligence Enterprise on
understanding cyber threats and our adversaries as well as maintain the
Defense Security Enterprise's focus on cyber security, including
increasing sharing of information and cyber tools to improve support to
small and medium businesses.
3. Senator Rosen. Ms. Harris, how will you address this challenge
if confirmed?
Ms. Harris. Our adversaries seek to target and threaten all aspects
of critical infrastructure, not only the Defense Industrial Base,
through malicious cyber actions. Accordingly, our response to deter,
detect and defeat these threats must be a whole-of-government
undertaking. If confirmed I will seek to reinforce the Department's
intelligence and security enterprises' coordination, support, and
interagency engagement to defend the DIB and other critical sectors
from such attacks.
cyber collaboration with allies
4. Senator Rosen. Ms. Harris, our allies are essential to enhancing
U.S. cybersecurity and cyber operations. We rely on our partners to
conduct threat hunting, enable early warning, harden our collective
defenses, and participate in intelligence sharing. If confirmed, how
will you enhance intelligence sharing and cooperation with our partners
to execute, prevent, mitigate, and recover from cyber attacks?
Ms. Harris. Our allies and partners are central to our success. If
confirmed, I will ensure the Department's intelligence and security
enterprises put cyber and cyber security front and center in these
relationships. We must seek to ensure our alliances and partnerships
enable the fullest cooperation in a combined effort to face growing
cyber threats.
5. Senator Rosen. Ms. Harris, in this role, how will you
collaborate with our allies to use their unique cyber capabilities to
support our military cyber operations, and use those capabilities to
our collective advantage?
Ms. Harris. If confirmed, I will ensure that OUSD(I&S) fully
engages with other DOD stakeholders and the interagency to maximize our
alliances and partnerships to our collective advantage.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
defense industrial base
6. Senator Blackburn. Ms. Harris, if confirmed, how will you
recommend leveraging Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning
(ML), and quantum computing to address cybersecurity threats within the
DIB?
Ms. Harris. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and quantum
computing are critical capabilities with broad applicability across the
Department. It is my understanding that these technologies are used to
detect anomalies on the networks operated by the Department and the
DIB. If confirmed, I look forward to learning more about these efforts
to ensure that OUSD(I&S) is working with the Department's AI/ML
stakeholders to advocate for cybersecurity solutions that best serve
the Department and the DIB.
______
[The nomination reference of Ms. Milancy D. Harris
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of Ms. Milancy D. Harris, 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 Ms. Milancy D.
Harris in connection with her nomination follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of Ms. Milancy D. Harris was reported to
the Senate by Chairman Reed on September 22, 2022, with the
recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
was confirmed by the Senate on December 22, 2022.]
______
[Prepared questions submitted to Dr. Laura D. Taylor-Kale
by Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties
Question. What is your understanding of the duties and functions of
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy?
Answer. The defense industrial base is fundamental to our national
and economic security. The United States faces threats to financial
viability and supply chain resilience from near-peer and peer
competitors. At the same time, the changing manufacturing and
industrial workforce and nature of work is shaping the capabilities and
business models of the manufacturing and defense industrial base.
Having offensive and defensive strategies to mitigate risks and promote
a healthy and resilient defense industrial base is the primary
responsibility of the ASD(IBP). The ultimate objective of the ASD(IBP)
should be ensuring that the defense industrial base is healthy and
resilient in the face of these many challenges and that our nation and
our warfighters have the critical supplies of materials and equipment
they need.
I understand that as the principal advisor to the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment for all industrial base
policies, the ASD(IBP) is responsible for providing detailed analysis
of, and insight into matters related to the global, commercial, and
financially complex industrial supply chain that is essential to our
national security. I believe that the ASD(IBP) must always ensure that
the Department's policies deliver secure and resilient capabilities to
our forces. The ASD(IBP) must conduct and coordinate global investment
and antitrust reviews and forecasts within the Department and develop
the DOD position on such matters in consultation with the DOD General
Counsel; oversee and participate as the DOD representative in matters
pertaining to CFIUS; and maintain effective oversight of small business
programs and support and encourage small businesses, minority and
female-owned enterprises, and nontraditional suppliers.
Question. What background and experience do you possess that
qualify you to perform these duties? What background or experience, if
any, do you have in industrial base issues, including supply chain
management?
Answer. The duties and responsibilities of ASD(IBP) require
analytical, policy, technical, management and organizational, and
interagency coordination skills. I have more than 20 years of
experience working in government, private sector, multilateral
organizations, academia, and the nonprofit sector at the interface
between business and government, and between national and economic
security. As the Deputy Assistant Secretary (DAS) for Manufacturing in
the Commerce Department's International Trade Administration, I learned
well the importance of understanding industry challenges and needs. I
see great value in policymakers liaising directly with manufacturers to
increase export potential for U.S. companies. As the DAS, I worked
directly with several industry groups and trade associations in
addition to serving as the Department's chief interlocuter with the
Manufacturing Council and industry trade advisory committees in the
domains of aerospace equipment, automotive equipment, forest products
and building materials, and civil nuclear energy. As Commerce DAS, the
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manufacturing and Industrial
Policy was my counterpart and key partner in CFIUS reviews. We also
worked together to analyze defense and civilian commercial
manufacturing issues like the decline of machinery, casting and forging
sectors, small business and entrepreneurship, and dual use commercial/
defense technologies.
Additionally, I have a decade of experience as a U.S. diplomat
working on economic and business issues across three continents. I have
significant on-the-ground experience working closely with the
Department of Defense on infrastructure and industry engagement from my
service in Afghanistan. I engaged directly with industry on export
opportunities and critical resources in Asia and Africa as a State
Department Foreign Service (FSO) economic officer. I was the first
State Department FSO to become an advisor on the Executive Boards of
the private sector investment arms of the World Bank Group
(International Finance Corporation), and in that role, as well as in my
role as senior advisor for policy and operations related to private
sector investment at the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, I
garnered significant experience in investment reviews and interagency
financial policy. I have also managed organizational change processes
that involve expanding capabilities and working closely with the
interagency to expand an agency's footprint and impact on business
policy issues.
Lastly, I have a proven track record of understanding industry
needs, particularly in manufacturing. I understand the underlying
strategies, business models, and profit-and-loss evaluations. I have
detailed knowledge of technology innovation and the impact on workforce
development, and I have translated this knowledge into actionable
policies. I also have conducted extensive research in academia and as
part of the Council on Foreign Relations' Renewing America Initiative
on manufacturing and industrial policy and the future of the U.S.
workforce. My research into the role of cross-sector/public-private
partnerships, ecosystems and supply chain management, technology
innovation and entrepreneurship, workforce challenges, and innovative
financial tools to help scale opportunities for entrepreneurs has
direct implications for how policy can effectively support the health
and resilience of the defense industrial base.
If confirmed as the ASD(IBP), I will leverage my analytical,
managerial, financial, negotiation, diplomatic, and organizational
leadership skills and knowledge gained from prior experience to advance
the Department's national security objectives and to be an important
partner for industry. I will directly apply my leadership and
management experience to the important task of ensuring the overall
success of defense industrial base policy management.
Question. If you are confirmed, what duties and functions do you
expect that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment will assign to you?
Answer. If confirmed, I would expect the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Sustainment to prescribe duties and functions for
me in accordance with 10 U.S.C. Sec. 138(b)(6), the Acquisition and
Sustainment charter, and, if available, the IBP organizational charter.
I would expect these duties and responsibilities to include primary
management, coordination, and oversight of programs and policies
related to industrial base resilience, industry engagement,
international cooperation, and small business programs. If I am
confirmed, I will work closely with Under Secretary LaPlante on all
matters related to the IBP portfolio, as well as fulfill to the best of
my ability any other duties and responsibilities he assigns to me. If
confirmed, I would manage and lead the IBP team to provide the subject
matter expertise and experience necessary to deliver programs and
policies that promote a strong and resilient defense industrial base.
We would remain mindful of our primary objective: to facilitate the
delivery of secure and resilient capabilities to our armed forces and
allies.
qualifications
Question. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base
Policy (ASD(IBP)) is the principal advisor to the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD(A&S)) for all industrial
base policies and related matters. If confirmed, in supporting the
USD(A&S), you will be responsible for establishing policy and
conducting oversight of the defense industrial base which supports the
acquisition and sustainment of our military forces.
What background or experience, if any, do you have in ensuring and
implementing supply chain management and security?
Answer. As an economic officer in Afghanistan, I gained on-the-
ground experience in working with industry and military officers on
supply chain management and security with a focus on infrastructure
development and telecommunications services and security. Additionally,
I have conducted extensive research on these issues as part of my study
of cross-sector partnerships, ecosystem development, and industrial
policy. If confirmed, I will bring these experiences to bear in
assessing the risks to defense industrial supply chains and in managing
OASD(IBP) policies and programs aimed at ensuring supply chain
management and security.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
conducting global investment reviews and forecasts that help inform
acquisitions and investments?
Answer. My work in interagency global economic policy at the State
and Commerce Departments provided me with extensive background in
investment reviews including CFIUS. Additionally, I reviewed
investments in my work on the Executive Board of the private sector
investment and lending arms of the World Bank Group. If confirmed, I
would use this to lead, manage, and provide oversight of OASD(IBP)
global investment reviews and forecasts, so as to inform the
Department's assessment of acquisitions and investments in the defense
industrial base.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
overseeing commercial mergers and acquisitions or conducting antitrust
reviews?
Answer. In addition to my interagency experience in analyzing
private sector investments, I have advanced degrees in economic policy
and business administration, with corporate finance training, including
mergers and acquisitions and antitrust analysis. If confirmed, I will
bring my analytical skills to bear in understanding the complex
challenges that mergers and acquisitions and antitrust matters pose for
national security and the overall health of the defense industrial
base.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
developing policy and processes for programs to acquire products and/or
services, as well as policies and processes for oversight of such
programs?
Answer. In my prior work at the Departments of State and Commerce,
Mathematica Policy Research, and the World Bank, I developed policies
and processes for managing and overseeing programs for services and
products. If confirmed, I will bring to bear this experience and my
organizational and program management skills to leading, managing, and
providing oversight of OASD(IBP) industrial base programs.
Question. What qualifications do you have using modern data
approaches, tools, and methods that prepare you to maintain visibility
of, analyze, and manage data on the volume, variety, and complexity of
the inventory of acquisition and industrial base initiatives and
programs in the Department?
Answer. In addition to my prior analytical work at Mathematica
Policy Research, the Departments of State and Commerce, and the
Executive Board of the World Bank Group, I have advanced doctorate-
level training in modern, complex data methodology, approaches, and
tools. I have used my advanced skills in both quantitative and
qualitative data gathering and analysis to manage the collection,
synthesis, analysis, and visualization of complex data at the network,
industry, and organizational levels. If confirmed, I will bring to bear
this experience in leading, managing, and overseeing the research and
analytics arms of the OASD(IBP), and in assessing the complexity and
diversity of data generated by acquisition and industrial base
initiatives across the Department of Defense enterprise.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
managing programs which encourage small business and/or nontraditional
business participation in government contracting?
Answer. As the Commerce DAS for Manufacturing and as senior
official at the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, I worked on
engaging and encouraging small business and nontraditional
participation in government programs If confirmed, I will bring to bear
this experience to encourage the participation of small businesses and
nontraditional suppliers in defense contracting.
Question. What background or experience, if any, do you have in
overseeing, pursuing or managing programs that support international
armaments or security cooperation?
Answer. As a career diplomat in the State Department, I worked
overseas with defense attaches and defense cooperation offices in the
pursuit of security cooperation in bilateral and multilateral settings.
If confirmed, I will use my diplomatic skills and experience to support
international armaments and security cooperation with allies and
strategic partners in support of the defense industrial base and
industrial supply ecosystems.
priorities and challenges
Question. If confirmed, what are the top priorities you would plan
to focus on during your tenure as the ASD(IBP)? What would be your
plans for achieving these priorities?
Answer. Our national security rests on our economic security and
the tools and capabilities our troops have to confront and overcome
rapidly evolving challenges from strategic competitors and adversaries.
The COVID-19 and the Ukraine crises have laid bare some of the
vulnerabilities in our defense industrial base and supply chain
ecosystems. A healthy and resilient defense industrial base can deliver
the capabilities that meet the current and future needs of U.S. forces.
These vulnerabilities represent both immediate and long-term national
security risks and economic risks because they could adversely affect
our ability to provide our troops with these essential capabilities. If
confirmed, my top priority would be strengthening the defense
industrial base and its supply chains, including continual assessment
of the strengths and weaknesses of the defense industrial base to
identity risks and opportunities, and then determine the best
authorities available to mitigate those risks and realize
opportunities.
In consultation with Congressional Committees, engagement with
industry, and in close coordination with senior officials across the
Department enterprise, the White House and the interagency, if
confirmed, I would focus on several key areas to address short term
gaps and the long-term health and resilience of the defense industrial
base. First, I would assess risks and develop and execute plans to
shore up supply chain vulnerabilities, particularly around critical
minerals and materials. I would do this by aligning risk mitigation
priorities with the needs of industry and lessons learned from the
COVID-19 pandemic and Ukraine crises. The recent reports published in
response to the Executive Order 14017, America's Supply Chains outlines
actionable recommendations the Department can take to address this
challenge. Second, I would focus on protecting the defense industrial
base from foreign adversarial capital and investments. Third, I would
aim to support small businesses and nontraditional suppliers as
important components of the defense industrial base for spurring
innovation and promoting competition in the defense industrial base.
Finally, the development and fielding of new, innovative technologies
are important for the health of the industrial base and for providing
the capabilities our armed forces need.
Question. In your opinion, what are the greatest challenges facing
the defense industrial base?
Answer. The fundamental challenge to the defense industrial base is
striking a balance between the sustainment of existing industrial
capability, while setting the conditions for the successful adoption of
more capable systems that are necessary for strategic competition with
peer and near-peer competitors. In my view, the defense industrial base
can be differentiated from commercial sectors in that it responds to
the demand signals from the Department of Defense and must reckon with
programmatic and budgetary challenges of working closely the Department
on capabilities and tools that ultimately meet DOD needs and national
security specifications for our armed forces. The threat environment is
rapidly evolving and the priorities and needs of our armed forces must
keep pace and get ahead of the shifting threat environment. Russia's
invasion of Ukraine has destabilized supply chains, making it difficult
to secure critical and strategic materials. Additionally, we face
strategic economic challenges from China, including threats to
intellectual property and to supply chain resilience through adversary
investment capital. President Biden has also outlined another
pernicious challenge for U.S. industry: vulnerability to malicious
cyberattacks from foreign adversaries, like Russia.
Question. What would be your plans for addressing these challenges,
if confirmed?
Answer. The key to addressing these challenges is deploying a
holistic approach where policymakers assess and mitigate risks along
the entire industrial supply chain. It is my understanding that the
President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2023 drives at the heart of
this challenge, including additional resources to support the Office of
(???) Industrial Base Policy and support for building upon the efforts
of the Executive Order 14017 report. It is also my understanding that
the Department has programs to assist small and medium sized businesses
with implementing cybersecurity improvements, including Project
Spectrum.
If confirmed, I will work across the Department, with interagency
partners, and in partnership with industry and the Congress, to address
these challenges. I would also seek to directly engage our allies to
create partnerships for ensuring capabilities critical to the health
and resilience of the defense industrial base. Additionally, if
confirmed, I would continue to prioritize innovation and
entrepreneurship through small business programs. I would look for ways
to move innovations past prototyping and into production lines. In this
regard, I would work with USD(A&S) to improve collaboration with
OUSD(R&E).
Question. By what metrics will you measure your progress towards
achieving these priorities and addressing these challenges?
Answer. The data and metrics in Industrial Base Policy should
address cross-cutting industrial base challenges that impact the
Military Services and Joint Chiefs' Planning units. Metrics are only as
viable as the underlying data that comprise them. As Under Secretary
LaPlante has said, data should be robust, readily accessible, and
measured against sound metrics. I share Under Secretary LaPlante's view
that if we don't move innovative technologies and research into
production lines, we have not succeeded. Ultimately, the measure of
success is the reduction of shortfalls to readiness and estimated
national emergency requirements, such as those provided in the reports
under Executive Order 14017, America's Supply Chains.
If confirmed, I will work closely with OUSD(A&S), this Committee,
industry partners, and senior officials across the Department,
including in Joint Chiefs' planning and the acquisitions and logistics
teams in the Military Departments to assess available data and align
metrics.
office of the asd(ibp)
Question. If confirmed, you will serve as the first Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy.
How would you ensure that this new position and office are
successful in overseeing and managing the defense industrial base?
Answer. From my experience in the interagency, I saw first-hand how
critical DOD's Industrial Base Policy functions were for understanding
vulnerabilities and implementing a robust strategy for manufacturing
and industrial policy. This observation has been heightened by the
constantly changing threat environment and the strategic
vulnerabilities in our industrial supply chains that the COVID-19
crisis and Russian aggression in Ukraine has revealed.
If confirmed, I will work closely with this Committee and its staff
as well as with industry partners, and senior leadership across the DOD
enterprise to advance OASD(IBP)'s efforts to ensure the health and
resilience of the defense industrial base.
Question. How would you ensure the office of the ASD(IBP) is
adequately resourced (in terms of personnel, budget, and authority) and
provided with the high-level support necessary to perform its duties
and responsibilities?
Answer. I understand that this Committee and Congress has given the
Department Title 10 authorities and resources to address the risks and
opportunities in the defense industrial base. If confirmed, I will work
with leadership in the Department, at the White House, and with the
Congressional Defense Committees to determine OASD(IBP)'s resourcing
requirements and recommend any changes necessary.
Question. Are there any organizational or legislative changes to
the office of the ASD(IBP) you believe would be beneficial to carrying
out the duties of the ASD(IBP)?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Under Secretary LaPlante, as
well as with leadership in OASD(IBP) and within the Department to
review OASD(IBP)'s legislative authorities and organizational structure
and recommend any changes necessary.
Question. How would you work with other offices outside of the
office of the ASD(IBP) that have key roles in the defense industrial
base, such as the service ManTech programs, the manufacturing
innovation institutes, service small business offices, and
counterintelligence field offices?
Answer. If confirmed, I will regularly engage with organizations
outside of the OASD(IBP) that have key roles in the Defense Industrial
Base to ensure that our actions are fully coordinated and aligned
within the Department. Organizations and programs outside of OASD(IBP)
and across the Department enterprise and in the interagency are key
partners for information and data gathering, and in implementing
policies that strengthen the defense industrial base. For instance, as
Commerce DAS for Manufacturing, I visited several of the Manufacturing
USA institutes in which the DOD and the Departments of Energy and
Commerce have partnered to fund and launch. These institutes have great
potential to bridge the gap between developing ideas and innovative
advanced manufacturing technologies, through prototyping, and scaling
emerging technologies, to create cross-sector ecosystems to address
industrial workforce skills shortages, and to provide training and
support for small businesses and entrepreneurs in cybersecurity and
supply chain management. Continued engagement with these institutes
will be important for addressing vulnerabilities in the defense
industrial base. Other manufacturing and small business offices and
programs such as those within the Military Departments provide critical
links with service acquisition programs.
Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Commercial
Due Diligence office? Do you need additional tools, data, techniques or
processes to make their work more effective?
Answer. My understanding is that this office falls under the Office
of Industry Engagement in OASD(IBP). If confirmed, I intend to review
the functions of this office to assess if additional tools, techniques,
or processes are needed to improve its effectiveness.
health of the defense industrial base (dib)
Question. Over the past several years, there have been increasing
concerns in Congress, industry, and the Department over the health of
the DIB and its ability to reliably meet current and future defense
needs.
What do you assess to be the most significant challenges facing the
DIB?
