[Senate Hearing 118-790]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-790
THE NOMINATION OF GENERAL RANDY A.
GEORGE, USA, FOR REAPPOINTMENT TO THE
GRADE OF GENERAL AND TO BE CHIEF OF
STAFF OF THE ARMY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 12, 2023
__________
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
63-638 WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman
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 DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan RICK SCOTT, Florida
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada TED BUDD, North Carolina
MARK KELLY, Arizona ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri
Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
John P. Keast, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________
july 12, 2023
Page
The Nomination of General Randy A. George, USA for Reappointment 1
to the Grade of General and to be Chief of Staff of the Army.
Members Statements
Reed, Senator Jack............................................... 1
Wicker, Senator Roger F.......................................... 3
Ernst, Senator Joni.............................................. 4
Witness Statements
George, General Randy A., USA, for reappointment to the grade of 5
general and to be Chief of Staff of the Army.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 46
Questions for the Record....................................... 83
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 99
Biographical Sketch............................................ 100
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 103
Signature Page................................................. 106
(iii)
This hearing is printed to include all available
information
requested or required to be inserted for the
record.
(iv)
THE NOMINATION OF GENERAL RANDY A. GEORGE, USA, FOR REAPPOINTMENT TO
THE GRADE OF GENERAL AND TO BE CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE ARMY
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 12, 2023
United States Senate,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room
SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Jack Reed
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Committee Members present: Senators Reed, Gillibrand,
Blumenthal, Hirono, Kaine, King, Warren, Peters, Duckworth,
Rosen, Kelly, Wicker, Fischer, Cotton, Rounds, Ernst, Sullivan,
Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd, and Schmitt.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED
Chairman Reed. Good morning. Let me call this hearing to
order.
The Committee meets today to consider the nomination of
General Randy George to be the next Chief of Staff of the
United States Army.
General, congratulations on your nomination. I would like
to welcome your wife, Patty, son Grant, and daughter-in-law,
Hannah, and daughter, Andrea, and son-in-law Timothy. We are
grateful to your family for the many years of support for your
service and would also like to recognize and thank Senator
Ernst, who will be introducing you shortly. Let me also thank
the outgoing chief, General McConville, as he prepares for
retirement. The Nation is safer and the United States Army is
on a path of generational transformation because of his
leadership. General George, the Committee welcomes your
nomination to serve as Chief of Staff of the Army. As the
current Vice Chief you have helped lead the Army through a
critical period of modernization.
Previously, as the senior military assistant to the
Secretary of Defense you gained a valuable understanding of how
the department requires the joint chiefs and combatant
commanders to work together in support of the National Defense
Strategy. You bring extensive command experience, having led at
every level from platoon to core including in combat.
You also have important analytical and force management
expertise from both an Army and joint force perspective. These
experiences make you the right person at the right time to lead
the Army.
The Army is in the midst of its most significant
modernization effort in decades, the service pursuing an
aggressive strategy called Army 2030 defined by the adoption of
multi-domain operations and return to large-scale formations.
The Army is shifting to a division-based configuration that
will need to operate in what you have described as dispersed,
mobile, and low-signature teams. To remain competitive with
China and Russia the Army must continue to invest in cutting-
edge technologies that will define future battlefields.
Specifically, the Army has been pursuing modernization in
key areas like long-range fires, air defense, vertical lift,
and deep sensing. These are ambitious and farsighted
objectives.
I am particularly encouraged by the Army's recent creation
of a new cross functional team focused on contested logistics.
This team, under the direction of Army Futures Command, will
address the need for more resilient and agile logistics in
dangerous environments like the Indo-Pacific.
General, I would like to know your plans to continue the
Army's modernization efforts and what resources are needed to
support them.
Even as increased resources are being allocated to the
Indo-Pacific region, including for sea and air capabilities,
the Army is being relied upon to provide a reliable presence
around the world.
In particular, the Army is providing significant support to
operations in Europe from logistics to rotational forces and
command and control elements. We are reminded every day in
Ukraine that combat credible ground forces are fundamental for
deterrence.
With that in mind, I am interested in hearing about your
view of the Army's mission globally and how you would adjust
its operating concepts and force posture to support the
National Defense Strategy.
Perhaps your most pressing challenge, however, will be
addressing the Army's recruiting crisis. I will argue that all
of the military services are facing their most severe
recruiting challenges since the establishment of the all-
volunteer force 50 years ago.
Last year the Army fell far short of its recruiting goals
and the same appears likely this year. There are a number of
factors contributing to this challenging recruiting environment
including low national unemployment rates, lingering problems
from COVID-19, and historically low numbers of Americans
eligible for or interested in military service.
I understand the Army is conducting an overhaul of its
recruiting and retention practices including the launch of a
major new marketing campaign and the expansion of the Future
Soldier prep course.
I would ask for an update and how you plan to recruit a
broader pool of potential recruits, if confirmed, and grow back
end strength in the coming years.
Further, I would like to understand how the Army plans to
modify its current structure to account for reduced end
strength in the near term but eventual growth to support the
advanced capabilities being developed through the Army's
modernization efforts.
General, these complex challenges will require the full
complement of your skills. Thank you for your willingness to
continue your service and lead the Army at this critical time.
I look forward to your testimony.
Let me recognize the ranking member before I recognize
Senator Ernst for her introduction. Senator Wicker?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROGER F. WICKER
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and General
George, I extend my congratulations to you and your family on
your nomination.
I welcome your wife, Patty--and I understand she is your
West Point sweetheart--as well as your children, Grant and
Andrea and their spouses, Hannah and Timothy. Welcome to you
all. I am going to have a little family reunion myself this
weekend and so it is good to see a family together.
The President has nominated you Vice Chief of Staff of the
Army to take the post of Chief of Staff pending Senate
confirmation, which I hope will come quickly. I believe you are
a great choice for this role and its associated duties.
Your leadership is battle tested, as the Chairman has
already mentioned, having served in several major military
operations throughout your career.
You have also worked alongside a range of allied and
partnered militaries, experiences that will surely be of value
in our global military competition with the Chinese Communist
Party and the Russian Federation.
It is no secret that this is a very dangerous national
moment, perhaps the most dangerous national security moment
since World War II, a claim affirmed by many leading general
flag officers who have testified here before this Committee.
The Army must resource multi-theater deterrence missions,
expansive work with the allies and partners, and a large
Homeland defense mission set. The Army is stretched thin as its
portfolio grows.
During the current war in Ukraine the United States Army
has acted as a NATO shield to further aggression. The Army's
constant and enduring presence in Central Europe has proved
essential for deterrence, disaster response, logistics
operation, and military-to-military training missions including
training the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Mississippi's own National
Guard is in Europe now supporting these causes.
I welcome your thoughts on what else the United States
could do to enable Ukrainian success including your thoughts on
the provision of ATACMS [Army Tactical Advanced Conventional
Munitions System] and aerial denial munitions.
However, we cannot discount the many struggles the Army
faces and, again, the Chairman has indicated an interest in
this troublesome fact. Recent reporting indicates the Army is
set to miss its fiscal year 2024 recruitment goal by some 30
percent.
The Army has also been delinquent, General, in delivering
Congress its Total Army Analysis. The purpose of the Total Army
Analysis is to give us, the lawmakers, a more accurate picture
of future unit organization projections for the service.
I am going to be asking if you can give us some assurance
that the legislative branch will be given some respect in
following the law in this regard.
The Army has improved its procurement process in recent
years but there is more room for progress. I am encouraged to
see that parts of the Army are diligently revitalizing our
industrial base but I remain disappointed that we are not doing
everything in our power to resource the industrial base.
In fiscal year 2024 alone we could invest an additional
$1.4 billion into the Army's munitions industrial base and
every penny of that would be well spent. This funding would
establish a steady production line for Switchblade 600
weaponized drone, buy another Patriot missile defense launcher,
and expand the capacity of the production line for extended
range GMLRS [Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System].
There is also much more to be done in the Indo-Pacific. The
European Deterrence Initiative funded a wholesale change in
Army force posture in Europe and we need a similar change in
the Indo-Pacific. We have yet to make the investments necessary
to build the Army posture we need on the First Island Chain. In
particular, I am worried about the State of our logistics plans
for which the Army has the functional lead.
So, General, I would like to hear your articulation of the
Army's role in the Indo-Pacific including in contested
logistics and what you would like from Congress in achieving
this vision. Tell us what you need and we will try to get it to
you.
As the country's largest and oldest military service the
Army will inevitably play an integral role in the future of our
national defense around the globe. I am hopeful that you will
be able to lead it through this dangerous period and I look
forward to your testimony.
Thank you.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Wicker.