Answer. In my view, the defense industrial base faces several
significant challenges stemming from de-industrialization and overall
changes to the U.S. economy over the last 50 years and strategic
economic and geopolitical threats from peer and near-peer competitors,
particularly China's adversarial capital and efforts to undermine a
rules-based international order. A fundamental challenge facing the DIB
involves striking a balance between the production and sustainment of
mature systems and industrial capabilities we have today while setting
the conditions for the successful adoption of more capable systems that
are necessary strategic geopolitical competition with peer and near-
peer competitors. Moreover, the defense industrial base must reckon
with the complexity of managing global supply chains, including
sourcing and processing critical materials and strategic materials and
maintaining security, protecting against cyber intrusions, and ensuring
overall stability. Additionally, workforce challenges undermine the
resilience of the defense industrial base as manufacturing industries
face an aging manufacturing workforce and dearth of new workers with
STEM/industrial skill capabilities. Finally, programmatic and budgetary
instability, erratic planning and investments in the defense industrial
base, and more recently, the potential effects of inflation all weaken
the DOD-industrial base relationship, make DOD an unattractive customer
and partner.
Question. How would you proposeto address these challenges, if
confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work across the Department of Defense
enterprise and with Congress, White House, our interagency and
international partners, and industry to move beyond diagnosis and to
develop strategic courses of action. I recognize that these challenges
were decades in the making and will require a long-term commitment to
address.
Question. What steps will you take to ensure the DIB has the
appropriate scientific, technical, and manufacturing workforces to
support current and future needs of DOD?
Answer. If confirmed, I will focus on maintaining a manufacturing
and defense industrial workforce that is robust and balanced across
both traditional industrial trade skills and, in partnership with
OUSD(R&E), advanced, next generation scientific, technical and
industrial skills. I support continued emphasis on critical STEM
education and technological innovation that underpins the DIB's
scientific and engineering workforce as well as work closely across the
DOD enterprise including with the OUSD(R&E) to align programs and
policies that support STEM and manufacturing workforce development in
the defense industrial base. I will further develop courses of action
with industry and interagency partners and leverage any appropriate
authorities to prioritize training the DIB workforce and ensuring
access to technical know-how needed to produce and sustain our weapons
systems and maintain DOD's competitive advantage.
Question. What steps will you take to ensure that the DIB has the
appropriate manufacturing and production infrastructure to support
current and future needs of DOD?
Answer. I believe that key Title 10 tools and authorities for
industrial base support including the Defense Production Act and the
Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment program are key to DOD's
efforts to support the defense industrial base manufacturing and
production infrastructure. If confirmed, I will work with Department
leadership to continue to leverage these authorities as effective tools
for advancing the Department's partnership with industry and explore
any modifications to the authorities and other tools that may necessary
to support the Department's current and future industrial base needs.
Question. What steps should the Department take--on its own or as
part of a ``whole of government'' approach--to increase domestic
industrial capacity and reduce reliance on suppliers in China or other
adversaries?
Answer. Addressing critical vulnerabilities in industrial supply
chains, reducing reliance of foreign adversaries, and securing domestic
industrial capacity is key to U.S. economic and national security. As
Under Secretary LaPlante has argued, the United States should have a
``whole-of-nation'' approach to incentivize commercial industry to on-
shore and ally-shore or ``friend-shore'' their supply chains. I believe
the Department of Defense should apply its authorities to build
resilience into supply chains, support innovative small businesses,
expand domestic manufacturing capacity, and secure access to the
industrial capacity of our strategic allies, particularly the NTIB.
If confirmed, I will work with industry and the Department's
interagency and international partners to review how IBP and its
authorities can be used to support these efforts within and external to
the Department, with an emphasis on productivity and competitiveness.
Additionally, I will work with A&S leadership and OUSD(R&E) to
transition manufacturing innovations and reduce dependence on foreign
sources. I will aim to increase secure access to domestic and allied
industrial capacity through targeted investments in key industrial
sectors at home, in our closest allies, and with other security
partners. Deepening our supply chain cooperation will enable the United
States to take advantage of secure sources of supply, create stronger
bonds of friendship between our countries, and take strong steps
towards building a more capable industrial network that can reduce our
collective reliance on suppliers in China and in other adversaries.
Question. If confirmed, one of the Deputy Assistant Secretaries
that will report to you is focused on industrial base resiliency.
What is your understanding of how resilience within the defense
industrial base is currently measured and assessed?
Answer. My understanding is that the Department views resilience as
greater domestic industrial capabilities and reduced foreign
dependency, particularly on foreign adversaries. Under the Executive
Order 14017 Report on Critical Supply Chains and the DOD-led 100-Day
Review, the Department assessed supply chain resiliency by prioritizing
four focus areas that are particularly important to national security.
Underpinning these focus areas are four key strategic enablers required
for mission success: workforce, small businesses, manufacturing, and
cybersecurity. The Report also contains a series of cross-cutting
recommendations for the Department to pursue, both on its own and with
its partners in industry, government, academia, and the Congress.
If confirmed, I will work across the DOD-enterprise to ensure that
the Department uses shared metrics for measuring and assessing this
goal.
Question. Are there other metrics or data frameworks that you think
should be developed to improve measurement and assessment capabilities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Department's progress
towards implementing the recommendations of the EO 14017 Report on
Defense Critical Supply Chains, the 100-Day Review, as well as the
Department's current framework for evaluating DIB resilience, and
suggest improvements as necessary.
Section 4819 of title 10, United States Code, established a
framework for modernizing and digitizing the approach for mitigating
risks to the defense industrial base.
Question. What is your understanding of the status of implementing
that framework?
Answer. In a rapidly changing threat environment, I recognize the
importance of modernizing and digitizing processes and information to
ensure the integrity of the defense industrial base. It is my
understanding that the characterization, monitoring, and assessment of
the defense industrial base and industrial base support is an important
responsibility within OUSD(A&S) and will allow the Department to make
informed decisions on the policies, programs and procedures it uses to
mitigate risks the defense industrial base. If confirmed, I look
forward to learning more details about the steps the Department has
taken to implement this framework.
Question. What other steps would you take to assess the health of
the current and future defense industrial base?
Answer. In addition to the instructions and authorities in Title
10, if confirmed, I would work closely with industry partners and seek
to understand and potentially leverage the process used to develop the
E.O. 14017 report, ``Securing-Defense Critical Supply Chains''
recommendations. Additionally, I would examine the recent GAO report
outlining the Department's risk mitigation strategies to determine
where OASD(IBP) can work across the DOD-enterprise, particularly with
Military Service Departments to support efforts to improve the
Department's visibility into the DIB's supply chains.
domestic sourcing
Question. The Biden Administration has made domestic sourcing a key
part of its policy agenda. If confirmed, you would oversee the
beginning of a significant push to increase DOD's procurement of
American-made goods, products, and materials.
Do you see any associated challenges or opportunities? Please
elaborate.
Answer. I strongly support the Department and other Federal
agencies' efforts to better leverage authorities to promote domestic
sourcing and encourage increased domestic and allied production of
critical and strategic raw materials. Domestic sourcing rules provide a
critical benefit to the Department of Defense. For example, the
Department has sourced titanium from domestic sources for many years,
and this rule has insulated DOD from much of the volatility flowing
from Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Question. In your opinion, what role should domestic sourcing
requirements play in efforts to manage the DIB, support domestic
companies, and ensure trusted and reliable supplies of goods and
services?
Answer. Domestic sourcing requirements provide a valuable tool to
insulate the DOD from adversarial sourcing risk, while supporting the
development of domestic sources of supply. At the same time, we should
remain open to the innovation and reliable sources of supply from our
allies and partners.
Question. In your opinion, what role should the Department play in
reviewing and recommending domestic sourcing requirements prior to such
requirements going into effect?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Department plays an active
role in the review of domestic sourcing rules through the Federal
Acquisition Regulation Council. It also is my understanding that the
Office of Industrial Base Policy provides input to FAR Council
deliberations, but this activity is principally driven by Defense
Pricing & Contracting (DPC).
If confirmed, I will continue to provide the necessary technical
support as DPC engages with the FAR Council.
Question. In your view, what would be the benefits of greater
Departmental input and involvement prior to domestic sourcing decisions
being made?
Answer. As the largest discretionary direct appropriation in the
Federal Government, the Department of Defense has an important role in
shaping domestic sourcing rules. It is my understanding that DOD's
input is incorporated through the FAR Council.
Question. In your view, what steps should the Department take to
ensure that companies are able to find needed financing and resources
from trusted sources?
Answer. I recognize that access to trusted financing and resources
are vital to ensuring the defense industrial base can continue to
modernize and evolve to provide the Department with its required
defense capabilities. In my view, the Department should facilitate
access to well-vetted financing and resources for defense industrial
base companies, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises and
nontraditional suppliers who may not have the resources and staffs to
examine this information. Given my interagency experience as DAS for
Manufacturing at the Commerce Department, I am particularly in favor of
the Department using its authorities to prevent the transfer of
sensitive U.S. technology and information to foreign adversaries. If I
am confirmed, I look forward to learning more about the Department's
efforts to provide pathways to reliable funding sources and will work
with my team to identify any gaps in our existing authorities.
Question. What actions should the Department take to address the
threat of ``adversarial capital'' from China and other sources that
seek to gain undue influence over the DIB?
Answer. I share concerns that Chinese and other adversarial
investments in U.S. infrastructure, data, and emerging technologies are
a significant concern. I recognize the importance of ensuring
adversarial capital from China and other sources does not gain undue
influence over the DIB. I understand that the Department works closely
with interagency partners and international allies to combat these
efforts and develop a common understanding fo these threats. If
confirmed I will review those efforts and will work with my team to
provide any recommendations on additional actions or authorities as
appropriate and on mechanisms to educate and train industry partners
and explore the potential of working with trusted domestic capital
providers.
Question. How can the Department better leverage suppliers in the
national technology and industrial base (NTIB) and among allies and
partners?
Answer. I understand that the United State is strengthening its
NTIB through exploring opportunities for information sharing, driving
opportunities for lessons learned, and work streams for to pursue joint
action against supply chain vulnerabilities, especially for critical
materials and rare earth elements. In addition, ``Ally-shoring'' and
``Friend-shoring'' could be important avenues that support critical and
strategic supply chains. If confirmed, I will use my diplomatic
background and skills to better leverage NTIB suppliers and work with
our allies and strategic partners to enhance our combined capabilities
and ensure that we are protecting our mutual interests from adversarial
practices and threats. I look forward to working with this Committee on
these important Title 10 authorities and reviewing the Department's
existing efforts and recommending new initiatives, as necessary.
mergers and acquisitions
Question. The February 2022 State of Competition within the Defense
Industrial Base report highlights the consolidation of the defense
industrial base into fewer large prime contractors as a significant
risk to competition within the DIB.
In your view, what is the appropriate role for the Department with
respect to proposed and ongoing private sector merger and acquisition
activities of DOD contractors?
Answer. My understanding is that the Department's role in the U.S.
government's review of merger and acquisition activities is to assess
the anti-competitive and national security impacts of a transaction on
the defense industrial base and convey those assessments to the
regulators at the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission.
If confirmed, I will work with the Department's senior leadership to
review DOD's current role and recommend adjustments, if necessary.
Question. What are your views on defense industry mergers and
acquisitions in terms of Pentagon guidance to industry?
Answer. Defense industry mergers and acquisitions impact the level
of economic competition in the DIB. In general, I believe this should
be a subject of on-going dialogue between the Department and the
defense industry as the Department implements acquisition and
sustainment policies more broadly and ensures effective competition. It
is my understanding that increased competition is in the Department's
budgetary interest and that the Department is working to implement
recommendations from the 2022 State of Competition in the DIB report.
If confirmed, I will work with OASD(IBP) team, senior Department
officials, and the interagency to understand the case-by-case
implications of industry mergers and acquisitions.
Question. In your opinion, does DOD focus enough on the potential
consolidation of sub-contractors and suppliers in addition to prime
contractors?
Answer. My understanding is that one of the challenges in assessing
supply chain resiliency is a lack of visibility into second and third
tier suppliers and subcontractors. However, I also understand that the
Department is exploring ways to enhance that visibility, which would
enable the Department to better analyze the state of these businesses,
including merger and acquisition activities. If confirmed, I will
review the Department's current efforts towards this goal and make
recommendations, as needed, to assess the effect of potential
consolidation of subcontractors and suppliers on the DIB.
organic industrial base
Question. In your opinion, what role does the organic industrial
base play in modernization efforts and in the sustainment of
warfighting capabilities?
Answer. As part of the overall defense industrial base, the organic
industrial base plays an important role in ensuring that our troops
have the warfighting capabilities and tools they need and being the
nation's insurance policy to safeguard supply chain readiness. My
understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Sustainment (ASD(S)) has oversight of the Organic Industrial Base. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with the ASD(S) on modernizing and
effectively sustaining warfighting capabilities.
Question. What is your assessment of the status of the facilities
and workforce in DOD depots, logistics centers, arsenals, and other
elements of the organic industrial base?
Answer. In general, I understand that the facilities and workforces
for the organic industrial base have been taxed after two decades of
persistent conflict. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) has oversight of the Organic
Industrial Base. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the
ASD(S) on evaluating the status of the facilities and workforce in DOD
Depots, logistics centers, arsenals, and other elements of the organic
industrial base.
Question. What role should the organic industrial base play in the
sustainment of software in defense systems?
Answer. Along with the rest of the defense industrial base and the
capabilities of the private sector, the organic industrial base is
essential to sustaining software intensive weapons systems. My
understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Sustainment (ASD(S)) has oversight of the OIB. If confirmed, I look
forward to working with the ASD(S) on the sustainment of software in
the defense systems.
Question. What role should the organic industrial base play in the
sustainment of dual use and commercial technologies used by DOD?
Answer. In general, DOD must work collaboratively with industry to
ensure that dual-use technologies can support the Department's
requirements. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) has oversight of the Organic
Industrial Base and any specific questions to the OIB's mechanisms for
cooperating with industry on these technologies. If confirmed, I look
forward to working with the ASD(S) on the sustainment of dual use and
commercial technologies in use by DOD.
Question. What role, if any, does ASD(IBP) have in ensuring that
the facilities and equipment at the military depots are modern,
operable, and effective?
Answer. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Sustainment (ASD(S)) has oversight of the Organic Industrial Base.
However, I believe that cooperation between Industrial Base Policy and
Sustainment is important for ensuring that military depots operate at
the highest levels of modernity, operability, and effectiveness. If
confirmed, I will work with the ASD(S) to understand military depots'
greatest needs and how IBP can support them.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to strengthen the
Department's organic industrial base?
Answer. In general, I understand that the facilities and workforces
for the organic industrial base have been taxed after two decades of
persistent conflict. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Sustainment (ASD(S)) has oversight of the Organic
Industrial Base. If confirmed, I look forward to working ASD(S) to
ensure that the Department's organic industrial base has the resources
it needs to meet DOD's current and future operational needs.
defense industrial base cybersecurity
Question. Section 1648 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2020 requires the Secretary of Defense to develop a
comprehensive framework to enhance cybersecurity for the DIB.
What is your understanding of the challenges of enhancing
cybersecurity of the DIB?
Answer. In general cybersecurity is one of the major threats
affecting manufacturers today and the loss of intellectual property and
sensitive information from all U.S. industrial sectors from theft and
other malicious cyber activity threatens U.S. national and economic
security. My understanding is that many companies defense industry base
perceive the Department's cybersecurity policies as onerous and
imposing, particularly for small businesses while the Department views
these policies as essential for securing critical information shared
with the DIB and protecting intellectual property. While it is
important to share information with industry, we must hold industry
accountable for doing what is required to safeguard that information.
If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing all the challenges facing
improving DIB cybersecurity and working with the Department's Chief
Information Officer--who I understand has oversight over DIB
cybersecurity--on addressing these challenges.
Question. If confirmed, how would you balance the needs of
improving cybersecurity with the burden of compliance on small and
medium sized businesses?
Answer. The Department must work with small businesses and help
with the burden of improving cybersecurity standards. I understand that
DOD's cybersecurity policies towards the defense industrial base are
overseen now by the DOD Chief Information Officer. However, I believe
it is important that the Department continue to pursue and improve
policies to nurture the small business vendor base and small and
medium-sized businesses' ability to compete for defense contracts. My
understanding is that Industrial Base Policy's Office of Small Business
Programs has multiple programs to assist small and medium sized
businesses with competing for defense contracts, including the
Procurement Technical Assistance Program, Project Spectrum, the Mentor-
Protege Program, and a dedicated small business website. If confirmed,
I look forward to working with the DOD CIO to seek the appropriate
balance between cybersecurity needs and easing the burden of compliance
on the small business vendor base.
Question. The framework required by Section 1648 has not yet been
completed and delivered to Congress.
If confirmed, will you commit to completing the work required by
Section 1648?
Answer. It is my understand that oversight cybersecurity in DOD
weapons systems falls under OUSD(A&S). If confirmed, I will work with
the USD(A&S) and the DOD CIO to review the current status of the work
required by Section 1648 and ensure its completion.
Question. In the last few years, the focus of the Acquisition &
Sustainment model has been on one element of the framework: the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model certification (CMMC).
What is your understanding of the current status of CMMC?
Answer. It is my understanding that the CMMC program is now under
the DOD Chief Information Officer's oversight. However, I also
understand that the program is currently working through the formal
rulemaking process to publish detailed CMMC guidance in part 32 of the
Code of Federal Regulations. If confirmed, I will work with the CIO and
other senior Department officials to this guidance is completed,
published, and readily available to industry.
Question. If confirmed, are there any changes you would make or
recommend to the CMMC efforts beyond those already mandated by the
Deputy Secretary?
Answer. I understand that the Department carried out a thorough
review of the CMMC program in 2021, which resulted in CMMC 2.0. If
confirmed, I will work with CIO to make recommendations that will allow
for the seamless implementation of CMMC in Acquisition programs and
ensure that our DIB partners meet requirements. If confirmed, I will
also work with our DIB partners to ensure the maximum acceptance of
CMMC and provide avenues to small and medium sized businesses that will
enhance their ability to participate in the DOD ecosystem.
microelectronics
Question. Over the last few decades, Taiwan, South Korea, and the
People's Republic of China have implemented large-scale national
industrial policies to build microelectronics manufacturing facilities.
In contrast, the availability of large-scale state-of-the-art
microelectronics manufacturing foundries in the United States has been
steadily declining. DOD has a diverse set of requirements and needs for
the domestic production of measurably secure state-of-the-art, state of
the practice, and legacy integrated circuits in low volumes to meet its
needs.
What is your assessment of the Department's microelectronics needs,
to include both legacy, state-of-the-practice, and state-of-the-art?
Answer. The Department of Defense needs consistent access to both
legacy and state-of-the-practice chips to maintain current weapon
systems while also requiring state-of-the-art microelectronics for
newly developed systems. If confirmed, I will continue DOD's efforts to
secure assured sources of microelectronics components for current and
future weapons systems. I look forward, if confirmed, to working with
the Department's leadership and our interagency partners to develop and
inform a ``whole-of-government'' Microelectronics strategy. I look
forward to collaborating with OUSD(R&E) to ensure DOD will have access
to state-of-the-art parts as the requirements emerge.
Question. In your view, what role should the Department play in
working with the interagency and industry to increase domestic
production of dual use microelectronics?
Answer. While the Department is the largest U.S. government buyer
of microelectronics, it is also only 1% of overall market demand.
Nonetheless, DOD must clearly articulate unique national security
requirements as interagency policies and investment strategies are
developed to ensure the nation's access to these critical components.
In my view, the Department's role should be to collaborate with other
affected agencies and industry and to support interagency activities,
particularly coordinating with the Commerce Department and the White
House that establish and sustain domestic production of
microelectronics.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you plan to take to
support increased domestic production of dual use microelectronics?
Answer. The Defense Department must leverage commercial
microelectronics technology and production wherever possible to be able
to help ensure future capacity for microelectronics that meet DOD
requirements. It is my understanding the Department has been working
with its interagency partners and leveraging its investment authorities
to ensure the nation as the required domestic production needed to meet
its national security needs. Additionally the CHIPS Act is an important
tool for re-energizing domestic commercial microelectronics production.
If confirmed, I look forward to learning more about the Department's
effort to increase access to dual-use microelectronics technology and
bringing to bear my experience as Commerce DAS for Manufacturing to
coordinate with interagency colleagues and emphasize the unique
national security priorities of the defense industrial base. I would
prioritize that DOD leverage resources provided by the CHIPS Act and
the commercial industrial base.
Question. What actions would you take to partner with the USD(R&E)
on this issue?
Answer. Working effectively across the Department enterprise and
with the interagency is key to ensuring that the needs of the defense
industrial base are elevated. If confirmed, I look forward to working
closely with OUSD(R&E) to ensure the Department has the workforce and
capacity needed to meet our current and future microelectronics needs,
to include supporting efforts to develop innovative production efforts.
small business
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to increase the
participation of small businesses in the defense technology and
industrial base?
Answer. Small business is a critical component of the defense
industrial base and a source of innovation. If confirmed, I will work
to increase the participation of small businesses in the defense
technology and industrial base by increasing outreach to small
businesses including new entrants, ensuring the acquisition workforce
is conducting effective market research to maximize the use of small
business set-asides and improving dissemination of information to small
businesses on upcoming procurement opportunities. I will collaborate
with others in the Department to apply those opportunities more
holistically alongside other small business activities.
Question. In your view, what are the biggest barriers that prevent
small businesses from becoming prime contractors to the Department?
Answer. It is my understanding that some of the biggest barriers
include difficulty navigating the defense acquisition process,
navigating the complex structure of the Department, often lengthy
procurement timelines from opportunity announcement to contract award,
and limited access to information on upcoming procurement
opportunities.
If confirmed, I will prioritize understanding the challenges and
creating solutions to the biggest barriers that prevent small
businesses from participating fully in the defense industrial base and
working with the Defense Department.
Question. Do you believe the Department is using all available
authorities to provide small businesses the opportunity to subcontract
with existing prime contractors to ensure programs of record have
access to the most advanced and effective technologies?
Answer. The Department of Defense manages various small business
programs that assist them with opportunities to subcontract with
existing prime contractors. As I understand it, these programs can be
better utilized to ensure programs of record have access to the most
advanced and effective technologies through internally increasing
awareness about the value of these programs, finding ways to
incentivize prime contractors to participate in these programs and
creating more connectivity between programs such as Small Business
Innovation Research Program, Small Business Technology Transfer
Program, Mentor Protege Program and programs of record, Procurement
Technical Assistance Program and the Indian Incentive Program. If
confirmed, I will work across the DOD enterprise, and especially the
Military Service Departments, to better leverage these programs.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
small businesses that provide goods and services to the Department of
Defense are monitored and supported when facing financial pressures
that challenge their viability?
Answer. Small businesses face financial challenges for any number
of reasons, and it should be important to the Department to support
businesses facing those financial pressures. If confirmed, I will work
to assess and evaluate options that will minimize financial impacts to
small businesses, while balancing the readiness and cash flow needs of
the Department.
Question. What do you see as the benefits of diversifying the
defense industrial base through more engagement with small and
disadvantaged businesses?
Answer. It is my understanding the DOD is increasing outreach and
engagement with industry, simplifying information on opportunities to
do business with the Department, and providing support to small
businesses that seek to enter the defense marketplace to promote
expansion and diversification of the vendor base. Small business
participation in defense procurements as prime and subcontractors is
vital to the defense mission, competition, and the health of the
defense industrial base. Small businesses spur innovation, represent
the majority of new entrants into the defense industrial base, and,
through their growth, create a pipeline of the next generation of
suppliers with diverse capabilities to support the DOD mission. They
are essential to the nation's economic prosperity as their ingenuity,
agility, and capabilities are inextricably tied to the nation's
national and economic security.
Question. What recommendations would you have to improve the
Department's use of the Small Business Innovation Research programs to
develop and field new, advanced capabilities?
Answer. The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program is a
key tool in the development and field of new technologies and
capabilities for the Department. I understand that one of the enduring
challenges that the Department faces is transitioning these new
technologies into production and to fielded system. It is my
understanding that the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering oversees the SBIR and Small Business Technology Transition
(STTR) Programs. If confirmed, I will work with OUSD(R&E) to identify
opportunities to more closely tie SBIR and STTR with other small
business programs and ultimately bridge the gap between emerging
technologies and fielded systems.
Question. What recommendations would you have to increase the
number of new entrants into the Small Business Innovation Research
Program?
Answer. The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
oversees the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small
Business Technology Transition (STTR) Programs. If confirmed, I will
work with OUSD(R&E) to ensure that the Department continues its efforts
to maximize the impact of the program while at the same time drawing
increase interest and participation within the program of new entrants.
intellectual property/technical data rights
Question. Do you believe that DOD has sufficiently 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 federal research and development (R&D), retain the
ability to re-compete programs to control costs, and exercise better
control over program sustainment costs?
Answer. Given the fast pace of technological innovation in
industry, I believe IP must be a higher strategic priority, considered
earlier and incorporated into planning, and more focused on longer-term
needs. If confirmed, I will work with the appropriate stakeholders to
review the Department's best practices for IP and make recommendations
as appropriate.
Question. If confirmed, what adjustments would you make to DOD's
practices in negotiating IP and technical data rights for programs to
improve DOD's ability to develop, procure, and sustain new systems and
technologies affordably?
Answer. My understanding is that the ASD(IBP) does not have
oversight over DOD's IP and technical data rights policies,
particularly as they relate to acquisitions and sustainment. If
confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S) and the appropriate stakeholders
to review these policies and make recommendations as appropriate.
Question. Does the Department need a different approach to access
to technical data when dealing with primarily commercial companies?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the appropriate stakeholders
to review the Department's current approach to technical data rights
and make recommendations as appropriate.
defense production act
Question. The Covid-19 pandemic saw the expanded use of Defense
Production Act (DPA) authorities for DOD to support national
emergencies and other contingencies.
What do you see as the appropriate level of use of DPA for DOD
support to domestic, non-conflict related use-cases?
Answer. As I understand it the President has the authority to use
the Defense Production Act to ensure the availability of U.S. industry
for U.S. defense, essential civilian, and homeland security
requirements. Title I and Title II give the President the ability to
act on emerging and long term needs for the nation's defense and
provides a broad array of tools for domestic emergency preparedness,
response, and recovery. As I understand it, the President authorized
the Office of Industrial Base Policy to use DPA Title III awards to
rapidly expand domestic production of N95s and swabs during the COVID-
19 crisis. In addition to decreasing the cost of capital for small
businesses, these economic incentives reduce the risk of uncertainty,
which is especially acute in a temporary domestic emergency. In
addition, DPA Title I ratings can ensure that emergency response
projects, like Title III investments, continue to receive priority over
other non-essential goods and services.
If confirmed, I will be the senior official in the DOD with
oversight over DPA and I would ensure that any use of the DPA
authorities proposed or executed by the DOD align with the mission and
objectives of the Department in accordance with the statute governing
the DPA.
Question. What lessons has DOD learned from Operation Warp Speed on
how to best utilize DPA authorities, and how have these lessons been
institutionalized within DOD?
Answer. It is my understanding that Operation Warp Speed
principally used Title I of the Defense Production Act to obtain
priority performance on their contracts. As I understand it, DOD
already uses DPA Title I ratings every day, which may provide a measure
of security that defense needs would continue to be met in a national
emergency. If confirmed, I will review lessons learned from Operation
Warp Speed and other uses of DPA authorities to ensure that any use of
the DPA authorities proposed or executed by the DOD align with the
mission and objectives of the Department in accordance with the statute
governing the DPA.
Question. How would you use DPA authorities to support
prioritization of federal contracts and expand domestic production of
key supply chain bottlenecks (ex. Microelectronics), if confirmed?
Answer. The DPA is part of the toolkit that the President can use
to address critical economic security needs. It is my understanding
that the DOD already uses DPA Title I ratings on nearly all of its
contracts today. It might be appropriate to further use DPA Title I and
III authorities to help expand domestic production and alleviate key
supply chain bottlenecks. If confirmed, I intend to review these
activities to ensure they continue to operate appropriately today and
under a potential future supply chain disruption scenario.
Question. In your opinion, to what extent and how should DOD best
utilize DPA Title III authorities for loan guarantees, purchase
commitments, and grants and subsidies to expand domestic production in
areas of strategic interest?
Answer. Economic incentives under DPA Title III should be tailored
to the specific problem they are intended to address. In some
circumstances, a grant or contract may be more timely or effective at
stimulating industrial base expansion. In other cases, a loan may be a
more appropriate instrument to sustain an investment over a long period
of time. If confirmed, I intend to take a thorough review of all
available authorities under DPA Title III to ensure that these tools
are appropriately aligned to the needs of the defense industrial base,
as well as the most efficient use of taxpayer funds.
Question. Are there sectors or items you believe should see
expanded use of DPA Title III authorities to support domestic
production?
Answer. If confirmed, I intend to undertake a portfolio review of
our current investments and plans for DPA Title III investment, and
this portfolio review would drive where I might recommend seeking other
authority or resources for DPA Title III investments.
international armaments cooperation
Question. The Department conducts a number of activities that
support International Armaments Cooperation (IAC) that are used to
promote US strategic goals. IAC is defined as (1) cooperative research,
development, test, and evaluation of defense technologies, systems, or
equipment; (2) joint production and follow-on support of defense
articles or equipment and; (3) procurement of foreign technology,
equipment, systems or logistics support. In addition to activities like
information exchange agreements, defense trade, cooperative logistics,
the Department also funds activities that can be used to promote
interoperability and joint development, such as the Defense
Exportability Features (DEF) program, Coalition Warfare Support
Program, and Foreign Comparative Test Program.
Question. In your view, how are international armaments cooperation
activities used to shape and support broader DOD warfighting needs and
priorities? Are there new approaches or activities we should consider
to be more effective and strategic?
Answer. International Armaments Cooperation provides opportunities
to share in the identification, development and advancement of military
capability that support coalition operations, and enables our
international partners to provide for their defense and create
stability within key regions of the world. If confirmed, I will embrace
the International Armaments Cooperation mission of the A&S
organization.
Question. Based on current experiences with Ukraine, what
recommendations would you have to help streamline or improve our
security cooperation, foreign military sales and cooperative logistics
processes in order to be more responsive to rapidly changing security
situations?
Answer. The global response in Ukraine has further illuminated the
interconnected nature of our supply chains and industrial base. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with Department and interagency
stakeholders to identify issues and opportunities to enhance our
collective resiliency to meet the evolving security landscape.
Question. In your view, how are newer initiatives like the Defense
Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) with India, the Quadrilateral
Security Dialogue (or Quad), or the AUKUS initiative being used to
support our defense posture, and are there recommendations for
improvements of those activities that should be considered to make them
more effective?
Answer. As the threat environment continues to evolve, initiatives
such as DTTI, the Quad, and AUKUS provide opportunities to enhance our
international cooperation. If confirmed, I look forward to exploring
the details of the work underway and seeking opportunities to enhance
outcomes and identify new opportunities for partnership.
sexual harassment
Question. In responding to the 2018 DOD Civilian Employee Workplace
and Gender Relations survey, approximately 17.7 percent of female and
5.8 percent of male DOD respondents 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(IBP)?
Answer. I believe that organizations must have a zero-tolerance
policy for sexual harassment and gender discrimination and that leaders
must set the tone from the top to ensure that all employees are treated
with fairness and respect. I understand that the Office of the ASD(IBP)
is aligned with Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks' commitment
to eliminating sexual harassment and gender discrimination. I fully
support their commitment and will do all within my power to advance
these priorities, if confirmed.
Question. In your view, is the civilian workforce harassment
prevention and response training for civilian employees in the Office
of the ASD(IBP) adequate and effective?
Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate the effectiveness of
OASD(IBP) workforce harassment prevention and response training
efforts, work with subject matter experts to review and enhance
programs and policies for preventing and responding to incidents and
complaints, including encouraging and supporting victim care.
Question. In your view, does the Office of the ASD(IBP) program for
response to complaints of harassment or discrimination provide
appropriate care and services to civilian employee victims?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review recent command climate surveys,
work with the OASD(IBP) team and other senior leaders in OUSD(A&S) to
address any concerns raised by civilian employees, ensure appropriate
care is provided to victims, and provide resources for outreach
programs and educational material to get the message to the workforce
that harassment and discrimination will not be tolerated.
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(IBP)?
Answer. I firmly believe that organizations must have a zero-
tolerance policy for sexual harassment and gender discrimination and
that leaders must ensure that all employees are treated with fairness
and respect. If I am confirmed, and were I to receive a complaint from
an employee, I would take immediate action to ensure that the complaint
was appropriately investigated and addressed. Throughout the process, I
would ensure that the employee was treated fairly and with respect and
was regularly updated, to the greatest extent possible, as to the
progress of the matter. I would also ensure that the employee received
all support necessary to remain a valued contributor to the
organization.
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
shipbuilding industrial base
1. Senator Shaheen. Dr. Taylor-Kale, the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering recently expressed
concern about the fact that the Small Business Innovation Research
(SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs have not
been reauthorized, noting that these programs ``provide a unique and
critical funding source to develop some of the most important
technologies for the DOD [Department of Defense]''. Do you share these
views, and will you commit to working with relevant offices within the
Department of Defense and with Congress to support reauthorization of
these programs?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I share this view. The SBIR and STTR programs are
key ways that the Department can attract new small business entrants
into the defense ecosystem. If confirmed, I will commit to working
within the Department and with Congress to pursue reauthorization these
crucial programs.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
shipbuilding industrial base
2. Senator Hirono. Dr. Taylor-Kale, the Navy just released its
Force Design 2045, which projects growing the fleet by 75 ships and
building 150 unmanned ships in the next 2 decades. As you know,
shipbuilding is a long-term investment and in order to meet these
demands we must grow a healthy industrial base with respect to public
and private shipyards, suppliers and manufacturers, and sufficient
skilled technicians. If confirmed, how will you develop a comprehensive
strategy to protect and strengthen this vital portion of our defense
industrial base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Revitalizing the shipbuilding industrial base is
critical for our nation to maintain its competitive advantage. If
confirmed, I will consult with my counterpart in the Department of the
Navy and stakeholders in the shipbuilding community to understand the
shipbuilding industrial base's specific needs and how to leverage the
Department's authorities and programs to protect and strengthen this
vital part of the DIB.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
defense mergers
3. Senator Warren. Dr. Taylor-Kale, press reports indicate the
Federal Trade Commission is reviewing whether Northrop Grumman violated
the behavioral remedy it entered as a condition for its acquisition of
Orbital. The Department of Defense's insights and expertise are
essential in reviewing whether these mergers serve our national
security interests. If confirmed, do you promise your offices will
cooperate with the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission
when they review mergers involving major defense suppliers?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. It is my understanding that the Department
regularly assists the antitrust agencies, the Department of Justice
(DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), with their merger review
investigations. If I am confirmed, I will continue this support
proactively.
4. Senator Warren. Dr. Taylor-Kale, protecting the health and
competitiveness of our defense industrial base will require stopping
bad defense deals in the future and breaking up the runaway
consolidation of the last 30 years. Critics say it's too difficult to
unwind mergers, but I disagree. Defense companies have demonstrated
time and again that they can divest and spin off integrated divisions
to win government approval before a merger. Those divestitures are
analogous to breaking up a big defense firm after a merger. Will your
offices recommend breaking up harmful defense mergers if you believe
such an action would serve our national security interests or bolster
competition in the defense industrial base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. It is my understanding that the Department
considers protecting the health and competitiveness of our defense
industrial base (DIB) a top priority. If confirmed, my office will
closely review mergers that threaten to consolidate and harm the DIB.
If future or existing defense mergers harm the Department, national
security interests, and competition, my office will work in close
cooperation with the antitrust agencies to take appropriate action.
5. Senator Warren. Dr. Taylor-Kale, I'm concerned that the
Department of Defense has acquiesced to too many harmful mergers and
relied too heavily on divestitures and ``behavioral remedies'' instead
of opposing outright mergers that clearly raise competitive concerns.
Will your
offices recommend the Justice Department or the Federal Trade
Commission oppose mergers that you assess to harm our national security
or competition in the defense industrial base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. If confirmed, I will ensure that my office
conducts thorough assessments of proposed mergers and provides this
information to the regulatory agencies
6. Senator Warren. Dr. Taylor-Kale, do you support codifying the
Department of Defense's advisory role in the antitrust review process
in statute?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I agree that the DOD plays an important role in
assessing the impact of proposed mergers on the health of the DIB. I
would, however, reserve any final judgements regarding codifying this
role in statute until after I've reviewed the proposed legislative
text.
military housing
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jacky Rosen
investing in advanced defense technologies
7. Senator Rosen. Dr. Taylor-Kale, for defense-focused advanced
technology small businesses that cannot find private capital and thus
do NOT cross the Valley of Death, how might a public-private
partnership to incentivize domestic investors help support our nation's
innovators?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Public-private partnerships can take many forms,
but in general they work by either increasing the potential return for
an investor or by decreasing the risk. It is the ratio of risk and
return on which private investors make their decisions. I would expect
a public-private partnership in this space to primarily focus on de-
risking the investments through matching capital of some sort invested
alongside private investment, or the government acting more directly to
serve as a backstop for the investment should it yield a loss.
microelectronics shortage
8. Senator Rosen. Dr. Taylor-Kale, defense businesses in Nevada
have discussed with me their challenges with the shortage of
microelectronics. Such shortages not only affect the U.S. Computer
Numerically Controlled (CNC) manufacturing base--which provides machine
tools to all major sectors of the U.S. economy--but also impacts U.S.
national security and economic interests overall. While DOD established
a working group to address systemic barriers limiting the
microelectronics supply chain, several of my Nevada delegation
colleagues and I sent a letter to the Administration earlier this year
urging them to take a more aggressive approach to resolving the CNC
manufacturing base crisis. How is the CNC manufacturing base crisis
affecting the rest of the defense industry, and if confirmed, what
steps would you take to increase and stabilize the supply of
microelectronics available to the CNC manufacturing base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I am acutely aware of the threat to defense
manufacturing posed by the shortage of microelectronics. I believe the
recently passed CHIPS Act should help provide stability to
microelectronics supply by on-shoring manufacturing capability, adding
much needed domestic capacity that will help the industries that use
microelectronics, including the CNC manufacturing base. If confirmed, I
will work with my colleagues in the Department and throughout the
interagency to ensure we are doing everything possible to stabilize the
microelectronics supply and shore up these essential defense industrial
base capabilities.
protecting businesses from cyber attacks
9. Senator Rosen. Dr. Taylor-Kale, the Defense Industrial Base
develops and maintains sensitive technology and intellectual property
vital to protecting our Nation. Knowing this, malicious cyber actors
regularly target these private sector entities looking for ways to
access company networks and obtain valuable information that may
compromise our national security and warfighting capabilities, in
addition to holding that information for ransom. While the fiscal year
2021 NDAA last Congress included my bipartisan bill with Senator Young
to provide cybersecurity services to small manufacturers in the defense
industrial supply chain, I'd like to know if more needs to be done to
combat cyber threats. Do you believe DOD is effectively assessing
cybersecurity risks to defense industrial base vendors, informing them
of those risks, and educating them on what they can do to mitigate
them?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I believe that the Department should do all it can
to support a strong cybersecurity posture for the defense industrial
base (DIB). My understanding is the Office of the Chief Information
Officer (CIO) is the Department's lead on the cybersecurity of the DIB.
I also understand that the Department has programs to assist small
businesses with adapting to cybersecurity threats and complying with
DOD's cybersecurity requirements.