Senator Ernst, please?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JONI ERNST
Senator Ernst. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Wicker, and
distinguished Members of the Committee, it is my privilege
today to introduce my dear friend and a native Iowan, Randy A.
George, for his nomination to be Chief of Staff of the U.S.
Army.
As a veteran of the Iowa Army National Guard I know
firsthand that the role of the Chief of Staff of the Army is
one of the most important in the military. I believe General
George is the right man for this critical job.
General George had humble beginnings growing up in Alden,
Iowa, a town with just over 700 residents. He joined the Army
straight out of high school as a junior enlisted soldier.
He had a great eagerness to learn and later commissioned
from West Point in 1988 as an infantry officer with a bachelor
of science in engineering. Later in his career he attended the
Naval War College and eventually became an instructor.
General George is a decorated war fighter with extensive
combat service including in the Gulf war, the Iraq war, and the
war in Afghanistan. He is an experienced leader, holding
command at every echelon in and out of combat.
In 2008 he commanded the Fourth Brigade combat team and the
4th Infantry Division while in support of Operation Enduring
Freedom. Later in 2017 he returned to Afghanistan, this time
commanding the entire 4th Infantry Division. Most recently, he
commanded I Corps, managing daily activities for more than
44,000 soldiers to deploy, fight, and win decisively in the
Indo-Pacific region.
Throughout his service General George never shied away from
difficult tasks and completed them with distinction. He is a
skilled joint officer having served in the Joint Staff J3 and
responsible for geographic combat operation, and he has
distinguished himself as the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, a
position he assumed in August. In this role General George has
been instrumental in helping lead our great U.S. Army.
As new threats emerge our Army must maintain highly trained
and lethal forces to fight and win the Nation's wars and I have
full confidence that he understands the requirements of our
Army at this critical time.
If confirmed, General George will spearhead Army
modernization to deter or, if necessary, defeat great powers.
General George is also laser focused on the betterment of our
Army from recruiting and retention to readiness and training.
He knows the needs of soldiers and their families.
General George is a hardworking public servant but I would
be remiss to not mention that General George is also a great
family man. It truly takes an extraordinary family to serve in
our military and I would like to thank his wife and West Point
classmate Patty and their two children, Grant and Andy, for
their selfless commitment and support over the years.
I firmly believe that General George's qualifications,
record, and character and, of course, his great home State make
him the right nominee to serve in this important role.
General George has my full confidence. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Ernst, not only for your
introduction but for your service. Thank you very much.
General George, please, your testimony?
STATEMENT OF GENERAL RANDY A. GEORGE, USA, FOR REAPPOINTMENT TO
THE GRADE OF GENERAL AND TO BE CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE ARMY
General George. Okay. First, thank you, Senators.
Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Wicker, Members of the Senate
Armed Services Committee, I am humbled to have been nominated
to serve as the 41st Chief of Staff of the Army and I want to
thank you all upfront for your steadfast support of our
soldiers and their families.
I know this has already been done but I would also like to
introduce my family. My wife, Patty, is behind me. She is my
West Point classmate and, yes, by every measure she was the
better cadet. She has been my toughest critic and biggest fan
for 34 years of marriage and she has kept our family strong
through numerous moves, deployments, and assignments. She has
also been a friend and a mentor to many military spouses over
the years.
Our two kids are behind me as well, our son, Grant, whose
hair is now too long, who served in the 4th Infantry Division
in the Ranger Regiment, and he is here with his wife, Hannah,
and my daughter Andy and her husband, Tim, are also joining us.
Patty and I joke that we gave our kids the opportunity to
attend three different high schools. We do believe that it made
them tougher and more adaptable and I know they are both very
thankful for that.
My mother and father, Bob and Lorraine, are watching from
home in Alden, Iowa. I think it is closer to 800 people where I
am at, Senator Ernst. My mom was a little uncertain when I
shipped off to basic training at 17 but I know my dad was very
happy to have me off the payroll.
There is not a military presence in Alden, Iowa, and we
were not from a military family. But there was a Korean War
veteran in town that I did some work for while in high school.
He told me stories about his time in the Army and it inspired
me to go talk to a recruiter. I came into the Army to get money
for college and I have stayed because of the mission and the
people.
Over the last almost 250 years the Army has become one of
the greatest ground forces the world has ever seen. We have
been the main effort for every conflict in our country's
history and have dominated our adversaries because of the
courage, imagination, and determination of our soldiers and our
Nation.
Integral to that, if confirmed I plan to have four focus
areas.
My number-one focus will be on warfighting so that our Army
is always ready to respond when our Nation calls.
Second, I will work to ensure that we are continually
improving to stay ahead of our potential adversaries. As the
war in Ukraine has shown us we are in a rapidly changing
strategic environment. We cannot afford not to evolve.
Third, I will work to ensure that we have the industrial
and sustainment base and the soldier and family support
infrastructure to rapidly project our force across the globe.
Fourth, and finally, I will continue to strengthen the Army
profession and build cohesive teams which starts with fixing
recruiting so that we remain an Army of the people and for the
people, a formidable team of all-volunteer warriors.
I am proud to be a U.S. Army soldier and I look forward to
your questions.
Chairman Reed: Thank you very much, General.
I have a series of standard questions which you could
respond to.
Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations
governing conflicts of interest?
General George. Yes, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Have you assumed any duties or taken any
actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the
confirmation process?
General George. No, Chairman.
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?
General George. Yes, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Do you agree when asked before this
committee to give your personal views even if your views differ
from the administration?
General George. Yes, Chairman.
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? General George. Yes, I do, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Will you ensure that your staff complies
with deadlines established by the committee for the production
of reports, records, and other information including timely
responding to hearing questions to the record?
General George. Yes, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses
and briefers in response to a congressional request?
General George. Yes, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Will those witnesses and briefers be
protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
General George. Yes, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, General.
Welcome. I think we all share Senator Ernst's enthusiasm
and confidence in your assumption, if confirmed, of the role of
Chief of Staff to the Army and one of the issues that you
identified upfront was recruiting, and we know there are many
forces that I mentioned in my comments that are making it
difficult not just for the military but for businesses to
recruit.
If confirmed, what actions would you take to address this
recruiting crisis? I must say, as I mentioned before, I was
very impressed with General Kelly and the Future Soldier prep
course. I think also too we have to spread our focus not only
to high school ROTC but to junior colleges.
But please, sir, your comments?
General George. Yes, Chairman. As I said in my opening
statement, I think it is the number-one challenge that we face
and the one thing that we have to be focused on. We are.
I will tell you that every leader in the Army and I have
been as the Vice as completely focused on this and there is
really two areas. Some of these are--we are doing whatever we
can in the short term and I will mention a couple of those.
We also have a longer term or what we have called basically
a sprint that we hope to finish here within this next month of
what are--do we need--how do we need to change structurally or
what big changes do we need to make, are we--how we are picking
recruiters, where we have our recruiters at, the command and
control structure, marketing. We are reviewing every aspect of
that.
As you mentioned up front we are--some of the challenges
that we are having is having people to meet our standards. We
do not--we are not going to lower our standards. The Future
Soldier prep course has been very helpful to that.
We are down there helping them, people that generally
otherwise meet the standards to get in the military, pass the
ASVAB [Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery]. We have had
challenges with folks passing the entrance test and that is
helping them and then also helping them to pass the height and
weight so that they get in.
We have seen very good success for that, better than 95
percent, and they are doing better in basic training and we--I
think the big thing on the--you mentioned on perceptions, lot
of people are--there is two big things.
I think that the big perception is putting their life on
hold that young kids are worried about. I can--I remember that
and was basically told, hey, it is going to accelerate your
life and I still use that because it was, because it has, and I
think we need to get that word out and we are working very hard
to do that. But that is the big reason that we hear people are
not coming in the military.
Chairman Reed. I thought it was interesting you mentioned
that--the Korean War veteran who got you interested. One of the
issues is a generational one. We just do not have the volume of
veterans we used to have that would talk to young men and women
and inspire them. But we have to get this solution solved.
One issue I will ask is you have been looking closely at
the fighting in Ukraine, and what lessons are you drawing from
what is going on there that can--must be applicable to the
Army?
General George. We are--I mean, there is a lot of lessons
that we are taking from that and something that we are
studying. I think everybody is studying that. So I will give
you a couple of broad--very broad ones.
First, Chairman, I think that partners and allies and just
the strength of that, I mean, was something that was--has been
immediate think how we, the Western forces, go about mission
command and how we allow initiative and just how impactful that
is on the battlefield.
I could go down every warfighting function that we have. I
will mention a couple and each really quick. I think the
importance of long-range fires and the accuracy of that that is
something that the Army, really, the joint force is investing
in and just how important that is.
I think people are seeing around the world how great U.S.
equipment is. That is another thing that I think everybody is
seeing. We are learning a lot in logistics and with 3D printing
that is happening that is up there.
We used to pull artillery tubes, for example, back to be
repaired and maybe all the way back to a depot. That is
happening to tele maintenance in a much more forward position.
We are learning a lot in counter unmanned systems so counter
UAS and how they are being used. I mean, it is--that is rapidly
evolving over there. So I think I could go on and on on this
one.
Chairman Reed. Well, thank you, sir, and, again, thank you
for your service, your family's service. Back in 1971 dating
fellow cadets was not encouraged but times have changed for the
better and the result is before us.
General George. Yes, sir. Chairman Reed. Thank you, sir.
General George. Thank you. Chairman Reed. Senator Wicker,
please?
Senator Wicker. I will leave that alone.
[Laughter.]
Senator Wicker. I mentioned a couple of things in my
opening statement, General, so and it may be that others will
want to delve into this. I mentioned the Total Army Analysis,
which is required in last year's NDAA, Section 1044.
You just solemnly answered one of the standard questions
that the Chairman always asks, will you ensure that your staff
complies with deadlines established by this committee for the
production of reports, records, and other information. Do you
acknowledge that that includes things like the Total Army
Analysis?
General George. Yes, sir.
Senator Wicker. I just want to point out when something is
placed in the statute by the House and Senate and signed by the
President it is the law of the land, and we want to give you
what you want to win for our Nation and we do hope that our
general officers will lead by example by giving us in a timely
manner what we want and transitioning to what you need.
Talk about what the ATACMS could do for our friends in
Ukraine in winning this war against the illegal Russian
invasion. The French are now prepared to deliver what you call
Storm Shadows, or SCALPs.
I do not know what the correct term is that we are supposed
to use. How helpful would our ATACMS be to the effort to defeat
the Russian invasion of Ukraine?
General George. Senator, the ATACMS, obviously, are great.
That missile is a great system, adds range. So that is
basically what it would be providing is the ability to attack
deeper targets.
In the end, I think that we have discovered at looking at
this--and the Chairman asked about lessons learned--it is still
a combined arms fight. There is a lot of things that go into
conducting offensive operations and I think that is an aspect
of it.
Senator Wicker. Well, you are--you are you are going to
obey the commander in chief, no question about it, and he is
going to make the call there. But you also have agreed to give
us your own personal opinion. These ATACMS would be helpful to
the Ukrainians who have asked for them. Is that not correct?
General George. Yes.
Senator Wicker. In terms of the range of them, if that is a
problem actually the range of the French weapons being provided
to Ukrainians is greater range. Is that not correct?
General George. I am not familiar with exactly what the
range is on the--on the French weapon.
Senator Wicker. Okay. Well, just supply that on the record
and that will be fine.
Let me ask you about a favorite of mine and that is Junior
ROTC. You are a graduate of the academy and I am--I got my
commission through ROTC at the University of Mississippi.
But it has become clearer and clearer how important the
ROTC at the high schools is. If you ask a principal of a high
school, you ask a superintendent of a public school system, if
they would like to have Junior ROTC of some kind, whether it is
Army or whatever, they will--they have always given me a
resounding yes and the RAND Corporation, other independent
studies, have confirmed that Junior ROTC in high schools is a
citizenship builder and only 10 percent of our high schools are
able to have Junior ROTC. But 40 percent of our recruits come
from students who have been in Junior ROTC.
So we are--we are increasing the floor of Junior ROTC in
the NDAA and raising the ceiling. What is your opinion about
this and will you help us make Junior ROTC a success pursuant
to this NDAA?
General George. Senator, I agree with you completely. I was
going to say the exact same thing. Where you have had JROTC in
a school we see, whether they are part of the program or not,
they get exposure to the military and we have increased people
that are joining the military.
So that is good, and I think they are great programs and
what--we are, yes, committed to continuing to grow these
programs. What we want to do is responsibly grow them, make
sure that we are picking the right people and working with the
local schools to do that.
But I agree with you, and we are looking--too we have to
look at, make sure that we are--there are some areas where we
are not that we could expand in some of these areas and we are
looking at all of that.
Senator Wicker. Right, and, Mr. Chairman, in general, there
are whole sections of the country where there is really a
paucity of Junior ROTC. This is a citizenship builder, and
whether they go into the military or not it is a subset of
schools that are overachievers, that attend school more
regularly, that graduate more regularly, and go on to higher
education later.
So thank you for that assurance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Wicker.
Senator King, please?
Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before beginning my questions, I cannot help but comment on
the futility of this hearing since we know that General George
will not be confirmed in any time in the foreseeable future,
not because of his qualifications or his experience or his vast
knowledge that he would bring to the job but because of a hold
that has been held on all general officers.
General George, you have committed to giving us your best
professional advice. Do you believe that this blanket hold on
the promotion of general officers, which has left us, for
example, without a commandant of the Marine Corps in the first
time in over 100 years, is undermining national security?
General George. Senator, it is--yes, it is impacting our
readiness. For us it is important as we move leaders to get the
right leader in the right place at the right time and
especially with the--with the right experience and so that is--
that is what we are challenged with right now with the hold.
Senator King. Thank you.
Senator Wicker. Mr. Chairman, I have to take a point of
personal privilege here, if I might, and I will be brief.
I am mindful of the senator from Maine's point of view. But
as a matter of fact a nominee for Chief of Staff of the Army
can be brought to the floor in the usual manner despite a hold
by the majority leader, taken up for a vote, cloture voted, and
the confirmation proceed.
Is that not correct, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Reed. That is correct but that does not account
for the 250 and 60 general officers that are on hold and the
response----
Senator Wicker. Indeed, it is--it is a general statement--
it is a general statement that applies to the others. But with
regard to this nominee and the one yesterday they will be taken
up in the normal course when the majority leader decides to
bring them to the floor and I think that will happen
expeditiously.
Thank you, sir.
Senator King. My response would be that national security
is being compromised by all 250 of those nominees that are
being held up, not just by one or two.
I would like to proceed with my questions if I could, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Continue.
Senator King. General, you have two hats if--when
confirmed. One is best military advice to the President of the
United States. The other is Chief of Staff of the Army.
One of the hardest things to do is saying something that is
difficult to the boss. Are you willing to give the President of
the United States advice that he or she does not want to hear?
General George. Yes, I am, Senator. I think we have had--I
have had to give advice to my boss. As I have advanced in my
career I have had to do that.
Senator King. I hope that that is--that is something that
you will remember as you undertake this position because it
is--if you look back through history, even recent history over
the last 20 or 30 years, telling the boss what they wanted to
hear got us into some real serious trouble. So I hope you will
remember this moment and take that responsibility very, very
seriously.
You mentioned the nature of war and the quote you used was
``rapidly changing strategic environment.'' Could you expand on
that a bit and tell me what you mean by that and how you
believe we have to evolve to meet those new challenges?
General George. Senator, I will use unmanned systems as an
example and loitering munitions and what we have seen because I
think there has been a lot of that that has been out there in
the open source press, but just how quickly things are--you can
take something off the shelf, for example, and weaponize it or
add different components to it.
There is 3D printing that can go to that and can rapidly
change and so what that has caused also for us is that you have
to think about how do you defend yourself against that.
So I think we have to look at it both on the offensive and
on the defensive side. I think what we have seen with--as well
on the--with software and just how quickly you can change and
advance capabilities. That is happening and you can really look
at that across all the other warfighting functions as well.
Cyber.
Senator King. Speed is one of the things you are focusing
on. Delighted to hear you talk about 3D printing because we
cannot afford to be, as you say, sending something back to the
depot.
In my view, every barrack--every barracks, every hangar,
every ship should have a 3D printer and we should be buying the
intellectual property when we buy a platform. Do you agree?
General George. Yes, Senator, I agree.
Senator King. Very quickly in some time that I have left,
lessons from Ukraine--what have we learned about what is going
on in Ukraine and how that war has proceeded in terms of
tactics, strategy, weaponry? Some quick thoughts on lessons
from Ukraine.
General George. I will try to give a couple in addition to
what I talked about before because I could go on. We are
studying this--we are learning a lot from this. Just what is
going on right now I think we are learning how difficult
offensive operations are and what you have to piece together to
do.
I think it is the same for--I did not cover a lot earlier
on integrated air and missile defense but it gets to the
counter UAS piece that I brought up before that you are going
to have to have systems that are able to knock down, and you--
first, you got to see all of that but then you got to be able
to knock down small class one, two, three unmanned systems all
the way up to cruise missiles and I think that that is a real
challenge that we are--we are learning over there.
I think Ukraine is doing a great job. But the basic thing
that I think we have learned from the beginning is it is
critical to have the will to fight and that is exactly what the
Ukrainians have been showing us over there.
Senator King. Thank you. Thank you very much, General.