10. Senator Rosen. Dr. Taylor-Kale, how will you address this
challenge if confirmed?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. If confirmed, I will work with the Office of the
Chief Information Officer to advocate for the cybersecurity needs of
the DIB while also ensuring that the Department provides the DIB with
the information and support it needs to mitigate cyber vulnerabilities.
rapid acquisition
11. Senator Rosen. Dr. Taylor-Kale, the Senate NDAA that was
advanced out of this Committee last month includes my provision that
would align current law and DOD policy to cut through red tape and
allow for more rapid acquisition during urgent operational needs. If
confirmed, how would you advise the Pentagon use this expanded
authority in the event that it is included in the final passed bill?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Efficient and effective acquisitions processes are
essential to supporting the warfighter. If confirmed, I will work with
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition to get briefed on
the Department's current use of accelerated acquisitions authorities
and, if necessary, provide recommendations on the use of expanded
accelerated acquisition authorities.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Mark Kelly
semiconductor fabrication in the united states
12. Senator Kelly. Dr. Taylor-Kale, I was pleased to see in your
advance policy question responses that you recognized the CHIPS Act as
an important tool for ``re-energizing domestic commercial
microelectronics production''. I agree that we need to revitalize our
domestic production of microelectronics if we are to compete
effectively with China, which is why I've fought so hard to advance the
CHIPS bill that recently passed the Senate. You also expressed a belief
that this work will take a whole of government approach and I could not
agree more. Earlier this year the Senate passed legislation to allow
expedited permitting for critical national security technologies like
semiconductors and advanced computing through the existing ``FAST-41''
permitting program. This would allow domestic semiconductor fabrication
plants, and manufacturing facilities in other critical industries, to
be able to participate in an expedited Federal environmental review and
authorization process. Do you agree that we should be exploring all
options, including an expedited Federal review process, to quickly
vitalize domestic production of semiconductors for use in our national
security?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I believe that, as part of the implementation of
the CHIPS Act, all options to expedite establishing domestic capability
to manufacture semiconductors for national security should be explored.
If confirmed, I will ensure that we are working with our interagency
partners to determine what options are best suited, and how they can
best be used.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator James M. Inhofe
urgent operational need for counter unmanned aerial systems
capabilities
domestic development of software
13. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Taylor-Kale, how do you assess the current
state of software innovation, and what weaknesses do you see?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Software innovation is a fast moving, constantly
evolving, and porous. Software continues to grow in importance to
manufacturing and industrial production and in weapons systems. Despite
the increasing importance of software in modern warfare, it is my
understanding that the Department struggles to keep pace with the rapid
innovation in software systems. Additionally, cyber threats and
concerns about intellectual property threaten the development and
absorption of innovative software systems in manufacturing in general
and the defense industrial base. I am particularly concerned about the
loss of intellectual property and sensitive information from malicious
cyber activity in small businesses that may not have the capacity or
resources to protect their software infrastructure and products.
14. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Taylor-Kale, if confirmed, what actions
would you take to strengthen the software industrial base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. If confirmed, I would work closely with the
Department's Chief Information Officer, industry partners, the Office
of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, and the
Military Departments to make sure that data and metrics on the software
industrial base were adequately included in the DOD's risk mitigation
strategy. Additionally, I would work closely with the CIO and OUSD(R&E)
on programs that support strengthening cybersecurity in the industrial
base and help bring innovative software systems to defense industrial
partners more quickly and efficiently.
ability to maintain a highly technical and educated workforce
15. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Taylor-Kale, if confirmed, what would you
do to ensure the Department of Defense is able to advocate in the
interagency and in Congress to ensure a robust domestic talent base?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. If confirmed, I will: (1) engage with my
counterparts at the Departments of Labor, Commerce, and Education; (2)
advocate for and encourage use of their authorities for defense
communities; and (3) work with them and with Congress to identify
legislative and policy changes needed to broaden the use of their
existing authorities for training, supporting, and retaining workers in
the defense industrial base.
u.s.-only restrictions imposed by certain other transaction authority
consortiums
16. Senator Inhofe. Dr. Taylor-Kale, in your testimony, you stated
the importance of engaging strategic allies as our partners to mitigate
supply chain risk and to ensure access to capabilities that are
critical to the health and resilience of the defense industrial base.
You also stated the importance of increasing competition and supporting
non-traditional suppliers.
As the Department of Defense continues to leverage the use of Other
Transaction Authorities (OTA) at an increasing rate to address
prototyping, research, and production projects, there is a concern that
certain OTA Consortiums are restricting participation to only those
companies with a U.S. presence without clear security rationale and
despite Department of Defense OTA guidance and direct DOD acquisition
official requests for the inclusion of allied participation in OTA
contract opportunities. This position also runs counter to longstanding
agreements that are in place between the United States and Canada, as
our North American Industrial Base partners, and our National
Technology Industrial Base partners that ensure reciprocal access to
DOD acquisition opportunities in support of our industrial base
resilience.
As part of your efforts to support non-traditional suppliers and to
strengthen the health and resilience of U.S. supply chains and
industrial base capabilities, what is your plan to ensure OTA
Consortiums follow the existing DOD agreements with our allies that
ensure open access to research, development, prototyping, and
technology procurement opportunities?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I understand concerns about the restrictions to
participation and I do believe that the OTA construct is a valuable
mechanism in the acquisition toolbox for the development, advancement
and production scaling of technologies. If confirmed, I will work with
the department leadership to clarify guidance related to OTA consortia
and to encourage the participation of National Technology Industrial
Base partners to the maximum extent allowed.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
defense industrial base
17. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Taylor-Kale, what is your current
understanding of why the Department has not yet updated its risk
mitigation strategy for the Defense Industrial Base (DIB)?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. It is my understanding that the Department has
several reports that address the strategies and risk mitigations plans,
including the annual Industrial Capabilities Report and the Executive
Order one-year report, Securing Defense-Critical Supply Chains. The DOD
has noted that every year it responds to overlapping reporting
requirements on defense industrial base strategy and that an updated
strategy would be duplicative and that the necessary effort to produce
such a strategy would unnecessarily divert limited resources.
18. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Taylor-Kale what are the long-term
impacts of neglecting policy updates to the DIB?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Continual assessment of risks to the defense
industrial base is important for maintaining current understanding of
threats and opportunities to the defense industrial base. I understand
that many of the required reports that the DOD believes collectively
address risk mitigation strategy in the DIB were completed or developed
prior to the COVID-19 and Ukraine crises. The long-term implications of
miscalculating risk could impact program development and planning and
the ability of the DIB to respond to future needs of our warfighters.
19. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Taylor-Kale, if confirmed, how will you
recommend leveraging Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning
(ML), and quantum computing to address cybersecurity threats within the
DIB?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. My understanding is that the Office of the Chief
Information Officer takes the lead on addressing cybersecurity threats
within the Defense Industrial Base (DIB). However, I believe that
leveraging AI, ML, and quantum computing capabilities, and integrating
them into the products and services that the DIB provides, will be
important in improving the DIB's ability to strengthen their cyber
posture. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Chief Information
Officer to study the use of these technologies and, in concert with DIB
stakeholders, examine how to leverage their use to mitigate
cybersecurity threats to the DIB.
public-private investment
20. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Taylor-Kale, what advantages do
increasing opportunities for small businesses and sector-specific
supply chain resiliency plans bring to the DIB?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Small businesses bring innovation and flexibility
to the DIB. As a result, it is important to grow numbers of small
businesses doing business with DOD. Increasing opportunities for small
businesses also add resilience to our supply chain by diversifying the
supplier base.
21. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Taylor-Kale, what deficiencies would a
pilot program that incentives investment and innovation address within
the DIB?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. A pilot program that incentivizes investment and
innovation would have many benefits, but I'll focus on the most direct
benefit. It is my understanding that the Department invests in many
cutting-edge technologies through programs like SBIR but transitioning
those prototypes to DOD capabilities can be difficult. Increasing
investment in this space would allow the Department to transition more
of those cutting-edge technologies into Department capabilities and do
so more quickly.
22. Senator Blackburn. Dr. Taylor-Kale, what sectors are being
compromised by the lack of diversity in small businesses and supply
chain resiliency?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. In multiple reports including the EO 14017 Report
on Securing Defense-Critical Supply Chains, and the 2022 Report on the
State of Competition in the DIB, the Department has highlighted several
defense-critical sectors that could benefit from more secure, resilient
and diverse supply chains. Those sectors are kinetic capabilities,
energy storage and batteries, castings and forgings, and
microelectronics. A bolstered small business industrial base with
increased supply chain diversity would also go a long way to shore up
some of the deficiencies identified in these and other sectors.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
critical minerals
23. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, how important is it that the
United States can mine and refine critical minerals to manufacture
equipment with defense and national security applications?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I believe it is critical for the United States to
have secure sources of supply for critical and strategic minerals. If
confirmed, I would work to understand the best balance between domestic
and allied sources to develop these efforts.
24. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, our critical minerals
problem is two-fold. One, our national stockpile has dwindled from $42
billion in 1952 to just $888 million as of last year; and two, we
possess no domestic refining capacity, whereas China controls 80
percent of global refining capacity. This year I offered an amendment
to the NDAA to increase our national defense stockpile by $750 million.
While this is a good start in addressing the issue, how do better
support private sector initiatives to bolster U.S. refining capacity?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I share your concerns about this issue, and
believe that the Department can be a valuable partner to the private
sector in bolstering domestic and allied refining capacity. If
confirmed, I look forward to diving deeper into this issue and
exploring how the Department can best use its authorities to expand
domestic and allied production of critical minerals.
25. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, in Alaska, we have a
tremendous amount of critical mineral reserves, especially of graphite.
How do we more efficiently get from locating mineral deposits to mining
and processing?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. As the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Commerce for Manufacturing at the International Trade Administration, I
am acutely aware of the importance of efficient supply chain links
between manufacturing and processing locations. While my understanding
of the complexities of transporting mineral deposits from mines to
processing plants is incomplete, if confirmed I look forward to diving
into this issue and exploring how the Department can leverage its
authorities to tackle this pernicious problem.
26. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, the inability of our defense
industrial base to continually modernize and mass produce expendable,
lower-cost items such as the Stinger, Javelin, and Mark 48 torpedoes,
calls into question whether we can sustain both the supplying of our
partners and allies with these weapons, and our own inventory to
prevail in conflict. It is clear that the episodic acquisition of
defense items like these has resulted in an alarming degradation of
stockpile readiness. Should we create a more consistent demand signal
for these smaller, more expendable items?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I understand the Department is still reviewing
lessons learned from the Ukraine conflict, particularly as it pertains
to appropriate resource levels to ensure munitions stockpiles are
available. If confirmed, I will work with USD(A&S), the Department,
Interagency and industry partners to ensure there's a sufficient demand
signal to maintain critical munitions.
27. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, could you explain how a more
consistent demand signal for items like Javelins, Stingers, and Mark 48
torpedoes would better enable sustained competition, scale production,
and incentivize modernization?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. I agree with Dr. LaPlante's statements regarding
hot production lines for critical munitions and supplies. If confirmed,
I commit to work with the USD(A&S) and our industry partners to
understand how we can create a consistent demand signal for these items
to enable sustained competition, scale production, and incentivize
modernization.
28. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, we have sent over 6,500
Javelins to Ukraine--a third of our inventory. A Center for Strategic
and International Studies (CSIS) report estimates that it will take us
up to 4 years to replace those. We have sent 2,000 Stingers to
Ukraine--a quarter of our inventory. The same CSIS report estimates it
will take 5 years to replace those, and because we haven't purchased
any Stingers since 2003, the labor force to produce them no longer
exists. Just 2 years ago, the Navy re-started procurement of the Mark
48 torpedo, which had ceased in 1990, to shore up its inventory. How do
we develop a more iterative development approach for these types of
weapon systems?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. Maintaining a robust production capability, as
well as investment in STEM and industrial skills for the defense
industrial workforce to support this manufacturing, should be one of
the highest priorities of the ASD (IBP). If confirmed, I will work with
USD(A&S) and the Service Acquisition Chiefs to ensure that the
appropriate requirements exist to maintain a robust industrial base to
support weapons procurement.
protest period
29. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, in your estimation, what is
the ideal time required to settle contract protests to protect the
interest of both industry and Government?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. It's my understanding that standard timelines
exist for government protests in order to allow time for review and
adjudication. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing these policies and
will advocate for any changes that may be required.
30. Senator Sullivan. Dr. Taylor-Kale, how should we reform the
protest period to prevent unnecessary delays in the acquisition
process?
Dr. Taylor-Kale. It is my understanding the Department has
previously submitted reports to Congress on current protest timeframes.
If confirmed, I will review these recommendations and examine any
proposed policy changes that may improve the process.
______
[The nomination reference of Dr. Laura D. Taylor-Kale
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of Dr. Laura D. Taylor-Kale, 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. Laura D.
Taylor-Kale in connection with her nomination follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of Dr. Laura D. Taylor-Kale was reported to
the Senate by Chairman Reed on September 28, 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. Brendan M. Owens by
Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
senate armed services committee
duties and qualifications
Question. What is your understanding of the duties and
responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy,
Installations, and Environment (ASD(EI&E))?
Answer. The Secretary of Defense has provided three overarching
priorities to guide DOD: Defend the Nation; Take care of our people;
Succeed through teamwork. The ASD(EI&E) is responsible for providing
safe and resilient installations for the warfighter and their families
and has critical responsibilities in each of the Secretary's specific
areas of focus.
Defend the Nation: The ASD(EI&E) has critical responsibilities to
ensure force readiness. Force readiness requires installations to
provide the infrastructure and capabilities to train and deploy forces
whenever and however the mission dictates:
i. Buildings must be designed, constructed and maintained to serve
the needs of the warfighter and the associated support personnel they
rely on.
ii. Energy resources for installations and weapons platforms must
be resilient, reliable and secure.
iii. Training areas must be secure and maintained to allow our
forces to train like they fight.
Take care of our people: The health and wellbeing of our
servicemembers, civilians, military families and defense communities is
closely tied to the buildings and environments they inhabit. The
ASD(EI&E) has a critical role in ensuring that buildings and
environments in and around military installations safeguard the health
and wellbeing of the Total Force.
Succeed through teamwork: Each military service has an Assistant
Secretary for Energy, Installations, and Environment. The ASD(EI&E)
does not have direct oversight for the Service EI&E Assistant
Secretaries but is in an ideal position to convene, coordinate and
advise the Service EI&E Secretaries to enhance and scale the impact
across their broad portfolio of energy, installation, and environmental
initiatives. Additionally, the ASD(EI&E) must support the rest of the
Office of the Secretary of Defense in its policy and oversight of EI&E
related issues for DOD.
The ASD(EI&E) is responsible for ensuring that DOD is on the
leading edge of environmental and energy research and development,
implementation of new technologies and strategies to optimize
efficiency, resilience and lethality of our warfighters, and protecting
the health and wellbeing of our servicemembers and their families.
Question. What background and experience do you possess that
qualify you to perform the duties and functions of the ASD(EI&E)?
Answer. Over my 25+ year career, I have been a catalyst for
transformation in the way the built environment is designed, built and
operated to optimize energy efficiency, integrate buildings into built
and natural infrastructure, optimize water use, utilize renewable and
non-renewable materials responsibly, and improve social equity and
human health outcomes. I have a strong track record of partnering with
executive leadership from both domestic and international government,
utility sector, building sector and environmental and civil society
NGOs to build effective and lasting coalitions.
I began my professional career working as a civilian contractor
serving as the energy manager in the Department of Public Works/
Directorate of Installation Support at U.S. Army Garrison Fort Belvoir.
As energy manager, I was responsible for energy conservation
initiatives and energy use reporting for Ft. Belvoir. Additionally, I
served as Fort Belvoir's point of contact to coordinate the development
of an Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) that spanned Forts
Belvoir, Meade, McNair, AP Hill and, Myer (now Joint Base Myer-
Henderson Hall). I also served on the source selection board for the
$28.5 million ESPC that was signed and continued to serve at Ft.
Belvoir during the implementation and measurement and verification
period for the ESPC. The technical and contracting experience gained
during my time at Ft. Belvoir is a foundation for returning to
government service.
In 2002, I joined the staff at U.S. Green Building Council to
support the development and implementation of the industry defining
LEED green building rating system. Over the almost 20 years I worked
with USGBC, LEED became the global benchmark for high performance,
healthy, resilient and efficient buildings. LEED has been used to
improve energy efficiency, resilience and indoor air quality by
hundreds of thousands of building projects in over 130 countries. As an
executive leader at USGBC I was responsible for technical development
of the LEED rating system.
For the past two years I have been running a consultancy focused on
the intersection of decarbonization, health and equity initiatives in
the built environment. In this work, I have enhanced my track record of
building outcome focused coalitions and galvanizing industry-wide
collaboration.
Question. In particular, what management and leadership experience
do you possess that would apply to your service as ASD(EI&E), if
confirmed?
Answer. I have broad experience across supply and demand sectors of
the energy industry with a focus on aligning and integrating technology
and policy to optimize outcomes. This requires me to maintain a strong
and active domestic and international professional network including
relationships with executives in local state and Federal Government,
industry associations, professional societies, National Laboratories,
utilities, product manufacturers, commercial building owners, builders
and contractors, architecture and engineering firms and the industrial
sector.
I have leveraged these relationships to ensure that staff I was
responsible for leading had access to the most current technology and
policy information so that they were as informed as possible to execute
the work they were assigned.
I have led professional staff and volunteers in a variety of
capacities and have been the principal executive in my consulting firm
since its founding.
Question. Do you believe that there are any actions you need to
take to enhance your ability to serve as the ASD(EI&E)?
Answer. In my experience, the most successful leaders are those
that actively seek to grow and learn. While I feel well-grounded in
most aspects of the technical and policy portfolio for EI&E, I will
continue to grow and enhance my knowledge base on both fronts as there
are DOD specific considerations and realities that necessitate an
openness to looking at issues in a new way. If confirmed, I commit to
bringing an open mind and willingness to learn and grow to the
ASD(EI&E) position.
I recognize that I have no practical experience working in the
Pentagon. While I have tried to familiarize myself with its business,
cultural, and policy cadence, I do not believe it is possible to be
fully prepared to be a productive part of an organization with the
scope and scale of DOD without being fully immersed in it. If
confirmed, I would lean heavily on the career Senior Executive Staff
that reports up through OASD(EI&E) as well as leveraging key
relationships with individuals who have served in senior leadership
positions at the Pentagon to get up to speed as quickly as possible.
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. I understand how crucial the working relationship between
Congress and DOD is to ensure that DOD has the resources and
authorities it needs to defend the nation. I am fully committed to
creating a candid, transparent and, timely relationship with Congress
and look forward, if confirmed, to working with legislators to advance
the interests of the American people.
As a specific example, the close relationship between Defense
Communities and their congressional representation is something that I
recognize as a critically important information conduit. The ASD(EI&E)
has a strong role in cultivating and maintaining the relationship
between DOD and Defense Communities and this is one area, of many,
where I see the whole of DOD and Congressional engagement being more
than the sum of its parts.
major challenges
Question. In your view, what are the major challenges that confront
the ASD(EI&E)?
Answer. I see five critical challenges within the ASD(EI&E)
portfolio:
i. Military family housing--healthy, affordable, and resilient
housing for servicemembers and their families is a critical readiness
issue. I believe it's also something we owe to the extraordinary people
in acknowledgement of the sacrifices they undertake on our behalf.
While I am encouraged by the implementation of recent oversight reforms
and investigative efforts designed to improve the experiences our
servicemembers and their families have in privatized military housing,
the circumstances that necessitated the institution of these reforms
and investigations remain deeply concerning. If confirmed, I commit to
be a strong partner for the Services, installation commanders, and
Congress to ensure robust and effective oversight of privatized housing
is in place to safeguard the health and wellbeing of our servicemembers
and their families.
ii. Environmental Clean-up/Remediation--Safeguarding the health of
our servicemembers, their families, veterans, civilian employees, and
defense communities is a responsibility everyone in a position of
leadership within DOD must view as absolute. DOD has a responsibility
to be transparent, follow the law, and address environmental
contamination as effectively as possible. If confirmed I will work to
ensure that DOD does all of these things. The potential health and
environmental challenges the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Facility and DOD's use
of materials like PFAS will require a dedicated, DOD-wide partnership
to resolve. If confirmed I will work with senior DOD leaders and
Congress to be a strong advocate for robust environmental clean-up and
leverage resources to accelerate the transition toward more suitable
materials.
iii. Energy Resilience and Security--Energy resources for
installations and weapons platforms must be resilient, reliable, and
secure.
iv. Climate Change--As I read through the DOD's Climate
Adaptation plan and the follow on plans released by the Army and the
Navy, the common thread that seems to connect them all is the
acknowledgement of climate change as a humanitarian, ecological, and
geopolitically destabilizing threat to national security with both
strategic and tactical implications and that the solutions necessary to
adapt to a changing climate and mitigate the growing threat are
completely mission aligned. I strongly agree with this assessment.
v. Flooding, extreme heat, wildfires and hurricanes, are already
impacting force readiness and lethality by limiting DOD's ability to
train like it fights. Sea level rise, increasingly extreme drought and
weather patterns create unprecedented changes to operational
environments and drive security risks that require a thorough and
integrated strategic response. These changing conditions require
deliberate action to not only ensure our forces are equipped for the
national security challenges of today, but also foresight to be
prepared for the challenges of the future. DOD installations and combat
platforms must be resilient and reliable in the contested operating
environments of today and tomorrow if they are to be effective. If
confirmed, I will work with senior DOD leaders to implement all
necessary climate adaptation and mitigation strategies to secure the
nation and ensure that our warfighters are always prepared to deploy,
fight, and win.
vi. Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, Modernization and
Demolition (FSRM) backlog--I have concerns about the risks that are
assumed in FSRM backlog. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that DOD
is appropriately prioritizing life, health, and safety in its FSRM
budgeting and I'll gladly go to battle for more O&M funding.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take, in what order
of priority, and on what timeline--to address each of these challenges?