Chairman Reed. Senator Rounds, please?
Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General George, first of all, I want to thank you for your
service to our country and to your family, and Patty, thank
you, because when you deploy your entire family really deploys.
There is a separation that does not go away, movements that
a lot of the rest of the country do not take into account from
one location to another as your different missions are
assigned, and I want to say thank you to not just you but your
family as well for that.
I would like to begin, General, with a discussion that I
have asked all of the other service chiefs about. All of the
other service chiefs and the combatant commanders have
expressed concerns about the impact auctioning off portions of
the 3.1 to 3.45 gigahertz band of the spectrum would have on
our defensive capabilities.
Based on what we have discussed before, if this report,
which is due in September, demonstrates that auctioning the 3.1
to 3.45 gigahertz portion of the spectrum will adversely impact
our national security what would be your advice to the
President and Congress?
General George. Senator, my advice would be we need that
spectrum and if we were going to lose that, obviously, it would
be time and resources to be able to adjust to that capability.
We are taking part in that study right now and providing our
insights to that.
Senator Rounds. Thank you. I think one part that is missing
sometimes is is that certain parts of the spectrum have to one
degree or another the necessary physics that allow for some
real capabilities and that is the reason why some of our
systems have been established in that area to begin with. Would
you concur with that? General George. I would concur with that.
Senator Rounds. Thank you, sir.
General, there is--at the time here it looks like right now
there is perhaps a 90,000 personnel shortfall between the
numbers within the Army and the numbers that we are projected
to need.
You are going to take your position at a time in which this
recruiting crisis is probably the most severe that it has been
since the DOD's 50-year all-volunteer force was created in the
first place.
While the Army struggles to meet recruiting numbers many
have criticized what is viewed as an increased and an untoward
emphasis on immutable characteristics like race and sex
throughout the DOD and the department has increasingly focused
on new policies and plans in areas like equity, extremism,
gender ideology, abortion, and sex change operations. There is
even a growing bureaucracy focusing on these specific issues.
I know that when you started there was a concern about this
may set us back a few years or it delays your movement into
other activities and so forth. That was the way it was then and
that still is one of the concerns, as you have expressed
earlier.
That did not stop us from meeting our recruitment goals 20
years ago, and while it may impact some today I think there are
other things that may have an impact as well including the
items that I have just discussed.
I guess my perspective is that everyone should be welcome
to serve if qualified. But we are losing focus on teamwork,
discipline, and the enormous challenge presented by an emergent
China.
How do you see this issue, sir, and is this an area where
when we start talking about all of these other items are they
impacting our ability to recruit young men and women?
General George. Senator, I would say yes. Perceptions--the
first thing you mentioned, I mean, we--yes, we have to turn
recruiting around and I am confident and we are going to put
the whole Army's effort and all the leaders behind it to do
that and we appreciate any help that you are providing with
that.
We are keeping soldiers in the Army. So retention is at
near historic. So they like the units that they are serving in.
I will tell you that I spend most of my time focused on
warfighting and that has been my--that has been my experience.
We do talk about building cohesive teams. That has been
my--also been my experience since I was first in. There are
things that you have to do to make sure that you are bringing
everybody together from across the country and everybody has
the same values and character as part of that that is
critically important to us.
So I do--I think anytime that there is a perception of
something from somebody because it is--like I mentioned up
front, it was a veteran that talked to me. It is coaches that
talk to people and teachers and, I ]mean, I would want people
to know that the Army is a great place to be.
It is a life accelerator and we are focused on our mission,
and there is so many things that you can do in the military to
advance your life and we got to get the word out on that.
Senator Rounds. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Rounds.
Senator Kaine, please?
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General George,
great to meet with you yesterday. I look forward to supporting
your nomination.
I will add to the recruiting challenge you could hardly
send a worse message to people who were thinking about joining
the military and maybe making a career out of it than is being
sent right now with these military holds.
One of my kids is a marine officer 8 years Active, now a
Reservist, like everybody else who joins an all-voluntary
military willing to risk their life for their country.
But why would they sign up to serve knowing that a member
of the U.S. Senate could block their professional advancement
because they are disappointed with a policy that they had
nothing to do with? That is what is happening right now.
Two hundred and fifty people, soon to be more than 600, who
have volunteered to wear the uniform of the country and risk
their life to defend the country are being blocked from
professional advancement because a member of this body is
disappointed with a policy that these hundreds have nothing to
do with.
If you are disappointed with a policy in the military,
especially if you are a member of this committee, you have an
opportunity every year when we mark up a defense bill to try to
convince your colleagues that the policy should be changed.
I have been now through 11 NDAAs on this committee and
every year I introduce amendments and try to convince my
colleagues that my position is right, and sometimes I prevail
but I often do not, and if I cannot convince my colleagues I am
right that is on me. But I do not take it out on hundreds of
officers and their families whose lives are being put in limbo
because I am unhappy.
This is--I associate myself with Senator King's point. This
is hurting our defense. This is hurting our Nation when we are
in a very challenging global environment, and as we are talking
about what we can do to try to make military service more
attractive it is sending exactly the wrong message to people
that we are trying to encourage to join the military.
General George, you--I think you are aware we had a hearing
earlier this year where Army experts came and talked about the
recruiting challenge and they listed the reasons that through
some intense surveying why recruiting is tough and the number-
one reason is, I am worrying that I am putting my life on hold,
that others will move ahead and I will not because I will be in
a situation where I cannot advance.
That was even a more powerful factor than, I am worrying
about the risk of my life. People were able to accept that risk
and still wanted to join but the number-one factor that people
were not joining is, gosh, I am worried that if I join the
military I am going to have to put my life on hold and I will
not be able to advance like others.
This body is sending a loud message that is being heard all
over this country to people who have risen through the ranks,
who have served, who have deployed multiple times, whose
families have moved, who have sacrificed. We are sending a loud
message to them that, wow, Kaine's mad about something that the
Pentagon is doing and he could not convince his colleagues that
it was right.
So, what, I should just punish everybody who had nothing to
do with it? I pray that we will turn from this dangerous path
because if one senator can do this, hey, all hundred will find
something at the Pentagon that they are not wild about and
suddenly it is okay--well, look, I am not happy and I could not
convince my colleagues but I at least can punish people who are
blameless. I hope we will turn from this.
General, I want to ask you about the Radford Depot. My team
and I recently went to the Radford Army ammunition plant. We
heard about the challenges that they face competing for
contracts.
Radford is a strategic capability, critical component in
our Nation's mission to produce munitions, which is important
and getting more important. Although cost is an important
consideration in these items we also need to preserve the
viability of an organic industrial base. I know you have spent
time focusing upon the munitions production needs of the
country.
So how do you view the balance between choosing vendors
with lowest cost bids while maintaining the ability to deliver
readiness from our organic industrial base?
General George. As you mentioned, Senator, Radford and
several other depots out there are critically important and it
is an amazing workforce, having been to a bunch of them, and
what they do and just how patriotic they are in their mission.
I think what we are looking at doing--and we have spent
some of our own money to try to--we need to inside the budget.
We appreciate the support we have gotten from Congress. I think
we got $1.6 billion last year to also invest in that. We do
have to upgrade these depots. I think that it is important to
do that and do it in a way where we can increase production.
I can give one example of an ammunition plant where you can
build the capability, you can keep the same size workforce, and
then have the ability to expand production from there, and I
think that is where we need to focus.
Senator Kaine. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Reed. Thank you,
Senator Kaine. Senator Ernst, please?
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you very
much, General George, for your time today.
Patty, thank you for being here and to the rest of the
family and I want to send a special thank you also to your
parents back home in Iowa and I know that they are very, very
proud of your accomplishments, General George.
I also know that when you are confirmed you will be an
effective steward for the Army and a great partner to those of
us on this committee.
So I do want to express some of the concerns that I have,
and we have discussed our Special Operations Forces in detail
but just for everyone's knowledge and information with the
recruiting challenges the Army is expressing interest in
cutting our SOF forces. SOF was born for great power
competition. They are the Nation's purpose built force for
campaigning against great powers.
Their value proposition is to deter war in peacetime and
create military advantages for the joint force in wartime. But
SOF also remains the Nation's premier force for crisis response
and counterterrorism.
As a recent congressionally mandated study determined the
demand signal from theater commanders for SOF will increase. I
am concerned to learn of the proposals to cut Army SOF by 10 to
20 percent.
Now, I know we are facing budgetary challenges. The end
strength challenges also are squeezing the whole Army. But SOF
are not mass produced and I doubt that cutting them would
create the savings the Army is actually looking for and, worse,
those cuts could have disproportionate impact on Special
Operations missions.
So the numbers are not adding up at this time. We are
looking to cut SOF when we need them the most. So, General, do
you believe these reductions would limit the Army's ability to
provide forces to commanders to deter great powers,
counterterrorism, and respond to crises?
General George. Senator, I have been deploying side by side
with SOF forces for the last 20 years. I agree with you that
they are an amazing capability. They have been and they will
continue to be. I agree with that.
What we are doing with modeling I have been talking with
both General Braga, who is the USASOC [United States Army
Special Operations Command] commander. The Army makes up about
65 to 70 percent of all of SOCOM [Special Operations Command)
and what we do is model to see how are things going to be
different, what capabilities do we need.
So when I was in Afghanistan just a couple of years ago
there was 11,000 that was there. Most of that was SOF and we
are not doing that. So I think we have to review all of this.
We are in the process. There has been no decisions made. I am
close to both of them. I actually heard from General Fenton
this morning.
So we are talking through that. But I think what we owe you
is the best joint force and military that can tackle the
problems that are ahead and that is what we are working on.
Senator Ernst. Yes, and so just to make clear, you will be
working with those commanders--those operational commanders and
making sure that the cuts would not create operational risk and
you can report those to Congress. Is that correct?
General George. Yes, Senator, we are working closely with
them. Absolutely.
Senator Ernst. Okay, and I do hope that as you are working
through those issues then before any of those cuts are approved
that you would notify members of this committee.
General George. Just earlier because Senator Wicker--of
course, we are going to come over before any of these final--
this comes out that we will talk it over with you first.
Senator Ernst. Good. Thank you, and, General, I do want to
share SOCOM's assessment. We did receive this just recently and
it says that SOF can only execute its assigned mission with SOF
enablers and cutting enablers increases risk to mission.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to if--I would ask if we could
enter this into the record.
Chairman Reed. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you,
General.
SOF--they are a strategic capability for the joint force
and I look forward to working with you to strengthen them. I
will followup with additional questions for the record.
But again, General George, you have my full support with
your nomination and confirmation. I am proud to be sharing the
desk with you this morning for the introduction and, again,
congratulations to your family.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Ernst.
Senator Rosen, please?
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Chairman Reed. I appreciate you
for holding this hearing, and I want to thank you too, General
George, for testifying today, for your lifelong service, your
thoughtfulness and, of course, we would always be remiss if we
did not think about the families who pack and unpack, do all of
that, I guess, schlepping around the world in order to support
the service to our Nation. So I thank you and your family.
But I want to talk a little bit about a small arms range
for Nevada and so I want to revisit an issue that I have
consistently raised with General McConville and Secretary
Wormuth.
Currently Nevada's Guard and Reserve soldiers are traveling
to surrounding states in order to satisfy their annual weapons
qualification. It is an average cost of $500,000--half a
million dollars per year per unit.
I am appreciative of the Army's commitment to correct this
would spur the effort underway to build a permanent range at
Hawthorne Army Depot by fiscal year 2025.
It is my understanding that Nevada Army National Guard is
on track to complete their planning and design to meet that
timeline.
So, General George, if confirmed, can I have your
commitment that a small arms qualification range is built
enough by 2025 so that Nevada's soldiers can meet their annual
requirements at greater convenience and lower cost to the
taxpayer?
General George. Yes, Senator.
Senator Ernst. Thank you. I will take that as a strong yes.
General George. A strong yes.
Senator Ernst. Well, everybody is very excited to do that
in Nevada. It will really improve our readiness.
We are going to stay with Hawthorne Army Depot because we
are the largest ammunition depot and demilitarization facility,
and so despite its size and crucial role that Hawthorne Army
Depot plays for our munitions readiness it is in desperate need
of significant infrastructure upgrades such as replacing
boilers that were installed in 1974, nearly 50 years ago. They
are now inoperable. We need to modernize condemned buildings
that are unable to be occupied and fixing roads that are
currently impassable.
So I am proud that this committee adopted my report
language during the NDAA markup that encourages the Secretary
of the Army to prioritize infrastructure investments for
Hawthorne and requires the Army to brief us on the status to
upgrade and repair the infrastructure and functionality of the
depot.
The need to invest in our munitions depots has only become
more acute in light of the need to ramp up munitions production
not only to arm Ukraine but also to backfill our own
stockpiles.
So during this year's Army posture hearing Secretary
Wormuth made a commitment to me to take a look at investments
at Hawthorne.
So, General George, again, if confirmed, can I have your
commitment to include Hawthorne in the Army's next future years
defense planning or even unfunded priority list so that
Congress can fund these investments to ensure our munitions
readiness? This is top of mind.
General George. Yes, Senator. We are--I mean, we are
reviewing that. We do have a plan across all of that and,
obviously, we have to balance readiness exercises and
everything else to look at that.
But yes, it is critically important for us and we will
definitely take a close look at Hawthorne, really, and across
our industrial base.
Senator Ernst. Thank you. I appreciate that, and I want to
talk a little bit now about remote maintenance support that we
are giving to Ukraine.
We know that the Army is providing remote maintenance teams
to allow Ukrainians on the frontlines to receive immediate
advice--hands-on advice from U.S. soldiers and contractors on
weapons and equipment maintenance.
So as Ukraine receives more advanced equipment the demand
for these teams is, frankly, going to grow and so, General
George, what should the Army be doing to expand this program to
ensure it is equipped to efficiently and accurately respond to
requests out in an Active battlefield like in Ukraine as--
particularly as their counter offensive continues to evolve?
General George. Well, Senator, as earlier we were talking
about lessons I think that is one of the big lessons that we
have learned, what you can do with tele maintenance and what
that does to reduce--have to backhaul things and what you can
fix forward.
So I am really--we are really proud of what Army Materiel
Command and U.S. Army Europe is doing to put this forward
across all of these equipments and we will--absolutely we pay
close attention to operational readiness rates and will
continue to support them.
Senator Ernst. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Rosen.
Senator Scott, please?
Senator Scott. Great. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you,
General George. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your
family for being here. Thank you for your service.
So can we talk about recruiting? Let me just give you some
numbers that you probably already know. I guess the Army missed
their numbers by 25 percent last year and I think it is on
track to do 23 percent less this year.
There is a Pentagon study that showed 77 percent of
American youth are not eligible to serve and there is a recent
Wall Street Journal article that highlighted a disturbing trend
that said children of military families, who typically make up
80 percent of Army recruits, are telling their children not to
serve, especially those in the South. So I will just give you
the things I will ask and you can answer me in any order.
One, can you talk about what you are going to do, if
anything, on the people that were discharged on COVID? So if
you can talk about that, and then what would you--if you were--
if you got to talk to all these military families about why
their kids should serve what would you say to them and what
would you tell if you were talking to--like, I think I was
telling somebody in your team I have got an 11-year-old
grandson who I am sure is going to serve in the military. Why
should he serve in the Army? What would you tell these kids why
they should go in to the Army?
Can you talk about what you are doing at Fort Jackson where
you are trying to prepare kids for joining the military that
might not be able to get in, and then is there anything
Congress ought to be doing to help you? There is no--however--
whatever order you want to do it.
General George. Okay. Thanks, Senator.
First, on COVID discharges we do have a process. There have
been people that have come back into the Army that were
discharged for COVID and specifically for COVID. It was not
COVID and several other things that kind of went along with
that. So I am confident that we have a process and we have had
people that come back in.
Senator Scott. Do you think it is going to work?
General George. What is that?
Senator Scott. Do you think a lot of people--do you think a
lot of people will come back?
General George. Well, that will be, obviously, up to them.
We want anybody who is able bodied and wants to come back and
serve their country to come back and join us.
Your second question was talking to families--
Senator Scott. Does this surprise you? Does that number
surprise you about military families telling their kids they do
not--they should not come back in or they should not--
General George. I do not know where you got this statistic
at, Senator, but I wanted--
Senator Scott. I will find it. It is the Wall Street
Journal article.
General George. What I was going to tell you is, and I just
had a friend who just sent--his son just did a year of college
and now he is enlisted and he is going to the Rangers so I am--
which I am very happy about.
So I think there is a lot of them out there that are still
telling their kids and they know. I think what we got to do is
change the perception and talk to them about what we are doing
and the one thing I would tell you--and I think we have had a
couple of conversations--we got to get out and get that story
out to people that are influencers and talk to our veterans and
tell them what we are focusing on.
Again, retention has not been a problem for us. People are
staying in the military. We are very busy. We are deploying. We
are doing things.
So why the Army? Obviously, I love the Army. I have been
doing this for a really long time. I know you can do almost
anything in the Army and I think it has proven to be a
meritocracy. Work hard. Do your job. You are going to--you are
going to advance.
There is a million different things you can do from cyber.
Everybody does not have to be an infantryman or artillery.