Answer. While the ASD(EI&E) portfolio is broad, the priority is to
support the overall DOD to Defend the Nation; Take care of our people;
Succeed through teamwork. If confirmed, I will work with senior DOD
leaders, Congress, Federal Government partners, and external
stakeholders to ensure that these priorities are met.
2022 national defense strategy (nds)
Question. In March, the Department of Defense transmitted to
Congress the classified 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) and
indicated that an unclassified NDS would be forthcoming. The 2022 NDS
designates China as the pacing challenge for the United States, but it
also states that Russia remains an acute threat to U.S. national
interests. In addition, the Department must also manage the persistent
threats posed by rogue regimes and violent extremist organizations.
In your view, how does the Office of the ASD(EI&E) directly support
the NDS?
Answer. The responsibilities of OASD(EI&E) are 100 percent aligned
with and directly support the NDS. The OASD(EI&E) mission is to provide
safe and resilient installations for the warfighter and their families.
This requires installations to be fully capable of supporting the
training and deployment needs of a mission ready force and this means
that buildings must be maintained effectively and the energy resources
are reliable and resilient. If confirmed, I will work with the Military
Department EI&E Assistant Secretaries and other DOD leaders to ensure
our installations are resourced and ready to deploy warfighters to face
our defined pacing challenges.
Question. In your view, what Department of Defense infrastructure
and military construction investments would be necessary for the Joint
Force to prevail in great power competition?
Answer. While I am familiar with the non-classified NDS fact sheet,
I have not been briefed on a full version of the Strategy. If
confirmed, I would work with senior DOD leaders to ensure that the
Joint Force has appropriate posture to respond to the multi-domain
threat posed by the PRC as our most consequential strategic competitor
and to address the acute Russian challenge in Europe.
Military Housing Privatization Initiative
Question. In the fiscal year 1996 National Defense Authorization
Act (NDAA), Congress established the Military Housing Privatization
Initiative (MHPI), providing the Department of Defense (DOD) with the
authority to obtain private-sector financing and management to repair,
renovate, construct, and operate military housing. DOD has since
privatized 99 percent of its domestic housing. In 2019, the Senate
Armed Services Committee held three hearings to address concerns voiced
by military families living in privatized housing that the program has
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.
What are your impressions of the overall quality and sufficiency of
DOD family housing, both in the United States and overseas?
Answer. Healthy, affordable, and resilient housing for
servicemembers and their families is a critical readiness issue. I
understand that the overall goal of DOD's housing program is to ensure
that servicemembers have access to safe, quality, family housing within
a reasonable commute of their duty station, whether in the U.S. or
overseas. I am concerned that DOD may lack sufficient on-base family
housing, and that as result, some servicemembers are being forced to
live for extended periods in temporary lodging while they seek housing
that meets their family's needs. If confirmed, I will ensure that the
Military Departments conduct assessments of the off-post housing
markets to determine the sufficiency of housing, and I will hold the
Military Departments accountable for providing adequate on base housing
that meets DOD's quality standards.
Question. What are your views of the current goals and structure of
the DOD's military housing privatization program?
Answer. I understand that, if confirmed as the ASD(EI&E), I will be
the Department's Chief Housing Officer. I understand the Department has
made significant progress in implementing MHPI reform actions,
including the Tenant Bill of Rights. While I am encouraged by the
implementation of recent oversight reforms and investigative efforts
designed to improve the experiences our servicemembers and their
families have in privatized military housing, the circumstances that
necessitated the institution of these reforms and investigations remain
deeply concerning. If confirmed, I will review the Department's MHPI
program goals and oversight structure and implement any necessary
refinements to ensure that the Department provides oversight as
necessary to ensure quality housing for military families and to hold
MHPI companies accountable for complying with project legal agreements.
Question. What efforts has DOD taken to address servicemember and
family member concerns regarding the untenable living conditions
prevalent in certain privatized housing locales?
Answer. In addition to issuing the MHPI Tenant Bill of Rights and
working with the MHPI companies to obtain their voluntary agreement to
implement these rights at nearly all installations with privatized
housing, the Department has implemented numerous other reforms, to
include establishing a Chief Housing Officer and Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Housing, increasing senior leader oversight, hiring more
than additional oversight personnel, establishing resident advocates,
implementing new housing standards and inspection requirements, and
working with the MHPI companies to accelerate project investment to
improve the condition of existing housing units or to construct new
units where feasible. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Department
continues to implement the remaining MHPI reforms set out in the fiscal
year 2020 NDAA, to improve the safety, quality, and habitability of
privatized housing, and to further enhance the Department's oversight
of the MHPI program and projects.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to ensure accountability
among DOD leaders for oversight of the privatized housing program?
Answer. I recognize the importance of holding DOD leadership
accountable for providing appropriate oversight of the privatized
housing program. If confirmed, I commit that as the Chief Housing
Officer, I will ensure that leaders at all levels provide necessary
oversight to ensure that the MHPI projects deliver safe, quality
housing for servicemembers and their families and that they hold the
MHPI companies accountable for project performance in accordance with
project legal agreements. In addition, I will fully support inclusion
of MHPI program oversight as a performance measure for DOD civilian and
military leaders with DOD housing oversight responsibilities.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to improve applicable
business operations constructs and vest accountability in MHPI
contractors for strict compliance with the terms of their public-
private partnership agreements with the Department of Defense?
Answer. The success of the Military Housing Privatization
Initiative relies, in part, on the MHPI companies and projects abiding
by the terms of the project legal agreements that comprise the project
deal structures. If confirmed, I will request that Military Departments
conduct a comprehensive review of the their MHPI project legal
agreements to ensure that they are enforcing existing standards of
performance, and to brief me on the results, to include identifying any
areas where they should seek renegotiation of the terms of those
agreements to incorporate clear and enforceable performance standards,
and penalty provisions for failure to meet performance standards.
Question. What are your views of the efficacy of the MHPI reforms
enacted in the fiscal year 2020 NDAA, as amended by the fiscal year
2021 NDAA?
Answer. I think Congress demonstrated substantial and necessary
leadership in directing the Department of Defense to implement the many
MHPI reforms set out in the fiscal year 2020 NDAA, and subsequent
amendments. If confirmed, the safety and well-being of military
families will be one of my top priorities. The Department's
implementation of these reforms, especially implementation of the MHPI
Tenant Bill of Rights, has been transformative in ensuring DOD takes
necessary actions to improve the MHPI program and rebuild trust with
servicemembers and their families. If confirmed, I will embrace my
responsibilities as the DOD Chief Housing Officer to oversee the
Department's implementation of the MHPI reforms set out in the fiscal
year 2020 NDAA, as amended, and to hold DOD leadership and the private
sector MHPI companies accountable for their project oversight and
performance.
Question. What do you believe to be the root causes of the MHPI
crisis?
Answer. I understand that there was a lapse in DOD leadership
involvement and inadequate staff support to perform required privatized
housing oversight as it was originally envisioned at the outset of the
MHPI program, to include exercising authorities in the project legal
agreements to hold MHPI companies accountable for project performance.
If confirmed, I will put military families first and I am committed to
providing rigorous oversight in my role as the official designated as
the Department's Chief Housing Officer. If confirmed, I will verify
that the Military Departments are taking appropriate action to ensure
that MHPI companies provide safe, high quality housing that is
responsive to concerns raised by servicemembers and their families and
implement any changes necessary to correct identified deficiencies.
Question. Do you believe the DOD has rectified these problems,
notwithstanding Congress's continued receipt of complaints from
military families?
Answer. I understand the Department of Defense has made significant
progress regarding the oversight issues that contributed to the MHPI
housing crisis, to include implementing the MHPI Tenant Bill of Rights
at nearly all military installations with privatized housing. I believe
DOD leadership should be fully committed to a culture of continuous
improvement in service to our military families. As the Department has
acknowledged, additional improvement is needed to include complete
implementation and maintenance of reforms required by the fiscal year
2020 NDAA, as amended. If confirmed, I will work with the Military
Departments in my capacity as the Chief Housing Officer to ensure that
they implement required reforms that will strengthen their oversight
and hold MHPI housing companies accountable for addressing complaints
from military families.
Question. If not, what would you do differently to address this
issue, if confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I will put military families first and I will
work in my capacity as the Chief Housing Officer to ensure that the
Department of Defense continues to implement reforms that will
strengthen its oversight and hold MHPI housing companies accountable
for addressing complaints from military families.
Question. What role would you establish for yourself, if confirmed,
in ensuring that the Department of Defense's use of direct hire
authority to fill vacancies in military installation housing offices
results in the timely hire of highly qualified individuals to perform
these critical duties?
Answer. I understand that the Military Departments have hired more
than 600 additional housing staff to provide necessary MHPI project
oversight. If confirmed, I will ask the Military Departments to brief
me on their housing manpower requirements and take action as necessary
to ensure that they utilize all available and appropriate hiring
authorities to augment staffing at their installation housing offices.
Question. If confirmed, how would you view and order your
relationship with the private contractors who own and manage the
privatized housing agreements with the DOD?
Answer. The Chief Housing Officer is responsible for oversight of
all aspects of the MHPI program. If confirmed, as part of my duties as
the Chief Housing Officer, I will ensure that the Military Departments
exercise the authorities within the project legal agreements to hold
MHPI companies accountable for providing safe, quality housing for
servicemembers and their families.
Question. What do you view as your obligations to these partners?
Answer. The Chief Housing Officer has an obligation to ensure that
the Military Departments adhere to the terms of the MHPI project legal
agreements and provide appropriate oversight staff and support for full
implementation of the Tenant Bill of Rights. If confirmed, as part of
my duties as the Chief Housing Officer, I will maintain positive lines
of communication with each of the private sector MHPI companies and
support and encourage their efforts to improve their respective
privatized housing portfolios, while also working with the Military
Departments to hold MHPI companies accountable for providing a positive
living experience for servicemembers and their families.
Question. What do you view as your obligations to the
servicemembers and family members who reside in military housing?
Answer. Servicemembers and their families expect and deserve a safe
and secure place to live in return for the sacrifices that make for our
nation. If confirmed, I unequivocally commit to putting military
families first. If confirmed, my priority as the Department's Chief
Housing Officer will be to ensure that the Department of Defense meets
our moral obligation to provide members of the armed forces and their
families with access to safe, quality, affordable housing. This
includes holding MHPI companies accountable for delivery of quality
housing for servicemembers and their families over the life of the
projects.
Question. What are your views on establishing command
accountability by having MHPI issues become a part of the performance
evaluations of base commanders and their senior enlisted counterparts?
Do you believe that both civilian and uniformed individuals should be
held accountable for failures?
Answer. I believe that accountability is a core value for any
organization and that all personnel, whether civilian or uniformed
service, should be held accountable for their actions and performance.
If confirmed, I will fully support inclusion of MHPI oversight
responsibilities as a performance metric considered as part of
performance evaluations for base commanders and their senior enlisted
counterparts.
Question. Given the challenges associated with the MHPI, do you
support the further privatization of the Military Service lodging
facilities?
Answer. I am aware that the Army has privatized nearly all of its
lodging facilities in the U.S. If confirmed, I will request a full
briefing on the Army's lodging privatization program and DOD's non-
appropriated lodging program to inform my understanding of each
program's effectiveness and my views on further privatization of the
Military Service lodging facilities.
base realignment and closure
Question. In past years, DOD has requested Congressional
authorization to conduct another Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
round.
Do you believe another BRAC round is necessary? If so, why?
Answer. I support all activities that will make DOD more efficient
in its mission--whether that's from a fiscal or readiness and lethality
perspective. It is my understanding that the Department is not
currently focused on another BRAC round. If confirmed, I will review
policies related to BRAC and work with the Military Departments and
Congress to determine whether or not a request for BRAC authority would
be appropriate.
Question. Were Congress to authorize another BRAC round, what is
your understanding of the responsibilities that would be assigned to
the ASD(EI&E) for formulating BRAC recommendations? If confirmed, how
would you plan to execute these responsibilities?
Answer. If Congress authorizes another BRAC round, it is my
understanding that the Secretary of Defense will determine the roles
and responsibilities for formulating future BRAC recommendations. It is
my understanding that the ASD(EI&E) was responsible for managing the
previous BRAC processes while working closely with the Services and
Defense Agencies, and that these organizations developed the various
recommendations.
Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to improve
the accuracy of DOD excess capacity estimates?
Answer. If confirmed and if Congress or senior DOD leadership
determines an excess capacity analysis is necessary, I will examine
previous DOD excess capacity estimates, related Government
Accountability Organization (GAO) reports and any lessons learned to
determine the best approach to assessing excess capacity.
Question. How would you undertake execution of these
responsibilities?
Answer. If I am confirmed, Congress authorizes a BRAC round, and I
am assigned responsibility for overseeing a BRAC round, I will ensure
that the BRAC process is a fair and transparent process, incorporates
lessons learned from previous five rounds, and addresses
recommendations from GAO reports.
Question. If confirmed, and if Congress were to authorize another
BRAC round, how would you go about setting priorities for
infrastructure reduction and consolidation within the DOD?
Answer. If confirmed, and Congress were to authorize another BRAC
round, my focus will be on increasing the military value of our
installations, as informed by the National Defense Strategy. If
confirmed and a BRAC round was authorized, I would work to align
infrastructure to force structure to enable a more resource efficient,
mission ready, resilient and lethal force.
Question. With a view to helping DOD measure its reduction of
excess infrastructure, would there be value--in any future BRAC round--
in setting targets for eliminating excess capacity, in your view?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review whether there is value is
setting targets if another BRAC round is authorized and whether it is
best to have a process that is not constrained by a pre-determined
target which could limit the analysis and limit flexibility of
Department's senior leadership.
It has been noted repeatedly that the 2005 BRAC round resulted in
significant unanticipated implementation costs and saved far less money
than originally estimated.
Question. Do you believe such issues could be anticipated and
addressed suitably in a future BRAC round, and if so, how?
Answer. I understand that there were a number of factors involved
in the increased costs. If confirmed, I will review lessons learned
from the BRAC 2005 round, GAO reports and best practices for cost
estimating.
Question. What is your view of the efficacy of DOD's process of
``bundling'' multiple stand-alone realignments or closures into a
single BRAC recommendation? How does ``bundling'' affect visibility
into the estimated costs and savings generated by an individual closure
and realignment?
Answer. I do not have any insight into this issue and if confirmed
and if Congress authorizes a BRAC round, I will determine how this
issue affected cost and savings estimates.
Question. What steps has the DOD taken to share with the Military
Departments and Services its ``lessons learned'' from the environment
remediation in support of the redevelopment of military bases closed
under BRAC--particularly with respect to the remediation of emerging
contaminants?
Answer. Applying lessons learned is an essential part of process
improvement for any organization. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring
DOD evaluates and applies lessons learned to all sites within DOD's
cleanup program, including those closed under BRAC.
Question. If confirmed, and if Congress were to authorize another
BRAC round, how would you apply these ``lessons learned'' proactively
to new realignments and closures?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the results of previous BRAC
rounds and work in close coordination with the Services to apply
lessons learned to all sites within DOD's cleanup program, to include
those created by any new realignments and closures.
installation modernization and resilience
Question. Decades of underinvestment in DOD installations has led
to substantial backlogs in facilities maintenance, while making it more
difficult for DOD to leverage new technologies that could enhance
installation efficiency and productivity. Yet, the quality of
installation resilience directly impacts the entire spectrum of
military operations--from force development through power projection,
interoperability with partner nations, and force sustainment--while
providing an appropriate quality of life for servicemembers and their
families.
In your view, does the DOD receive adequate funding for its
installations? Please explain your answer.
Answer. I do not believe there is adequate funding within DOD's top
line to address all installation requirements. In developing its annual
budget, I understand DOD takes risk across a myriad of appropriations
to fund its most critical priorities with facility investment accounts
often being a bill payer. These risks must be assessed in coordination
with readiness and sustainment priorities to ensure the liabilities
they introduce are well understood and do not compromise mission
capability.
Question. In your view, how is the readiness of DOD installations
linked to the readiness and lethality of the Armed Forces?
Answer. I understand the President and the Secretary of Defense
have directed the Department to ensure installations and forces are
resilient in the face of a wide range of challenges to include climate
change, disruptions to energy or water supplies, and direct physical or
cyber-attacks. Based on these priorities, it seems that there is a
critical link between installation readiness and force lethality. If
confirmed, I would seek to better understand the role that
installations play in promoting readiness of our forces.
Question. If confirmed, do you have specific plans to leverage
infrastructure and modernization to improve the quality of life for DOD
servicemembers and their families?
Answer. The quality of life of our DOD members and their families
is critical to maintaining the readiness of our Armed Forces.
Infrastructure that is secure, reliable and resilient can directly
enhance quality of life for servicemembers and their families. If
confirmed, I would review the various quality of programs within the
Energy, Installations and Environment portfolio and develop or enhance
programs to ensure that quality of life remains a priority.
The Department has the goal of a 90 percent funding requirement for
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM). This
goal does not buy down risk on the billions of dollars of backlogged
projects, however.
Question. Do you believe the 90 percent FSRM requirement goal
should be reassessed and adjusted? Please explain your answer.
Answer. I believe that all DOD goals should be reviewed
periodically to ensure they are reasonable, effective, and current. If
confirmed, I will review DOD's goal to fund facility sustainment at 90
percent of the Facility Sustainment Model goal, and, if needed,
recommend necessary changes.
Question. Military Construction (MILCON) accounts have failed to
see the same amount of growth over the last several years as have other
accounts such as procurement and research and development.
If confirmed, what arguments would you advance to advocate for
additional MILCON dollars during budget builds?
Answer. I understand that DOD's military construction (MilCon)
budgets are occasionally used as bill payers for other DOD initiatives.
If confirmed, I will work with the CAPE and Comptroller organizations
to advocate for higher MilCon fiscal goals to address key capabilities
DOD needs to support mission readiness and Administration priorities.
There is a critical and scientifically verified link between the
quality of the built environment and work force performance and health.
I believe these facts could be used to raise awareness about the
importance of MILCON and sustainment budgets.
Question. The DOD defines ``installation resilience'' as the
capability of a military installation to avoid, prepare for, minimize
the effect of, adapt to, and recover from extreme weather events, or
from anticipated or unanticipated changes in environmental conditions.
The range of threats against which a military installation must
maintain resiliency is ever-growing, including: cyber threats, physical
attacks, political influence, and extreme weather events.
Given the 2022 NDS, what priority in the DOD program would you
accord the survivability of DOD expeditionary advanced bases, forward
operating bases, and other locations?
Answer. My understanding of the unclassified 2022 NDS priorities is
that resilient installations and contingency locations are essential to
defending the Homeland, deterring strategic attacks, and deterring
aggression in the Indo-Pacific and European theaters. The increasing
all-hazard risks to the United States show the importance of resilient
installations and expeditionary bases able to withstand, fight through,
and recover quickly from disruption. If confirmed, I will work with
other components of OSD, the Joint Staff, the Services, and the
Combatant Commanders to balance investments in resilient bases with
other investments in Joint capabilities.
Question. What is your understanding of the Department's efforts to
assess and prioritize facility requirements for prepositioned forward
fuel, stocks, and munitions, as well as to generate options for non-
commercially dependent distributed logistics and maintenance--all to
ensure logistics sustainment in the face of persistent multi-domain
attack?