There is a lot of things that you can do in the military and I
tell everybody that I did not plan. I came in for a couple of
years. I have mainly stayed for the people initially, and,
obviously I love the mission. So and I think we got to get that
word out and talk to people.
I am really proud of, to your last question on Fort
Jackson, what we are doing down there with the Future Soldier
prep course and it gets to your--you said 77 percent cannot
meet the standards.
We have had--we have seen some of the--that has dropped,
actually, from just a couple of years ago. We want people to
meet our standard and I think we want them to know that, that
we are willing to invest in them and help them pass that test
to get healthier.
I would love if--and if you have not been down there I
think it is good and I am always amazed when I--the number-one
story I always hear is everybody says, I am glad I put my phone
up a little bit and I am sleeping better. I am doing better.
But I think it is helping. That course is helping them. We are
seeing great results out of it.
Senator Scott. Can you--thank you. Can you just talk--we do
not have much time left but just talk about the troops we have
in Asia and the importance of them and are they really doing
their job? Are they are going to help deter either China, North
Korea or any bad actor?
General George. Absolutely. I think, Senator, we got--and
USARPAC [United States Army, Pacific Command] is doing a lot.
Would like to come sit down and talk to you about that or have
somebody that can explain what the Army is out there doing in
the Pacific.
Like we talked about with Ukraine I think partnerships,
partners, and allies mean a lot and human interoperability, I
think, is the most important thing. You get that out of
exercises that we are doing over there and we are doing a lot
of them. I was--it is amazing the relationships that we have
built, I think, in Europe and we are doing the same thing in
the Pacific Theater.
Senator Scott. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Scott. Senator
Warren, please?
Senator Warren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is good to see
you here, General George. Welcome. Congratulations.
So I am deeply concerned about the increasing number of
suicides that we are seeing among Active Duty soldiers. In the
first quarter of 2023, 49 Active Duty soldiers took their own
lives. That is the highest first quarter number since DOD first
started collecting these data a decade ago.
Now, the Army has studied this problem a lot but it has not
acted with enough urgency. From 2019 to 2022 the Army sponsored
47 studies addressing suicide. However, an Army audit obtained
by the Project on Government Oversight found that nearly 90
percent of those studies, quote, ``did not have any actionable
recommendations or recommended only more research.'' Nearly 90
percent of them, and for the few studies that did have
actionable recommendations the Army did nothing.
Now, the Army was originally supposed to issue new suicide
prevention regulations in the fall of 2021. Nearly 2 years
after that deadline it has still failed to do so and our
servicemembers are suffering.
So, General George, if you are confirmed can I count on you
to help get these regs out and, even more importantly, to help
get these regs implemented in order to address the suicide
crisis in our military?
General George. Yes, Senator.
Senator Warren. Good.
General George. Can I talk--can I say a couple of things
about that?
Senator Warren. You sure can. You sure can.
General George. Just in my experience because as a
commander it was not necessarily the regulation--
Senator Warren. Fair enough.
General George.--that made the difference for me. It was
getting the resources and then command emphasis and that is
what we have to do, and right now we are doing what we call a
building cohesive teams update and I always talk about every
location is a little bit different and I always give the
example of Alaska versus Fort Irwin versus now Fort Liberty.
Very different. They are facing different challenges and I
think that that is what we are trying to do is focus.
One of the things that we have learned from we will take
things that work. But in Alaska they are doing something called
Mission 100, which is basically getting somebody to talk to a
counselor immediately.
Everybody has to do that within a year because what we are
finding is a lot of these problems are not necessarily
behavioral health problems. They are relationship issues,
financial issues.
I think we got to look at this through health and holistic
fitness. Our health and holistic fitness--where we have fielded
that in the brigades we have seen reductions in behavioral
health and in suicides. Again, I think it is--that is what we
have to focus on are the end results and we are not happy with
where we are at.
Senator Warren. Well, and I appreciate the attention that
you have paid to this and I have every confidence you will
continue to do this.
But I just want to be able to say quite publicly, you and
I, this has got to be a priority for the Army and seeing these
first quarter numbers is truly alarming.
One other thing that we know--you raise several factors can
contribute to suicide. Another one we know is failure to
respond to sexual harassment or assault.
So, General George, do you agree that addressing sexual
assault and harassment should be part of the solution to
suicide prevention programs at DOD?
General George. Senator, I think all of that is yes as a
part of that if you are having them and so first it is
prevention of those kind of things that we have to focus on and
then--and the response, absolutely, making sure that we are
taking care of the victim.
Senator Warren. I appreciate that. We do not have suicide
prevention regulations yet but we do have recommendations from
what is called the Suicide Prevention and Response Independent
Review Committee and one of the shortfalls it identified in a
report earlier this year is the critical shortage of behavioral
health professionals.
Do you agree that one tool in addressing these shortages
could involve the Army working with servicemembers to
facilitate access to whatever care can help them whether it is
directly through DOD or outside DOD?
General George. Yes, Senator, I agree with that and like I
said before I think what we are trying to do is if it is
specifically--I think there is a national shortage in
behavioral health specialists so what we want to do is make
sure that we are triaging and people who need the behavioral
health actually get that, and if somebody has a financial issue
or relationship issue they are talking to somebody.
Senator Warren. I appreciate that. I just want to mention
that in Massachusetts we have the Home Base program, which is
making a big difference to servicemembers and their families.
They provide treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder
and depression as well as for the complicated grief of loved
ones who have lost a servicemember or a veteran to suicide, and
it provides an opportunity for servicemembers to get the help
they need without worrying about the stigma of seeking help
through DOD instead.
So I want us to do everything we can in this area and I
look forward to having a chance to work with you. Thank you,
General George.
General George. Thank you, Senator. I look forward to
getting up to see Home Base and everything else.
Senator Warren. Good. I am going to hold you to that.
General George. Yes, Senator.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Warren. Senator
Tuberville, please?
Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General,
thanks for being here, you and your family. Thanks for your
service.
As we talked about yesterday we want to try to keep
politics out of--out of your business. You do not need that and
I apologize for what you have had to go through this morning.
Some of your hearing time should not--you should not have had
gone through that but--because you cannot control that, okay.
So but I thank you for being here.
But you are going to find out in your recruiting--we have
talked about recruiting today--your three biggest hurdles are
going to be politicians, the media, and social media. That is
going to be your three biggest problems.
I have gone through that before not in the military but
also in coaching, and so that is some things that you are going
to have to fight through.
Just one little story. About a year ago--I will tell you a
sad story--one of the big things that we get here--that you get
satisfaction from is to be able to nominate young men and women
to the military academies, which is awesome. I mean, it is an
awesome accomplishment.
They work for it all their life. They put their heart and
soul into it, and I called a young man last year in Alabama,
and it had been his lifelong goal to be perfect in every score
and in school.
He said, Coach, I am going to turn it down. I have read too
much in the media about what is going on. I do not want any
part of it. That is the direction that we are headed in this
country.
We need kids like him to be in the military, not force them
out because of too much dang politics. So good luck to you and
I think you are going to do an awesome job.
I want to ask you about the future long-range assault
aircraft, the new helicopter that we are getting ready to
start, and you are going to be the recipient of that. What is
your thoughts about it, the decision that we made with the dual
rotor?
General George. You are talking of FLRAA?
Senator Tuberville. Yes, the FLRAA. Yes.
General George. Well, I think that that helicopter,
obviously, the ones that we have had and I have been on for the
last 20 years are great. This one you are going to get double
the speed and double the range and have the ability to upgrade
from them.
I think that that will be a significant improvement and as
I mentioned up front we have to constantly be looking to evolve
and I think that this will help us--definitely help us to do
that.
Senator Tuberville. Do you think that is going to help us
in the Indo-Pacific the Army being involved if there happens to
be a future conflict?
General George. I do, yes, Senator.
Senator Tuberville. Because of the size, the speed?
General George. I think the size and the speed and
getting--and moving things around. Yes, Senator.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Tomorrow I will be meeting
with General Hamilton, the commander of the Army Materiel
Command, and as you know Anniston Depot is the designated
center of industrial and technology excellence for vehicles
such as the M-1 Abrams tank and the Stryker.
The depot has teammates deployed around the world in direct
support of our Nation's war fighters providing service and
repairs in the field, especially in this time of the conflict
we are having in Europe.
General, what is being done to ensure that the depots
around the country can meet the current forecasted workload to
replenish what we are losing now?
General George. Senator, first, as I mentioned to you, I
think, we are super proud of Anniston. A lot of what ends up in
Ukraine has been touched by the great workforce that is down
there at Anniston and also helping with all of the logistics is
also coming out of Redstone.
We are in the process of updating the industrial base. It
is critically important to the Army, really, to the joint force
and to our Nation. We have a long-range plan to do that and we
have kind of broken it up in increments to prioritize what we
can do.
We had spent a good amount--$1.5 billion--out of our
budget. Thanks to Congress we got an additional $1.6 billion,
and I think we are continuing to look at that and what we need
to do to pull it left.
It is oftentimes not as easy as just going out and fixing
everything all at once because we also have to continue to do
what we are doing at Anniston. So you have to figure out how
you are upgrading it while continuing the mission.
Senator Tuberville. I am amazed at how many people it takes
to run a tank, not the people inside but the people that follow
along--the fuel, the maintenance, mechanics.
General George. Yes, sir. Yes.
Senator Tuberville. I mean, it is unbelievable just looking
through that scenario. But, again, congratulations--
General George. Thank you, sir.
Senator Tuberville.--to you, your family and look forward
to going to Redstone and Fort Novosel and Anniston in the near
future. Thank you.
General George. Thank you.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Tuberville.
Senator Kelly, please?
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good to see you
again, General, and very nice meeting your family and
congratulations on your nomination.
I really appreciate the conversation we had--I think it was
about a month ago--about the importance of leveraging existing
Army assets to strengthen our electronic warfare capabilities
and hearing your perspective on how critical our Army's
training ranges are to that work and that effort.
The Fort Huachuca electronic proving ground offers great
potential for electronic warfare testing, experimentation, and
training. In Fort Huachuca, as we discuss, has a truly unique
geography that allows us to safely employ electronic warfare
effects and to train very realistically, and a DOD team
recently came out to the fort and assessed their capability and
found that it does have the capacity and the expertise and the
will also to do more and, in my view, we need to seize this
opportunity.
That is why I led a provision in this year's defense bill
requiring that the Secretary of Defense carry out a
demonstration of a new Western Range complex. This will
eventually serve as a joint multi-domain nonkinetic testing and
training environment across military departments and the
Western Range complex would connect multiple nonkinetic ranges
and training sites to better replicate some real-world threat
conditions. I also worked on provisions to require assessments
on where we may need to invest to ensure that we keep pace with
changing technology and threats.
So, General George, if confirmed, you would oversee the
execution of Army policies and programs on electronic warfare.
So could you explain a little bit why this capability is so
important as we accelerate modernization to meet threats posed
by countries like Russia and China?
General George. Yes, Senator. We--this kind of gets to some
of the earlier questions we were talking about what have we
learned and a lot in electronic warfare and also in signals
intelligence. That is a big part of what we can do out in
Huachuca.
There is very few locations like what we have--the
capability that we have out at Huachuca, which is also our--the
Army's intel center and we have to immediately adapt the kind
of lessons that we are learning and we need places where we can
do that, and we are looking at a place just like you are
talking about doing that at Huachuca. Also have to integrate
that into our combat training centers.
So I think it is absolutely--if we are going to evolve we
are going to have to learn how to adapt to those environments.
Senator Kelly. One of the things that makes Fort Huachuca
unique is the geography, and when you put an emitter out on the
Barry Goldwater Range on the ground to emulate some Chinese
threat compared to what you can do in Fort Huachuca you are
talking about upwards of 10 times the power and what that
enables is, say, it is a surface to air missile threat, a
fighter, to be able to identify that threat from a much greater
distance.
So could you talk a little bit about the context of what
this means for a future conflict in the Pacific if we were to
get into one?
General George. Well, I think that what you are talking
about being able to do is realistic training that we have to be
able to do. Those are the kind of threats that we are going to
face and you have to train--you have to train for that.
We are doing the same thing in trying to incorporate that
where we can with our exercises. Some of our exercises have
actually linked back to capabilities that we have had at the
electronic proving grounds.
I think we have to--obviously, the Pacific is the expanse
and doing geography and linking all of these capabilities to
include command and control is something that we will--we will
continue to do. But it is, obviously, critically important to
the Army and, I think, the joint force.
Senator Kelly. Well, thank you, General.
In my remaining time here I just want to talk about a visit
I had at the Army Futures Command, and I was briefed on their
efforts to ensure that the U.S. Army remains at the forefront
of technological innovation and warfighting capability.
They had some concerns that they did not have a lot of
nimble funding tools and sources and they were often at risk of
missing some opportunities to leverage innovation from industry
because they did not have the funding tools available to get
resources to companies without it taking, in some cases, a
couple years.
So I know I am running out of time here. But, General, I am
interested in getting some help and a commitment to facilitate
some collaboration between the Army Futures Command and the
Office of Strategic Capital and to see if you would be willing
to work with me on these efforts to bridge what we often refer
to as the valley of death in government contracting.
General George. Absolutely, Senator. Whatever we can do to,
I think, do things--evolve quickly we are absolutely interested
in that and I am happy to come see you and talk to you about
that more.Senator Kelly. Thank you, General.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Kelly.
Senator Budd, please?
Senator Budd. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, General, for
being here and congrats on your nomination.
I want to focus on Special Operations Force structure and
potential cuts that have now been widely reported, including an
exclusive by the Secretary of the Army with the Army Times.
Special Operations Forces play a critical role in strategic
competition, counterterrorism, and crisis response. So and,
General, a true or false question here. So given these
requirements would you say that demand for Special Operations
Forces from the combatant commands is growing? True or false,
please.
General George. I do not know the answer to that
specifically. But if you were to ask me how much it is since
what we were doing 10 years ago I think, again, what we are
trying to do to look at this, and there has been no decisions
made on this--on anything with the force structure but we are
doing things differently and this really comes down to if we
are operating in the same theater together and doing the same
thing and that is what we model. There are ways that we can do
things, I think, one, more efficiently and, two, that would be
better for the--for the joint force.
So we have a lot of capabilities that are out there already
campaigning and I think that we can do a lot of things
together, Senator.
Senator Budd. General, thank you. I appreciate your
responses earlier to Senator Ernst and her kind introduction of
you.
The trend that I am seeing--and this is anecdotal and we
probably would have the data that we are seeing an increased
demand on this--but the joint concept for competing states that
the joint force will conduct irregular warfare operations and
activities proactively to subvert, create dilemmas for
adversaries, and impose costs on adversaries' strategic
interest.
So when I think of irregular warfare I think specifically
about Army SOF, Green Berets, psychological operations, civil
affairs.
So another true or false. Decreasing the overall--and this
is, again, decreasing overall capacity of Army Special
Operations will decrease joint force ability to conduct the
irregular warfare called for by the joint concept for
competing. Would that be true or false?
General George. I am sorry I have not given you a true or
false, Senator. But I do think that, first of all, for SOF it
takes a long time to grow that capability. We have not talked
to anybody at SOCOM about--specifically for SOF, that specific
capability, because I agree with you we need that capability
and--out there. I think what we are talking about is how we
support that capability that they have.
Senator Budd. Thank you, General, and keeping with that it
would seem that if we did decrease SOF in the joint force that
would decrease our ability to compete. So what does the
operational and personnel tempo look like for Army Special
Operations?
General George. I would tell you that the op tempo is high
really across the Army for what we are doing. So that is kind
of how we measure it as far as we are looking at brigade combat
teams, the same enablers that we are talking about are over
there forward.
For example, in Europe right now it is all the Army
enablers that are already over there that are supporting the
SOF so they would not have to send additional folks over there.
So that is what we try to do to do economies of scale. That is
what you would expect us to do because we also need an Army
that can fight and win and so I think that is all part of it.
Senator Budd. General, continuing on with that, and I think
I heard in that answer that you said it is high right now. So
if demand is increasing and capacity would decrease under the
Army's reported plans would that not negatively impact both
operational and personnel tempo?
General George. Again, what we are--we would like to
decrease tempo--perstempo--for everybody that is out there.
Senator Budd. Right. But understand if it is--if it is
actually is increasing would not decreasing under the Army's
reported plans--would that not negatively impact operation
personnel tempo? I mean, they seem they could be going in
opposite directions.
General George. If you are talking very basically like
that--I would love to come over and have a detailed
conversation with you on this, Senator--really, for everybody--
about this.
Senator Budd. Thank you, General. So I hope that we can
make some reasonable decisions here--I look forward to that
conversation--that are in the best interests of the Army and
the joint force as a whole. So I am going to be following this
closely and I would love detailed updates as the department's
planning progresses.
But in my final time here I want to ask on a different
topic. When we spoke in my office you mentioned the Army needs
to improve its marketing strategy to address the recruiting
crisis. You have mentioned recruiting a bit before.
But what strategies and tools--a little different
question--what strategy and tools would you suggest to improve
Army recruiting?
General George. I will give you one quick example, Senator.
I heard this when I was out with a recruiting company
commander. I do not remember if it was Oklahoma or Texas or it
was one of the others and he said, hey, if you are a
nationally--your national message might be buy a certain kind
of vehicle and out here we buy Ford 150's. That is what it is.