Answer. I understand that the Department must be prepared to
succeed in a contested logistics environment to ensure the deployment,
employment, and sustainment of Joint forces around the globe. I am
familiar with the role of the Defense Logistics Agency in prioritizing
requirements for prepositioned forward fuel and will work in close
partnership with the ASD for Sustainment and the Joint Staff to ensure
the full complement of fuel and other logistical stocks are available
to the warfighter. It is my understanding that recent congressional.
language directed USTRANSCOM to become the element responsible for
global bulk fuel management and delivery on a global basis. I look
forward to working with USTRANSCOM and other relevant DOD stakeholders
to implement the way forward.
Question. How is DOD addressing significant challenges with
resilient storage for new generations of high-yield munitions in
theater?
Answer. It will be extremely important for DOD to ensure its
munitions storage infrastructure is capable of safely storing the newer
munitions coming into DOD's inventory. If confirmed, I will collaborate
with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment to identify
challenges with current munitions storage infrastructure and develop,
in coordination with the Military Departments, plans to modernize these
facilities consistent with safe storage of new-generation munitions.
Question. In your view, how can the capability and capacity of
ordnance magazines at ordnance installations be enhanced--with a view
to ensuring the most efficient resupply of war fighters and minimizing
strategic lift requirements?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Sustainment, the DOD Explosive Safety Board, and the
Military Departments to develop plans articulating the infrastructure
requirements for safely and effectively meeting DOD's munitions storage
and resupply requirements.
extreme weather events
Question. President Biden has declared that climate change is an
essential element of national security and foreign policy. Secretary
Austin has stated that DOD will include the security implications of
climate change in risk analyses, strategy development, and planning
guidance. If confirmed, you would sit on the Secretary's Climate
Working Group and your portfolio would oversee energy resilience and
environmental threats to military installations. Thus, you would have a
major role in implementing this guidance.
What is your understanding of the ways in which climate change
poses a risk to national security and the Department's responsibility
to prepare for its impacts?
Answer. It is my understanding the Department has recognized that
climate change is a critical national security issue and threat
multiplier. Climate change is already having impacts and will continue
to amplify operational demands, impact the health and safety of our
servicemembers and their families, and adversely impact energy
resilience and installation infrastructure performance and reliability.
These effects and costs are likely to increase as climate change
accelerates. I agree with the Secretary of Defense who has stated that
not adapting to climate change will be even more consequential, with
failure measured in terms of lost military capability, weakened
alliances, enfeebled international stature, degraded infrastructure,
and missed opportunities for technical innovation and economic growth.
Question. How do you believe the Department should incorporate
climate change into its risk analyses, strategy development, and
planning guidance?
Answer. I believe that the Department must take bold steps to
accelerate climate change adaptation and mitigation to reduce the
adverse impacts of climate change. These efforts will require assessing
and adjusting strategic objectives and missions so the Department can
deter aggression and defend the nation under all conditions. If
confirmed, I will work to advance new and update existing policies and
guidance; improve construction codes and standards to reduce and
mitigate climate impacts; continue to provide tools to assess and
evaluate climate exposure at installations; put forward a requirement
for comprehensive installation master planning; increase efforts to
improve energy reliability, security and resilience; and accelerate
science and technology research and development to better understand
adaptation and mitigation requirements.
Question. How should readiness and budget concerns factor into
these assessments?
Answer. The Department's combat forces must be capable of operating
under the most extreme and adverse conditions, including the kinds of
disruptions we are increasingly seeing around the world: droughts,
floods, wildfires, and rising sea levels. To improve readiness, the
Department needs to train and equip forces for these climate-changed
conditions. In my opinion, budgeting should be commensurate with the
need for agile and flexible readiness.
Question. Section 2801 of the fiscal year 2020 NDAA required each
major military installation to include military installation resilience
in each installation's military plan.
If confirmed, how would you ensure these plans are completed and
shared with this Committee?
Answer. I am aware that NDAA fiscal year 2020 section 2801 requires
that 10 USC 2864 be updated to require that installation master plans
include observed and projected climate and extreme weather hazards,
including sea level rise, wildfires, flooding, and other changes in
environmental conditions, with particular emphasis on critical
infrastructure within and outside the installations necessary for
mission capability.
If confirmed, I will ensure that comprehensive military
installation resilience policy and guidance is produced to guide
preparation of these plans are prepared in priority order. Furthermore,
I will ensure that the number of completed military installation
resilience plans are reported annually to Congress.
Question. In 2018 alone, extreme weather caused roughly $9.0
billion in damage at military bases across the United States.
How would you assess the readiness and resource impacts on the DOD
from recent extreme weather events?
Answer. I understand that, based on prior extreme weather events,
DOD is assessing how to integrate climate change-related considerations
and life-cycle costs into planning, business processes, supply chain,
and acquisition. These efforts will require using risk management
processes including analysis of costs associated with climate effects
and how these costs can be reduced through effective climate change
adaptation. Overall, I think DOD finds itself similarly vulnerable to
the effects of climate change as many cities do and that urgent action
is required to mitigate the threat to readiness extreme weather
presents.
Question. In your view, how can the DOD best mitigate risks to
Department missions and infrastructure associated with extreme weather
events?
Answer. Extreme weather and climate change effects vary regionally
and locally. It is my understanding that the Department's approaches to
reduce the risks to built and natural infrastructure into the future
will also depend on the sensitivity of missions and operation to these
risks. In my opinion, the Department can begin to reduce the effects of
climate change and extreme weather by reviewing recent damaging events
and sharing lessons learned that will support the ability to recover
from these events in a way that reduces the likelihood of disruption in
the future. Improving the Department's understanding of the
effectiveness of climate change adaptation and mitigation measures on
our infrastructure components and ecosystems is critical.
Further, I believe the Department should evaluate how to plan and
prioritize maintenance and repair of facilities, sometimes past their
useful lifespan, or in locations where repeated climate hazards have
occurred. Reviewing and updating policies and technical guidance to
reflect this evolving knowledge will improve the Department's ability
to adapt to observed and reasonably foreseeable climate impacts to
built and natural infrastructure.
Question. If confirmed to be the ASD(EI&E), how would you update
the DOD Building Requirements Unified Facilities Criteria to
incorporate designs more resilient to the effects of extreme weather
events to ensure that MILCON-funded structures exist and remain fully
functional for their intended lifecycles?
Answer. I understand the Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) adopts
or incorporates current building codes and consensus-based standards
for new facilities or major renovations. If confirmed, I will work with
the Military Departments and DOD Construction Agents to ensure the UFCs
reflect criteria that addresses climate change and installation
resilience.
energy resilience
Question. It is essential that the DOD maintain the capability to
sustain critical operations in the event of intentional and
unintentional grid outages.
If confirmed, what would you do to inculcate energy resilience as a
mission assurance priority for the DOD?
Answer. Military installations are strategic assets for generating
readiness, and energy resilience is key to DOD's mission effectiveness.
It is my understanding that the DOD has taken a strategic approach to
installation energy resilience which includes energy efficiency, and
onsite generation favoring microgrids, clean energy generation, and
storage. If confirmed, I will continue to prioritize installation
energy resilience efforts that support critical missions.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to direct the
execution of projects (MILCON or non-DOD funded) to fill gaps in
individualized Installation Energy Plans, to oversee the execution of
these projects, and to identify and remediate resilience gaps both on-
and off- DOD installations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments to
identify and prioritize infrastructure requirements resulting from the
Installation Energy Plans and work with the Components on resourcing
strategies to address these requirements.
Question. In your view, how can the DOD better integrate energy
security and resilience as standard components of its MILCON projects
and programs?
Answer. I believe it is necessary for installations to understand
what energy or climate vulnerabilities they may be exposed to in order
to design new or recapitalize existing facilities. If confirmed, I will
work with the Military Departments to ensure each installation
completes the installation resilience plans required by Congress and
incorporates the results in their installation master plans. I believe
there are numerous opportunities to demonstrate the interconnectedness
of energy security and resilience and readiness that could improve
projects and programs funded through MILCON.
Question. In your view, how can DOD and Joint Force training
exercises and wargames better incorporate real-world scenarios
regarding energy-related threats and constraints--such as the
availability of fuel in the Pacific and assessing black start abilities
in response to a cyberattack on commercial electric grids?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to better understand the DOD's
current strategy for joint contested logistics regarding fuel for
operations, and its posture concerning black start abilities and
cybersecurity, and look for ways to bolster our capabilities to reduce
vulnerabilities to DOD's fuel supply and from cybersecurity threats to
the grid.
Question. Given the DOD's dependence on non-DOD energy sources, how
can the public and private sectors best be integrated in installation
resilience plans and programs to reduce vulnerabilities, add
redundancy, or improve energy management?
Answer. I understand that the Department requires installations to
address their reliance on critical energy infrastructure and services
from outside providers, in individual Installation Energy Plans. I
believe an important aspect of this is documenting the private sector
providers' response in restoring energy and power to installations, and
recovery of mission readiness, in the event of a disruption. If
confirmed, I will work with the Services to continue developing
effective approaches to best address DODs reliance on private sector
energy sources and integrate the best solutions to address
vulnerabilities, add redundancy, and improve energy management. DOD's
size presents an opportunity to not only support its community partners
but also the entire country in commercializing new and scaling existing
technology with an eye towards enhancing energy resilience, energy
independence, reliability, equity and health in the U.S
Question. In your view, is the use of stationary micro-reactors a
workable option to provide long-term energy resiliency to U.S.-based
DOD installations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to evaluate every viable
technology option, including advanced nuclear energy, to build a
portfolio of energy projects that increases the Department's
installation resilience and reduces its carbon footprint. Microreactors
and other advanced nuclear reactors are technologies that offer the
potential for resilient energy on a smaller scale than traditional
nuclear power plants. It is my understanding that the DOD plans to
demonstrate microreactor technology at Eielson Air Force Base to assess
the potential for enhanced installation energy resilience and mission
assurance.
Question. What is your understanding of the initiatives, if any,
the DOD is undertaking with respect to development of long duration
grid batteries for use on bases?
Answer. My understanding is that the Department has issued
guidance, based on recent NDAA language, that installations should
favor on-site generation and microgrids in addressing energy resilience
gaps. Energy storage is an important element of resilient and reliable
energy systems because it can extend the time over which an
installation can be without grid power in the event of a disruption.
Additionally, storage enhances the efficacy of on-site microgrids
utilizing clean energy generation technologies like wind and solar. If
confirmed, I work with the Services to effectively incorporate the
appropriate storage technologies into energy resilience plans and
projects.
authorities to improve energy resilience
Question. DOD and the Military Departments can use any number of
authorities and mechanisms to pursue distributed energy projects that
improve installation resilience, increase readiness and mission
assurance, and offer long-term cost savings. These include: Inter-
Government Support Agreements, Other Transaction Authority, Utility
Privatization, Energy Savings Performance Contracts, Utility Energy
Service Contracts, Enhanced Use Leases, and the Defense Community
Infrastructure Program. If contracts are written properly, non-DOD-
funded mechanisms are excellent ways to lock in cost savings for 25
years, increase resilience, modernize infrastructure, and diversify
energy sources.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to streamline the process
of writing and awarding contracts that will improve mission assurance
through the various DOD energy offices?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the responsibilities of the
various stakeholder groups in the mission assurance and installation
communities, in order to develop a common understanding and playbook of
definitions, risks, and investment options for energy resilience for
critical missions; optimize communications with industry; and
streamline the process of awarding contracts to support energy
assurance.
Question. In your view, how can the DOD improve its use of the
previously mentioned authorities to secure access to advanced energy-
related technologies and concepts, including cyber-secure microgrids?
Answer. I understand that Congress has provided the Department with
several unique authorities that provide options for obtaining access to
advanced energy technologies. My understanding is the Department has an
Installation Energy Planning policy requiring the Services to take a
holistic approach to each base's energy needs and energy resilience
requirements, and assess which authority best fits a specific
implementation strategy for an energy resilience project. If confirmed,
I will work with my staff to make sure the Department is fully
utilizing those authorities and determine if the Department should seek
additional authorities to expand options necessary for increasing
energy resilience at DOD installations.
operational energy
Question. The Department defines operational energy as the energy
required for training, moving, and sustaining military forces and
weapons platforms for military operations, including the energy used by
tactical power systems, generators, and weapons platforms. On the
battlefield of the future, warfighters will need exponentially more
energy with rapid recharge and resupply over longer operating
distances. The quality of electricity will matter too--the DOD's
vehicles, sensors, robots, cyber forces, directed energy weapons, and
artificial intelligence will be controlled by systems sensitive to
fluctuations in voltage or frequency.
If confirmed, what priorities would you establish for DOD
investments in operational energy technologies to increase warfighter
combat capabilities and reduce logistical burdens?
Answer. I believe reducing energy demand, bolstering our energy
supply chains, and diversifying energy supplies will increase the
Department's ability to effectively operate in contested logistics
environments. If confirmed, I will review operational energy risks to
Department missions, and work within the Department's planning,
programming, budgeting, and execution process to mitigate the most
urgent risks.
Question. In what specific areas do you believe the DOD needs to
improve the incorporation of operational energy considerations and
distributed energy resources into strategic planning processes?
Answer. I understand that the Department is reviewing energy demand
reduction and energy supportability in current programs, the role of
energy in strategic guidance, and opportunities for changes in policies
and procedures affecting requirements and acquisition. If confirmed, I
will ask for an overview of these efforts to date and work with other
elements of OSD, the Joint Staff, and the Military Departments to
integrate operational energy and distributed energy resources into
Department strategic planning.
Question. How can DOD acquisition systems better address
requirements related to the use of energy in military platforms to
decrease risks to warfighters?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the role of energy demand and
supportability in the acquisition process, to include major capability
and the mid-tier acquisition pathways.
Question. In your view, how can energy supportability that reduces
contested logistics vulnerabilities become a key factor in the
requirements process?
Answer. I understand that OUSD(A&S) has launched an initiative to
decrease energy demand and increase energy supportability in Joint
capability development. If confirmed, I will work closely with
OUSD(A&S), the Joint Staff, and the Military Departments to implement
this initiative and ensure that energy supportability is integrated
into capability requirements.
Question. How can the DOD broadly include operational energy
improvements in its weapons platforms?
Answer. I understand that OUSD(A&S) has launched an initiative to
decrease energy demand and increase energy supportability in Joint
capability development. If confirmed, I will work closely with
OUSD(A&S), the Joint Staff, and the Military Departments to implement
the Deputy Secretary's initiative and ensure operational energy
considerations are included in Department weapons platforms.
Question. In your view, how can the DOD better leverage
advancements in data analytics and associated technologies to improve
commanders' visibility into fuel consumption by the force?
Answer. Comprehensive and timely information on the Department's
previous and future energy use should inform not only strategic
decisions, but a range of operational and tactical-level decisions. If
confirmed, I will request an update on the state of fuel and power data
analytics and identify additional opportunities for improvement.
energy conservation
Question. What do you perceive to be the core elements of an
effective energy conservation strategy for the DOD?
Answer. Energy conservation should be a core principle in
assessing, planning and designing efforts to ensure energy for the DOD
mission. It is my understanding that the Department pursues energy
conservation as part of its broader efforts to bolster energy
resilience and mission assurance. In this regard, a successful energy
conservation strategy needs to be mission-driven and include proper
policy, guidance, governance, training, and appropriate resourcing over
time. Energy is vital to the Department's essential missions and must
be available where and when needed. Reducing energy demand through
conservation has the potential to deliver cost savings, decrease
vulnerability of supply lines, and reduce the resources needed to
achieve energy resilience. If confirmed, I will review the current
strategy and make updates and changes as needed.
Question. What do you perceive to be the most achievable and
realistic energy conservation goals for the DOD?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Department is in the
process of completing Installation Energy Plans for all its locations.
It is also my understanding that the Plans should provide insight into
the most pressing energy resilience needs of each location so that
projects can be developed to close any identified gaps. In many cases
those planned projects should not only bolster resilience but also
enhance conservation, increase energy efficiency, and implement clean/
low-carbon energy solutions. It is also my understanding that
Installation Energy Plans will inform the Department's broader climate
adaptation and climate mitigation efforts. If confirmed, I will work
with my staff to determine the right mix of goals that will establish a
balance between energy resilience and energy conservation that will not
negatively impact mission readiness.
Question. What do you consider to be a ``stretch goal'' for DOD
energy conservation?
Answer. I am aware that energy resilience of our military
installations is a high priority for the Department of Defense. The
Department must ensure it has available, reliable, and resilient power
to support critical missions. Reducing demand for energy through energy
efficiency measures is an important part of gaining energy resilience
and energy security as these measures enable sustainable operations. If
confirmed, I will work with my staff to determine the right mix of
goals that will establish a balance between energy resilience and
energy conservation that will not negatively impact mission readiness.
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
reach these goals, and how would you measure your progress?
Answer. As stated above, if confirmed, I will work with my staff to
determine the right mix of goals that will establish a balance between
energy resilience and energy conservation that will not negatively
impact mission readiness. In terms of progress measurement, I
understand there is a Department-wide effort to develop an enterprise-
wide metrics system to integrate data from a wide variety of sources
across the Department, including energy, and perform advanced analytics
on that data. If confirmed, I will review this effort and work to
identify metrics and tools that may support the advancement of
Department energy conservation goals.
Question. In your view, what has been the impact of the current DOD
energy conservation goals? Please explain your answer.
Answer. From my review of published reports, it is my understanding
that the Department's energy conservation efforts have made meaningful
impacts in a broad array of categories including, but not limited to,
facility efficiency investment, energy use intensity, and high-
performance sustainable building investment. In addition to reducing
energy demand, it is also my understanding that the Department's
efforts have also strengthened its mission assurance and energy
resilience postures. If confirmed I will work with my staff and the
Military Services to better understand the impact that current DOD
energy conservation goals have had on the Department.
water resilience
Question. A secure and reliable supply of water is essential to the
Department of Defense's ability to perform its critical missions on
installations and in support of operational deployments.
If confirmed, how would you lead the DOD in developing a
comprehensive water strategy that addresses research, acquisition,
training, and organizational issues?
Answer. I understand that the Department has identified assured
access to water supply as critical to military security and readiness,
at home and abroad. If confirmed, I would build on statutory
requirements to provide a comprehensive strategy to meet this critical
need.
Question. What actions has the DOD already undertaken to improve
access to sustainable water sources in drought-prone areas across the
United States and the globe, and with what result?
Answer. I understand that the Department has for a number of years
reduced its water use intensity as reported annually. Also, I note that
the Defense Climate Risk Analysis published by the Department in
October 2021 identifies drought as one of a number of climate hazards
that drive insecurity globally, with a potential for Department
intervention. The Department relies on the skills and technical
expertise of the US Army Corps of Engineers as it considers water
resources management to improve water resources utilization and
availability. If confirmed, I will build on these efforts to enhance
sustainable water access in the Department's drought-prone areas
Question. What progress is the DOD making in developing and
implementing a technology roadmap to address capability gaps for water
production, treatment, and purification?
Answer. I understand that the DOD Strategic Environmental Research
and Development Program (SERDP) and Environmental Security Technology
Certification Program (ESTCP) oversee a research portfolio addressing
innovative technologies to improve treatment and purification for
drinking water and wastewater. If confirmed, I will review and assess
the program for progress and gap areas to address Department needs at
home and abroad.
Question. What actions has the DOD undertaken to improve water
conveyance systems to reduce loss, recapitalize aging infrastructure,
and meet installation mission requirements?
Answer. I understand that each Military Department has a tailored
program addressing their installation mission needs around water. These
approaches include taking advantage of the utilities privatization
programs as one method to recapitalize deteriorated infrastructure and
meet installation requirements. If confirmed, I will review and assess
the effectiveness of this and other programs with a view toward
accelerating water system updates.
emerging contaminants
Question. The environmental and health effects associated with
exposure to Per- and Poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have long been
a major concern for Congress, DOD, military families, and communities
in the vicinity of military installations.
What is your understanding of the DOD's strategy for monitoring
drinking water on DOD installations, as well as public and private
drinking water off-installation, for PFOS, PFOA, and other
contaminants, and addressing any findings impacting water safety?
Answer. I understand that DOD is monitoring and taking actions to
address PFOS and PFOA in drinking water on and off DOD installations
under the federal cleanup and drinking water laws.
Question. If confirmed, what role would you establish for the
ASD(EI&E) in addressing potential PFAS contamination at DOD
installations and operational platforms?
Answer. If confirmed, I will assume the role of the chair of the
PFAS Task Force and will exercise EI&E's oversight authorities to
ensure the Department's efforts to address PFAS are coordinated,
aggressive, and transparent.
Question. What is your understanding of the role DOD has in funding
and overseeing PFAS-related environmental cleanup and restoration
activities at Guard and Reserve locations and in communities adjacent
to or near military bases, installations, and operational platforms, if
the contamination found is linked to Guard or Reserve activity?
Answer. It is my understanding that DOD follows the existing
federal cleanup law, to investigate, prioritize and determine cleanup
actions at our DOD installations, to include Guard and Reserve bases.
Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to addressing
public health concerns--including the desires for increased
transparency to servicemembers and their families--regarding alleged
exposures to potentially harmful contaminants on or deriving from DOD
installations?
Answer. Protecting our soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, civilian
workforce, and all of our families who live and work on our
installations and in our surrounding communities is of the utmost
importance. If confirmed, I will make the transparency of the
Department's actions to address PFAS a top priority and work to enhance
communication and dialogue with servicemembers, their families, and
defense communities.
Question. What is your understanding of the role of other federal
agencies in addressing this issue?
Answer. I believe that PFAS is an issue larger than the Federal
Government. Many federal agencies, private enterprises, non-profits,
and academic institutions have a role in addressing this challenge and
I would welcome the opportunity to work across the interagency and
beyond to arrive at a comprehensive, nationwide solution.
environmental compliance
Question. The DOD has implemented a robust environmental compliance
program to ensure the DOD can meet its title 10 responsibilities, in
balance with the need for environmental stewardship and conservation.
If confirmed to be the ASD(EI&E), what policies and programs would
you support to educate DOD leaders and the force about the imperative
of complying with laws and regulations addressing environmental
matters?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure DOD leadership is informed and
educated on legal and Executive Order requirements, as well as
applicable environmental laws and regulations. I will also affirm that
DOD must continue to support the needs of the warfighter, be a good
steward of the environment, and preserve our Nation's resources. This
responsibility includes managing environmental clean-up, compliance,
emerging chemicals of concern, conservation of natural and cultural
resources; collaborating with Federal, state and local government
Agencies; and ensuring public transparency as practicable.
Question. If confirmed, how would you work with the Department of
Interior and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to ensure military
readiness, while protecting the environment on and around DOD
installations, bases, and ranges?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the long and successful
collaboration with the US Fish & Wildlife Service balancing mission
needs with the protection of the natural resources, habitats and
species under the stewardship of the DOD. This collaboration will be
even more important as we work to ensure DOD lands and waters are
resilient to and can successfully adapt to a changing climate.
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. It is important for decision makers to understand what
impacts would likely result from a decision to proceed with a proposed
action. It is also critical that the Department assess environmental
impacts in a timely manner to support the mission. If confirmed, I will
continue to support National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
streamlining efforts across the Department. A critical element of
making informed decisions is having current and relevant information on
hand to support the analysis required for an EIS. I will take steps to
improve the Department's efforts to inventory environmental conditions
and resources on their lands, as well as reach out to stakeholders
early in the planning process to identify critical environmental
concerns.
environmental restoration
Question. Funding for the DOD's environmental restoration program
remains a significant part of the DOD's overall environmental program
budget.
What do you see as the main priorities for environmental cleanup
and restoration in the context of the DOD program?
Answer. If confirmed, my main priorities are for DOD to protect
human health, follow the federal cleanup laws, conduct cleanup in an
open and transparent manner, and coordinate DOD efforts with other
Federal and State agencies.
Question. If confirmed, what specific steps would you take to
ensure that the DOD continues to program, budget, and execute adequate
funding to permit cleanups under the Installation Restoration and
Military Munitions Remediation Programs so that they continue apace?
Answer. If confirmed, I work with my staff to review the needs of
the program, and take the actions necessary to adequately resource and
accelerate DOD's cleanup program as appropriate.
encroachment on military installations
Question. Competition for space and other forms of encroachment
continue to challenge the resiliency of DOD ranges and amplify the need
for larger hazard areas to execute training, attesting, and operations
to meet NDS requirements.
In your view, can virtual testing and training solutions contribute
to the DOD's ability to meet capability requirements and mitigate the
adverse effects of encroachment? If so, how.
Answer. I understand the important role that virtual testing and
training solutions can play in DOD's ability to meet requirements, but
also recognize the need for continued live training and testing to
support the priorities of the National Defense Strategy. I understand
the adverse impacts that encroachment can have on military mission, and
if confirmed, I will work closely with the Military Departments and
Joint Staff to understand their current and future test and training
requirements, so that I can work collaboratively to identify solutions
to mitigate the adverse effects of encroachment and support operational
requirements.
Question. If confirmed, how would you contribute to the DOD in
projecting future operations, testing, and training range requirements?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to working closely with the Military
Departments and Joint Staff to understand their future operational
requirements, and translate those operational requirements into
projected installation and range infrastructure to support emerging
capabilities.
Question. How would you structure your role as the ASD(EI&E), if
confirmed, with respect to engaging with communities surrounding DOD
ranges and training areas, to address and resolve concerns, while
ensuring the resilience of range capabilities?
Answer. I recognize the important role DOD communities play in
supporting the Department's ability to execute its missions and promote
military installation and range resilience, and I understand that the
Department has a number of community-oriented programs to promote
proactive community engagement and military mission sustainment. If
confirmed, I will continue to prioritize proactive community engagement
as a key element to protect the Department's missions and capabilities;
and I will seek to further promote partnerships focused on enhancing
opportunities for community-installation resilience.
Question. If confirmed, how would you address the challenging
demands for compensation for noise impacts being levied by communities
surrounding DOD installations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the complex issue of noise
generated by the Department's operations, training, and testing
missions and work within the Department and with Congress to adequately
resource EI&E capabilities and determine the best path forward to
address community concerns.
Question. One significant tool the DOD can use to mitigate impacts
of base encroachment and preserve natural habitat buffers to bases is
the Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program. Another
avenue to mitigate potential conflicts between base radar and energy
development is software updates and the modernization of radars, which
are often paid for by energy developers.
If confirmed, what new ideas would you propose as means for
addressing this issue?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to working closely with the Military
Departments to understand their current and future installation
encroachment and resilience challenges; and will work to identify and
enable expanded partnership opportunities through the Readiness and
Environmental Protection Integration Program. If confirmed, I also
commit to collaborating with the Military Departments, as well as
industry, to explore an expanded range of solutions for mitigating
potential conflicts between base radar and energy development.
Question. If confirmed, what policies or steps would you take to
balance the trade-off between energy development, radar modernization,
and impact on operations and training?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to working closely with the Military
Departments to understand their current and future installation
encroachment and resilience challenges; and will work to identify and
enable expanded partnership opportunities through the Readiness and
Environmental Protection Integration Program. If confirmed, I also
commit to collaborating with the Military Departments, as well as
industry, to explore an expanded range of solutions for mitigating
potential conflicts between base radar and energy development.
real property accountability
Question. DOD manages a portfolio of real property assets that, at
last report included about 586,000 facilities--including barracks,
maintenance depots, commissaries, and office buildings. The combined
replacement value of this portfolio is almost $1.2 trillion and
includes about 27 million acres of land at nearly 4,800 sites
worldwide. This infrastructure is critical to maintaining military
readiness. Since 1997, DOD Infrastructure Management has been on the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) ``High Risk List.''
If confirmed as the ASD(EI&E), what actions would you take to
better align infrastructure to changing DOD force structure needs?
Answer. I understand that DOD has the greatest number of real
property assets within the Federal Government. If confirmed, I will
review the authorities that are available to the Department, and
consult with the Military Departments and Joint Staff to identify
opportunities to better align infrastructure to future needs. I believe
DOD should take all opportunities to be efficient and enhance
resilience with its real property.
Question. Is DOD's joint basing program currently achieving its
goals, in your view? What additional opportunities exist, if any, to
reduce duplication of effort? If confirmed as ASD(EI&E), what actions
would you take to avail the Department of such opportunities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Department's joint basing
program to assess if the program generates financial and physical
infrastructure savings for the taxpayer without compromising mission
effectiveness. In partnership with the Military Departments, I would
explore future opportunities where the Department can reduce
duplication of effort, generate financial savings, and utilize our
physical infrastructure efficiently.
Question. Do you believe the DOD currently maintains excess
infrastructure overseas? Please explain your answer. How would you seek
to address the number, placement, and mission assurance of overseas
infrastructure, if confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I would review the alignment of the
Department's overseas infrastructure against our objectives, strategy,
and force structure. The evolving threat environment requires a
constant assessment of our infrastructure requirements. As such, I will
work with OSD, the Joint Staff, the Military Departments, and the
Combatant Commanders to ensure the Department's infrastructure is
properly postured and sized to meet a wide range of military missions
in support of the NDS.
Question. If confirmed as the ASD(EI&E), how would you go about
relocating functions from commercial leased space to existing space on
a DOD installation-- reducing leases and better utilizing excess space?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments to
assess the utilization and availability of DOD owned space at
installations and opportunities to relocate DOD tenants from
commercial-leased space to government-owned space.
Question. In November 2018, GAO reported that DOD's Real Property
Assets Database contained inaccurate data and lacked completeness: DOD
was missing utilization data for about 93,600 facilities.
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the appropriate real
property specialists to evaluate the current status of utilization
reporting and address any gaps accordingly.
Question. In your view, what are the key components of a sound and
sustainable process to account for the existence and status of the
DOD's real property assets?
Answer. In my view, a key component for a sound and sustainable
process is a real-time asset accountability platform for inputting,
tracking and analyzing real property inventory data that will help
ensure Real Property Asset data quality across the Department.
Question. The cost of construction in remote overseas locations is
particularly expensive. When these locations are designated as
accompanied tours, this cost is magnified by requirements for support
facilities such as schools, larger hospitals, and family housing units.
What is the value in designating remote locations as accompanied
tours, in your view?
Answer. I understand that designating remote locations for military
operations, whether accompanied or unaccompanied, is based on many
factors. If confirmed, I will work with the appropriate OSD, Joint
Staff, and Military Department organizations to ensure these
designations meet operational objectives and in a cost effective
manner. Designating a location as an accompanied tour could enhance
recruitment and retention for the force but this necessarily needs to
be balanced with additional costs.
Question. In your view, what is the appropriate mechanism for
deciding whether the value of accompanied tours in this context
outweighs the cost associated with constructing and maintaining the
facilities required to support military families?
Answer. The cost benefit analysis for the value of accompanied
tours needs to take into account factors like readiness, recruitment,
retention, force morale, and cost among others. If confirmed, I will
work with the appropriate OSD, Joint Staff, and Military Department
organizations to ensure these designations meet operational objectives
and in a cost effective manner.
Question. What are your ideas for reducing the costs of
construction at remote locations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments and
DOD Construction Agents to identify various technologies, logistics,
and use of local materials that might be incorporated into facility
designs that could drive down costs while meeting expected performance
outcomes.
command climate survey
Question. If confirmed, would you plan to administer a command
climate survey to the workforce under your leadership and management?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with OSD leadership and staff
within OASD(EI&E) to determine whether a command climate survey would
benefit the OASD(EI&E) team in their work.
Question. How would you plan to address the outcomes of such a
survey?
Answer. If a command climate survey is warranted, I would, if
confirmed, first identify if there are areas where organizational
transformation is needed (morale, team cohesion, organizational
accountability, etc.). If change is warranted, I would, if confirmed,
consult with both internal and external leadership to address the areas
where improvement will yield benefits and develop a plan to address
deficiencies or improve team performance.
sexual harassment
Question. In responding to the 2018 DOD Civilian Employee Workplace
and Gender Relations survey, 17.7 percent of female and 5.8 percent of
male DOD employees indicated that they had experienced sexual
harassment and/or gender discrimination by ``someone at work'' in the
12 months prior to completing the survey.
What is your assessment of the current climate regarding sexual
harassment and gender discrimination in the DOD?
Answer. Hostile work environments are an anathema to good order,
morale, and high performance. The results of the 2018 DOD Civilian
Employee Workplace and Gender Relations survey are both disheartening
and frustrating and clearly highlight an area where DOD can and must do
more to support its most important resource.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
receive or become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment or
discrimination from an employee of the Office of ASD(EI&E)?
Answer. I have yet to be briefed on the policies and procedures for
supporting DOD employees who have been subjected to sexual harassment
or discrimination. If confirmed, I commit to being briefed and fully
understanding the role and responsibilities a leader in OSD has
regarding responding to harassment and discrimination. If confirmed, I
further commit to being a visible and proactive champion for a culture
of respect, accountability, and dignity within OASD(EI&E) and that
there is no place where harassment and/or discrimination will be
tolerated. Additionally, I will work to ensure that there are no
repercussions for DOD personnel who come forward in response to
harassment or discrimination.
congressional oversight
Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
appropriate committees of Congress are able to receive testimony,
briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
communications) and other information from the Department.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
to appear and testify before this Committee, its subcommittees, and
other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
provide this Committee, its subcommittees, and other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, with witnesses and
briefers, briefings, reports, records (including documents and
electronic communications) and other information as may be requested of
you, and to do so in a timely manner? Please answer with a simple yes
or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
consult with this Committee, its subcommittees, and other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
keep this Committee, its subcommittees, and other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, apprised of new
information that materially impacts the accuracy of testimony,
briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
communications, and other information you or your organization
previously provided? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
request, to provide this Committee and its subcommittees with records
and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
a formal Committee request? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
respond timely to letters and/or inquiries and other requests of you or
your organization from individual Senators who are members of this
Committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
retaliation any military member, federal employee, or contractor
employee who testifies before, or communicates with this Committee, its
subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
military housing
1. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, the fiscal year 2020 National Defense
Authorization Act required the Department to create a public complaint
database regarding privatized military housing. Years later this has
yet to be implemented, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Housing has testified that it won't be done any time soon. You will
be the Department's Chief Housing Officer. In your advance policy
questions you said that you ``will ensure that the Department continues
to implement the remaining MHPI [Military Housing Privatization
Mr. Owens. Initiative] reforms set out in the Fiscal Year 2020
NDAA.'' Does this include implementing the public complaint database?
If confirmed, I will ensure that the Department of Defense
implements the MHPI housing complaints database required by 10 USC
2894a, to include ensuring that tenants of MHPI housing can file a
complaint in the database, landlord responses to such complaints are
recorded in the database, and all database records are available to the
public to the maximum extent allowed in accordance with Privacy Act
requirements.
2. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, when will the Department complete the
creation of the military housing public complaint database?
Mr. Owens. If confirmed, I will ensure that the MHPI housing
complaints database required by 10 USC 2894a is prioritized for
implementation as soon as it can be delivered but no later than fiscal
year 2023.
3. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, in March 2021, Senator Tillis and I
sent a letter to the Department of Defense seeking information
regarding the availability of accessible housing and accommodations for
military families with disability-related needs. The Department's
initial response took a year, and we have yet to receive answers
without any information restrictions or controls. For each DOD
installation with Military Housing Private Initiative (MHPI) housing in
place for calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many Exceptional
Family Member Program (EFMP) families live at each installation? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee, for each DOD installation with MHPI
housing in place for calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020, the number of
EFMP families that live at each installation. If confirmed, I commit to
providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
4. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for each DOD installation with
Military Housing Private Initiative (MHPI) housing in place for
calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many families at each
installation have requested housing that is compliant with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for each DOD
installation with MHPI housing in place for calendar years 2018, 2019,
and 2020, the number of families at each installation that have
requested housing that is compliant with the ADA. If confirmed, I
commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
5. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for each DOD installation with
Military Housing Private Initiative (MHPI) housing in place for
calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many ADA-compliant housing
units are in place at each installation? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for each DOD
installation with MHPI housing in place for calendar years 2018, 2019,
and 2020, the number of ADA-compliant housing units that are in place
at each installation. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
6. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for each DOD installation with
Military Housing Private Initiative (MHPI) housing in place for
calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020, what percentage of the housing
units on each installation are ADA-compliant? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for each DOD
installation with MHPI housing in place for calendar years 2018, 2019,
and 2020, the percentage of the housing units on each installation that
are ADA-compliant. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
7. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for each DOD installation with
Military Housing Private Initiative (MHPI) housing in place for
calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many of the available ADA-
compliant homes on each installation are currently occupied by families
with disability-related needs? Please provide the answer without any
information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for each DOD
installation with MHPI housing in place for calendar years 2018, 2019,
and 2020, the number of available ADA-compliant homes on each
installation that are currently occupied by families with disability-
related needs. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
8. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for each DOD installation with
Military Housing Private Initiative (MHPI) housing in place for
calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020, what is the protocol for an EFMP
family that is either moving to each base or already on-base and in
need of an ADA home or accommodation? Please provide the answer without
any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for each DOD
installation with MHPI housing in place for calendar years 2018, 2019,
and 2020, information about the protocol for an EFMP family that is
either moving to each base or already on-base and in need of an ADA
home or accommodation. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
9. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how are military families informed
about the availability of ADA housing on each installation? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information on how military families are informed about the
availability of ADA housing on each installation. If confirmed, I
commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
10. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, who coordinates communication to
military families about the availability of ADA housing on each
installation? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information on who coordinates communication to military families about
the availability of ADA housing on each installation. If confirmed, I
commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
11. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, if ADA housing is unavailable, what
is the protocol for the Military Housing Office (MHO) and EFMP office
once an accessible home becomes available? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information on the protocol for the MHO and EFMP office, if accessible
housing is unavailable at an installation but then becomes available.
If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
12. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what was average wait time for EFMP
families on each installation in 2018, 2019, and 2020 before they
successfully move into a home that meets their needs? Please provide
the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee average
wait time data for EFMP families on each installation in 2018, 2019,
and 2020, before they successfully move into a home that meets their
needs. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
13. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, do on-base MHO and EFMP office shave
access to private military housing companies' waitlists for families in
need of accessible housing when none is available? Please provide the
answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information on whether the on-base MHO and EFMP office share access to
private military housing companies' waitlists for families in need of
accessible housing when none is available. If confirmed, I commit to
providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
14. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many
families with disabilities were on the waitlist for a housing unit on
each installation? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee data, for 2018,
2019, and 2020, about how many families with disabilities were on the
waitlist for a housing unit on each installation. If confirmed, I
commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
15. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for 2018, 2019, and 2020, what was
the average amount of time these families spent on the waitlist before
being provided with adequate housing? Please provide the answer without
any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee data for 2018,
2019, and 2020, on the average amount of time EFMP families spent on
the waitlist before being provided with housing that met their
disability needs. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
16. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many
military orders have been modified or canceled due to unavailable
housing on each installation in the past year? Please provide the
answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee data on how many military orders
have been modified or canceled due to unavailable housing on each
installation in the past year. If confirmed, I commit to providing this
input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
17. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how many families at each
installation have requested modifications to housing so it is ADA-
compliant? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee data on how many
families at each installation have requested modifications to housing
so it is ADA-compliant. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
18. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, does the MHO and EFMP office on each
base have access to information about the number of requested
modifications to housing so it is ADA-compliant? Please provide the
answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information about whether the MHO and EFMP office on each installation
has access to information about the number of requested modifications
to housing so it is ADA-compliant. If confirmed, I commit to providing
this input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
19. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many
of those families received the requested accommodations? Please provide
the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee data, for 2018,
2019, and 2020, information about how many families who requested
modifications to on-base housing so it is ADA compliant received the
requested accommodations. If confirmed, I commit to providing this
input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
20. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what was the average waiting time
for approval of accommodations on each base for 2018, 2019, and 2020?
Please provide the answer without any information restrictions or
controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for 2018, 2019,
and 2020, the average waiting time for approval of requested ADA-
complaint accommodations on each base. If confirmed, I commit to
providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
21. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what was the average waiting time
for completion of accommodations on each base? Please provide the
answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee data on the
average waiting time for completion of requested ADA-compliant
accommodations on each base. If confirmed, I commit to providing this
input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
22. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, were any of the families required to
pay for their own accommodations or required to pay to return the home
back to its original condition upon move-out? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information on
whether any of the families who requested ADA-compliant housing on an
installation were required to pay for their own accommodations or
required to pay to return the home back to its original condition upon
move-out. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
23. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what specific mechanisms are in
place for military families to resolve disputes with MHPI housing
providers? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information on
the specific mechanisms in place for military families to resolve
disputes with MHPI housing providers. If confirmed, I commit to
providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
24. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for 2018, 2019, and 2020, how many
military housing officials and Military Tenant Advocates are present at
each installation to perform privatized housing oversight and mediate
disputes between servicemembers and the private housing partner? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for 2018, 2019,
and 2020, data on how many military housing officials and Military
Tenant Advocates are present at each installation to perform privatized
housing oversight and mediate disputes between servicemembers and the
private housing partner. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
25. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, in fiscal year 2020, how many
complaints were received by the MHO or EFMP office regarding housing
needs for families with disabilities at each installation? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information about the number of complaints received by the MHO or EFMP
office regarding housing needs for families with disabilities at each
installation in fiscal year 2020. If confirmed, I commit to providing
this input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
26. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, can you provide a summary of the
number and type(s) of complaint(s) received in fiscal year 2020? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee a summary of
available data about the number and type(s) of housing complaints
received by the Department of Defense in fiscal year 2020. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
27. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how many of these complaints were
resolved in fiscal year 2020? Please provide the answer without any
information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee available data
on how many of the housing complaints received in fiscal year 2020 were
resolved in fiscal year 2020. If confirmed, I commit to providing this
input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
28. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what was the average time required
to resolve a case in fiscal year 2020? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee available data
on the average time required to resolve a housing complaint case in
fiscal year 2020. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
29. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for 2018, 2019, and 2020, can you
please provide a detailed list of all cases where private housing
providers have been fined or sanctioned for problems related to housing
for military families with disabilities? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for 2018, 2019,
and 2020, a detailed list of all cases where private housing providers
have been fined or sanctioned for problems related to housing for
military families with disabilities. If confirmed, I commit to
providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
30. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for each instance when a private
housing provider was fined or sanction in 2018, 2019, and 2020, can you
please provide information on the location, the housing provider, the
amount of the fine or other sanction, and the reason for the fine or
sanction? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for each
instance when a private housing provider was fined or sanction in 2018,
2019, and 2020, information on the location, the housing provider, the
amount of the fine or other sanction, and the reason for the fine or
sanction. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
31. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens can you please provide a detailed
list of all cases of requests for waivers, modifications, or exemptions
from DOD standards for military families with disabilities in 2018,
2019, and 2020? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee a
detailed list of all cases of requests for waivers, modifications, or
exemptions from DOD standards for military families with disabilities
in 2018, 2019, and 2020, to the extent this data is available. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
32. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, for each requested waiver,
modification, or exemption in 2018, 2019, and 2020, can you please
provide detailed information on the nature of the request, the
requester, and whether the request was granted? Please provide the
answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee, for
each requested waiver, modification, or exemption from DOD standards
for military families with disabilities in 2018, 2019, and 2020,
detailed information on the nature of the request, the requester, and
whether the request was granted, to the extent this information is
available. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
33. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, the Office of Special Needs (OSN)
establishes DOD policy to support military families with disabilities.
What specific resources--from OSN or elsewhere--are provided to
families so that they understand their rights regarding fair housing?
Please provide the answer without any information restrictions or
controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information about the specific resources--from OSN or elsewhere--that
are provided to families so that they understand their rights under the
Fair Housing Act. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
34. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how is information about OSN
disseminated and standardized across all the Departments? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to inform the Committee about
how information about the OSN is disseminated and standardized across
all Military Departments. If confirmed, I commit to providing this
input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
35. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what resources are made available to
military families regarding family moving needs? Please provide the
answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Sustainment, US Transportation Command, and the Military Departments to
provide the Committee information about what resources are made
available to military families regarding family moving needs. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
36. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, the Military Housing Advocacy
Network revealed that military families with disabilities are being
asked to repeatedly prove their disability needs through documentation
with each EFMP office at each military installation. Why is this DOD
policy in place? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee information about any DOD policy
that requires military families with disabilities to prove their
disability needs through documentation at each EFMP office at each
military installation. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
37. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, is there a centralized database
where information about the needs of military families with
disabilities can be safely stored that follows families regardless of
moves? Please provide the answer without any information restrictions
or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee information as to whether DOD has a
centralized database that can safely store information about the needs
of military families with disabilities and allows this data to follow
these families regardless of moves to a new duty station. If confirmed,
I commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
38. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, if no database exists, can DOD
create such a database using its current statutory authority? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee information as to whether DOD can
create a centralized database that can safely store information about
the needs of military families with disabilities and allow this data to
follow these families regardless of moves to a new duty station, if no
such database currently exists. If confirmed, I commit to providing
this input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
39. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how does each EFMP office coordinate
with the private housing company on their installation to prevent those
companies from requiring excessive and burdensome medical documentation
for families with disabilities? Please provide the answer without any
information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information about how each EFMP office coordinates with the privatized
housing company on their installation to prevent those companies from
requiring excessive and burdensome medical documentation for families
with disabilities. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
40. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, many families report long waitlists
for ADA-compliant houses or are outright denied houses because there
are none available, but it is DOD policy that 5 percent of houses on
each military installation be ADA accessible or easily modifiable for
accessibility. Who is responsible for ensuring that private companies
participating in the MHPI program build the required number of ADA-
compliant houses on each installation? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information
about who is responsible for ensuring that private companies
participating in the MHPI program build the required number of ADA-
compliant houses on each installation. If confirmed, I commit to
providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
41. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what are the consequences, if any,
for an MHPI company that does not provide the required number of ADA-
compliant houses on each installation? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information
about the consequences, if any, for an MHPI company that does not
provide the required number of ADA-compliant houses on each
installation. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
42. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, have there been any such sanctions
to date for any MHPI companies that do not provide the required number
of ADA-compliant houses on each installation? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information as
to whether there have been any sanctions to date for any MHPI companies
that do not provide the required number of ADA-compliant houses on each
installation. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
43. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, can you please provide a detailed
list of any fines or other sanctions issued to date for any MHPI
companies that do not provide the required number of ADA-compliant
houses on each installation? Please provide the answer without any
information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee a detailed list
of any fines or other sanctions issued to date for any MHPI companies
that do not provide the required number of ADA-compliant houses on each
installation. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
44. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, who within the Military Departments
is responsible for tracking this ADA-housing waitlist? Please provide
the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information on who within the Military Departments is responsible for
tracking the ADA housing waitlist. If confirmed, I commit to providing
this input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
45. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, is information about the waitlist
shared with Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information as
to whether information about the ADA housing waitlist is shared with
HUD. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
46. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, the fiscal year 2021 NDAA mandated
that all EFMP functions be centralized in a headquarters office for
each Service and at each installation. Is housing included in this
centralization mandate? Please provide the answer without any
information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to provide the Committee
information about whether housing is included in the fiscal year 2021
NDAA mandate that all EFMP functions be centralized in a headquarters
office for each Service and at each installation. If confirmed, I
commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
47. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, do the Services need specific
housing liaisons, at either the headquarter-level or at installations
with a large population of EFMP dependents? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness and the Military Departments to determine and report to the
Committee whether the Services need specific housing liaisons, at
either the headquarter-level or at installations with a large
population of EFMP dependents. If confirmed, I commit to providing this
input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
48. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how do EFMP offices determine what
housing resources are available at each installation, and where do they
store this information? Please provide the answer without any
information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee information about how EFMP offices
determine what housing resources are available at each installation,
and where they store this information. If confirmed, I commit to
providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
49. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, who ensures that EFMP offices are
modifying and canceling military orders for military families with
disabilities when they are being ordered to move to a location that
lacks the housing resources that they need? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee information about who ensures that
EFMP offices are modifying and canceling military orders for military
families with disabilities when they are being ordered to move to a
location that lacks the housing resources that they need. If confirmed,
I commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
50. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, do EFMP offices communicate with one
another when a military family with disability-related needs is moving
from one installation to another? Please provide the answer without any
information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee information about whether EFMP
offices communicate with one another when a military family with
disability-related needs is moving from one installation to another. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
51. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, does DOD collect any performance
metrics for each of the EFMP offices? Please provide the answer without
any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee information about whether DOD
collects any performance metrics for each of the EFMP offices. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
52. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, can you provide any analysis of any
performance metrics for the EFMP offices from the last 5 years? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to provide the Committee an analysis of the performance
metrics for the EFMP offices from the last 5 years, to the maximum
extent possible. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
53. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, are the private military housing
companies that manage and facilitate privatized military housing
classified as federally financed companies? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information as
to whether the private military housing companies that manage and
facilitate privatized military housing are classified as federal
financed companies. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
54. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, are these MHPI companies covered by
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information
about application of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act to the
private sector MHPI companies. If confirmed, I commit to providing this
input without information restrictions or controls to the maximum
extent permitted within DOD information security and privacy
guidelines.
55. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, what specific DOD oversight
procedures are in place to ensure that private military housing
contractors are meeting contractual obligations with regard to the
rights of people with disabilities, including the Fair Housing Act,
ADA, and section 504? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee with information
on the specific DOD oversight procedures that are in place to ensure
that the MHPI companies and projects meet their contractual obligations
with regard to the rights of people with disabilities, including the
Fair Housing Act, ADA, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
56. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, does the DOD have reasonable
assurances that MHPI partners are complying with contractual
requirements and Federal and State laws? Please provide the answer
without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information
about whether DOD has reasonable assurances that MHPI partners are
complying their contractual requirements and Federal and State laws. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
57. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how often does each Military
Department review private partner records to ensure compliance with
applicable Federal and State laws? Please provide the answer without
any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the requested information
about how each Military Department ensures private partner records
comply with applicable Federal and State laws. If confirmed, I commit
to providing this input without information restrictions or controls to
the maximum extent permitted within DOD information security and
privacy guidelines.
58. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how often do the Services schedule
and conduct inspection visits to military installations? Please provide
the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
the Military Departments to provide the Committee information about how
often the Services schedule and conduct housing inspection visits at
military installations. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input
without information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent
permitted within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
59. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how often are all installations
inspected? Please provide the answer without any information
restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with my staff and Military Departments to provide the Committee
information about the frequency of installation housing inspections by
the Services. If confirmed, I commit to providing this input without
information restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted
within DOD information security and privacy guidelines.
60. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, are housing offices warned in
advance of inspections or are there surprise inspections? Please
provide the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information as
to whether housing offices are warned in advance of Service housing
inspections, or if there are surprise inspections. If confirmed, I
commit to providing this input without information restrictions or
controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD information
security and privacy guidelines.
61. Senator Warren. Mr. Owens, how frequently do surprise
inspections occur and what installations are targeted? Please provide
the answer without any information restrictions or controls.
Mr. Owens. I understand that this information is needed for the
Committee to perform its oversight duty. As I do not have the necessary
clearances or access to information, I am unable to answer this
specific information request at this time. If confirmed, I will work
with the Military Departments to provide the Committee information
about the frequency of surprise housing inspections by the Services. If
confirmed, I commit to providing this input without information
restrictions or controls to the maximum extent permitted within DOD
information security and privacy guidelines.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jacky Rosen
tracking carbon emissions on military installations
62. Senator Rosen. Mr. Owens, last year's NDAA included my
provision authorizing a pilot program to test software on military
installations designed to reduce energy costs and track carbon
emissions in real-time. This program will help the Department of
Defense meet its carbon reduction targets, reduce energy costs for
taxpayers, and increase efficiencies. If confirmed, can you commit to
standing up the program and working with me to ensure its success?
Mr. Owens. The value of real time energy use information is
substantial and can enable military installations to reduce energy use
and energy cost. In addition, real time energy use information can be
used to enhance resilience and reliability when leveraged correctly. If
confirmed, I will work with the DOD labs, installations and industry
partners to pilot promising technologies that have the ability to
provide real time installation energy consumption utilize this
information to conserve energy, reduce cost and enhance resilience.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator James M. Inhofe
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances/environmental cleanup
63. Senator Inhofe. Mr. Owens, when it comes to per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) cleanup, or any environmental
remediation, do you commit to following the process laid out in the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) and other controlling laws and regulations, to include
prioritizing projects as dictated by those laws and regulations?
Mr. Owens. Yes. If confirmed, I will commit to following CERCLA and
other applicable laws and regulations and will work with the Military
Departments to ensure the Department follows the prescribed
environmental remediation processes.
electric vehicles
64. Senator Inhofe. Mr. Owens, during the hearing you indicated
your support for replacing the entire non-tactical fleet to electric
vehicles (EV) by 2030 as outlined by the Senate Armed Services
Committee-passed National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2023. This bill also contains a waiver for the SECDEF to utilize if
circumstances warrant. Would you advise the waiver to be utilized if
the price of EVs continue to rise, as predicted by some economists, as
much as 20 percent in the next few years?
Mr. Owens. If confirmed, I will be committed to supporting the
Administration's and Congress's goals of transitioning DOD's non-
tactical vehicle (NTV) fleet to a fully electric fleet by 2030. First
cost of EVs is a critical variable in assessing the total value that a
fully electrified NTV fleet can deliver for DOD. Other factors that
will determine total value include expected lifetime ownership costs
and how effectively microgrid and energy generation investments can
leverage the EV fleet for energy storage, resilience, and reliability.
Current indications are that American industry is on track to provide
the Department with a range of cost effective EV options which will
deliver capability the vehicles they are replacing cannot provide.
However, if confirmed, I am prepared to adjust my expectations as
market and technical considerations dictate.
65. Senator Inhofe. Mr. Owens, would you advise the waiver to be
utilized if the electric grids at our installations cannot support such
an increase in electricity use?
Mr. Owens. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department assesses the
impact of a fully electrified NTV fleet on installation electric grids
when planning deployment of electric vehicles and charging
infrastructure. If confirmed, I would advise that this assessment
comprehensively analyze both the supply and demand side of installation
energy systems and develop recommendations that integrate energy
resilience, reliability, storage, demand, and consumption
considerations in such a way that the full value of the capabilities of
an electrified NTV fleet are understood and leveraged. If confirmed, I
would advise all waiver considerations to be made based on a
comprehensive and integrated understanding of cost and benefits.
66. Senator Inhofe. Mr. Owens, would you advise the waiver to be
utilized if there are cars within the current fleet that are nowhere
near the end of their useful lives?
Mr. Owens. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department carefully
considers mission and economics when deciding when and how to convert
NTVs to electric models. If confirmed, I would advise all waiver
considerations to be made based on a comprehensive and integrated
understanding of cost and benefits.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Joni Ernst
implementing national defense authorization acts
67. Senator Ernst. Mr. Owens, will you commit to implementing laws
as promulgated by Congress, to include past and future Defense
Authorization Acts?
Mr. Owens. Yes.
68. Senator Ernst. Mr. Owens, if confirmed, what steps will you
take to ensure DOD implements section 321 of the fiscal year 2021 NDAA
as directed by Congress?
Mr. Owens. If confirmed, I will work with the ASD(Sustainment), the
Department of Energy, General Services Administration, and the Military
Departments to ensure the Department's efforts to implement section 321
are appropriately supported.
alternative fuels
69. Senator Ernst. Mr. Owens, what role do you believe domestic
alternative fuels, specifically biodiesel, ethanol, and propane, can
play in reducing emissions?
Mr. Owens. Diversification of energy resources can deliver both
strategic and tactical advantages if implemented correctly. When they
can increase resilience and force capability, domestic alternative
fuels should be part of the overall strategy to reduce emissions.
If confirmed, I will ensure the Department delivers the fuel and
energy resources our forces require to accomplish their mission.
70. Senator Ernst. Mr. Owens, if confirmed, what steps will you
take to ensure domestic alternative fuels, specifically biodiesel,
ethanol, and propane, will be a part of DOD's energy portfolio?
Mr. Owens. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department delivers the
fuel and energy resources our forces require to accomplish their
mission. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department continues to
incorporate a wide range of fuel sources to ensure the continued
resilience and mission effectiveness of our forces.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Marsha Blackburn
facilities sustainment, restoration, and modernization
71. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Owens, if confirmed, what will be your
first concrete step to prioritize drawing down the facilities
sustainment, restoration, and modernization (FSRM) backlog?
Mr. Owens. The DOD's existing FSRM backlog is a significant area of
concern for me. If confirmed, I will make it a priority and I will work
to ensure that DOD leaders understand facilities sustainment as both a
critical readiness issue and a personnel health, well-being, and
performance issue. If confirmed, I will work with the Military
Departments and Comptroller to determine the courses of action required
to reduce the backlog. Additionally, I will advocate for the
appropriate level of resourcing to ensure critical missions are not
jeopardized due to inadequate FSRM funding.
72. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Owens, what will be the effects if
programs such as hypersonic testing are bogged down with facility
maintenance?
Mr. Owens. DOD's hypersonic programs are critical to maintaining a
strategic edge over our adversaries, and the research, development,
test, and evaluation of these key weapons systems must be supported by
adequate facilities and infrastructure. The development of these key
systems cannot be compromised by facilities maintenance issues. If
confirmed, I will work with the Military Departments to determine what
facility sustainment levels are needed to ensure missions are not
compromised.
73. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Owens, how will you message that the
FSRM backlog is a personnel challenge?
Mr. Owens. A significant body of existing research links human
health, well-being, and performance to key aspects (air quality,
thermal comfort, acoustics, access to daylight) of the built and
natural environments people inhabit. Additionally, significant research
links the quality of buildings to metrics such as reduced employee
absenteeism and improved ability for organizations to recruit and
retain top tier talent. The ``return on investment'' from a human
health, well-being and performance perspective delivered by
improvements to air quality, efficiency and the indoor environment are
well understood. If confirmed, I will work with the DOD components and
relevant OSD organizations to help them understand how facilities
sustainment can improve DOD's ability to recruit and retain a high
quality joint force and be leveraged to ensure that DOD's workforce
performs as optimally as possible. If confirmed, I will be a staunch
advocate for the funding to address existing shortfalls.
climate change
74. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Owens, how does DOD's lack of
longitudinal datasets on the effects of climate change shape the
Department's climate policies, strategies, and partner engagements?
Mr. Owens. In my opinion, the Department is sufficiently informed
with varying length and quality of longitudinal datasets on the impacts
of climate change and has used this data to inform strategy with
varying degrees of success. For example, sea level rise has been
observed for approximately 100 years, and I understand the Navy has
monitored these effects on its coastal locations and taken them into
account for its Naval Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program
(SIOP).
Going forward, I believe the forthcoming fifth National Climate
Assessment, together with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change's sixth assessment report to be completed in September 2022,
will augment the existing data DOD is utilizing and provide the basis
for refining DOD's plans to adapt its strategy and ensure mission
readiness under current and future conditions. If confirmed, I will
work with colleagues in the Department and the interagency to update
policies and strategies in Acquisition & Sustainment to ensure our
forces can train like they fight and are equipped to accomplish their
mission today and in the future.
75. Senator Blackburn. Mr. Owens, if confirmed, do you plan to make
climate change reporting within DOD a requirement? If so, how do you
plan to execute this required reporting?
Mr. Owens. If confirmed, I plan to support the Administration's
goals and requirements on climate change reporting and risk mitigation.
If confirmed, I would advise integrating climate change reporting into
the Department's existing energy, sustainability, water, and other
resilience reporting requirements. This reporting could then be
integrated into policies, decision-making, and key Department processes
(e.g. master planning, design and construction, mission assurance all-
hazards threat assessments) to support the full range of installation
resilience assessments needed to ensure our warfighters are equipped
and can train to execute their mission.
______
[The nomination reference of Mr. Brendan M. Owens follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of Mr. Brendan M. Owens, 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. Brendan M.
Owens 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. Brendan M. Owens was reported to the
Senate by Chairman Reed on September 28, 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.]
[all]