How do we tailor local messages to local. That is one thing
that I think that we have to look at because we are different
and we are trying to appeal to a very broad--we want to come
from across society and so I think that we have to look at it
in detail from the local markets all the way up to the larger
markets and that is what we need to do.
Senator Budd. Thank you, General. Chairman, my time has
expired.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Budd.
Senator Hirono, please?
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General George, welcome. Thank you very much for your
service and your commitment to continuing to serve and, of
course, aloha to your family because we all know that when you
serve your family also serves.
We have had over the last 2 days the--hearings on two
really important nominations. Yesterday was General Brown to be
the Chair of the Joint Chiefs and today you to be the Chief of
Staff for the Army.
It has been made abundantly clear how damaging the holds
that Senator Tuberville has placed on military promotions is
and yesterday I note that Senator Tuberville in his questioning
of General Brown for his position said if there is anything he
can do to help General Brown, and I would say--and I would join
my colleagues in saying, Senator Tuberville, you have made your
point and I ask you to lift your hold because, as I said, it
has been made abundantly clear by all of your testifying that
these holds are creating much damage to our readiness, our
ability of our military to proceed. So there is that for
Senator Tuberville.
General George, as part of my responsibilities I want to
ensure the fitness of all nominees who come before any of the
committees on which I serve for fitness to serve and I ask the
following two initial questions. 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?
General George. No, Senator.
Senator Hirono. Have you ever faced discipline or entered
into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
General George. No, I have not, Senator.
Senator Hirono. General George, I have been sitting here
for a while, and I very much appreciate your very thoughtful
responses to the questions that have been put to you and
especially relating to very sensitive issues such as suicide
and, I would say, the continuing scourge of sexual assault and
harassment in the military. I appreciate your thoughtful
responses.
As the chair of the Readiness Subcommittee I have made very
clear the importance of infrastructure as a top priority and
the Army, like every service, has a deep backlog of maintenance
and modernization for its facilities and basic infrastructure
and, in fact, in Hawaii there is a backlog of almost $5 billion
in facilities maintenance and modernization and that is the
deficit. We discussed this yesterday.
Where does infrastructure replacement, repair, and
maintenance stand in your order of priorities for the Army?
General George. I will tell you, Senator, that it is
integral. Our job is to be prepared for--to fight and win our
Nation's wars and having the right infrastructure depending on
what it is is a critical aspect of that.
You know in Hawaii how critical Schofield and everything
that we have out there, the training area, PTA [Pohakuloa
Training Area], is to us out there. So we have to pay attention
to that. It gets to recruiting as well. If you are not--if you
do not have the right infrastructure that has an impact on your
workforce and so I would say it is of critical importance to
us.
Senator Hirono. There is such a huge infrastructure deficit
throughout the DOD but the Army has a huge presence in Hawaii
as well as in other places and what I would like to see going
forward under your leadership is a more obvious commitment to
infrastructure replacement, maintenance, modernization.
I do not really see that as a commitment. We wait until
things fall apart, where electricity goes out at Tripler, the
major hospital in Hawaii, and you cannot have that, not to
mention the huge concerns regarding Red Hill.
So you did mention the importance of renegotiating our
leases for training, especially Pohakuloa, and part of those
renegotiations is very much talking with the community.
So I would like to have your commitment that you will make
sure that that kind of outreach is occurring. The last thing we
need to happen for these really critical training areas is some
concerns raised that we have not addressed due to some lack of
outreach and continuing discussions with especially the native
Hawaiian community.
General George. I agree with you 100 percent, Senator, and
we will--we will partner with the local community. I know they
are doing that right now.
Senator Hirono. As we are doing these leases I think there
may be an opportunity for the Army to really look at its needs
and return some of the land to the State. So that kind of a
process I think is very important. I hope you will conduct that
and with a view of returning land that you do not need to the
State.
General George. Okay, Senator. Yes.
Senator Hirono. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Hirono.
Senator Mullin, please?
Senator Mullin: Thank you, Chairman, and I honestly had no
intention of addressing this but I have to because it seems
like my colleagues from the other side continue to bring up the
Tuberville hold and they are leaving a factor out of this, that
Chuck Schumer can bring this up for vote anytime he wants to.
Secretary Austin can come here and address his concerns anytime
he wants to.
Senator Tuberville has the right to put a hold on it
because he believes something is illegal. He believes that
Secretary Austin is going outside of Code 1093. 1093 was a
code--was a law that was passed that President Biden--for my
colleagues that may not know the history of this, President
Biden voted for that was very clear that allowed exceptions
only in three cases for the armed services to pay and assist in
any circumstances for an abortion.
That is the law, and if we do not like the law then we have
the right as a body to change it. But yet we are ignoring that
issue, and if Secretary Austin believes that it is within his
authority to do so then he can come in here with his team of
attorneys and, Chairman Reed, you can have a hearing on it and
he can explain it to all of us, or Chuck Schumer can simply
bring it to the floor for a vote and we can all vote on it and
say we do not believe in law anymore and we want to dissolve
it.
But my colleague has the right to put a hold on it. So we
can continue to gripe about it all we want but it is within his
right to do it and it is within our body to address his
concerns if we choose to. But we are all ignoring that issue.
So I think my colleagues should probably refocus on
themselves and call in Chuck Schumer or this committee to have
a hearing on it.
With that being said, I will quit my rant.
General George, a pleasure seeing you again. I truly think
we have developed a friendship. I appreciate you, and, Mrs.
George, your sacrifice. Holy smokes, between you and your
service and your husband's service in the way you guys have
held a family together is remarkable.
I just commend you guys. My heart goes out for you. The
sacrifice and service that you have made and your children have
made I just thank you. Thank you for giving us this
opportunity.
I get thanked all the time for my service and I stop and I
say, no, there is not one of us who could do this if you all
did not do your job and do it well. So God bless you and God
bless your family and I wish you--I wish you all the luck and I
am going to just end this because I really do not have any
question for you because we have met multiple times.
I really thank you for your interest in our munitions depot
in McAlester and, of course, Fort Sill. I look forward to the
time we get you back in Oklahoma and we get a tour of those
facilities along with Tinker and even Vance and Altus. So
Godspeed, and that you understand you do have a friend in me
and I am here wanting to get in the boat and row in the same
direction with you and continue to make this country stand out
and be the greatest nation in the world. Thank you.
General George. Thank you, Senator.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Mullin.
Senator Duckworth, please?
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to correct the record here. Senator Tuberville
has been given multiple off ramps. He was offered a vote on
Senator Ernst's bill which was far--much more overall
encompassing. He has been given lots of opportunities and he is
simply refusing to lift a hold.
For the first time in over a hundred years we do not have a
commandant of the Marine Corps, someone who can have the full
power and authority of a commandant. This is absolutely
unacceptable. We have all of these officers and their families.
My colleagues talk about and laud the family members for their
service.
We have family members who are being pulled out of schools,
unable to start a new school term. We have spouses who cannot
start a new job, who have lost their jobs. The entire military
readiness is slowly grinding to a halt and it is going to get
worse every single day because Senator Tuberville has injected
politics into this.
Let me make it clear. DOD statute is very clear. The DOD
cannot fund abortions and the DOD is not funding abortions. The
DOD is simply providing the ability for servicemembers to
travel to a different State from the one in which they are
assigned in order to receive reproductive health care.
The DOD is not paying for those abortions. They are simply
saying if you cannot get the reproductive health care you need,
whether that is an abortion or IVF or an IUD or wherever that
is, then you should be able to travel someplace for that.
You know who gets hurt the most on this? Our lowest
ranking. It is the youngest women in the military. It is the
spouses of the youngest men in the military who have to ask for
a pass from their sergeants to leave their duty station so that
they can go take care of their health care needs, and what we
are telling them--what Senator Tuberville is telling them is, I
do not care about you. Thank you for your service but you
cannot take care of your own healthcare or your spouse's health
care.
To simply put this as this is a political thing and this is
about the military providing abortion is absolutely
categorically untrue because the military is not providing
abortions in this instance.
Now, let me also be clear that our men and women in uniform
face so many hardships they should be able to take care of
themselves and their family members, bottom line, and if there
is anybody that is injecting politics into this it is Senator
Tuberville, who is fundraising--he is fundraising off of his
hold on the military leadership that is affecting the national
security of this country. If he truly cared about this he would
not be fundraising off of it. That is my rant.
Now, General George, good morning and welcome to you and
your family and congratulations on your nomination. I am just
going to skip all my preamble and just get to the point.
General George, if confirmed how would you direct the Army
to prepare for a combat scenario where peer adversaries target
our supply webs and logistical networks? This follows up on our
conversation that we had. I care deeply about contested
logistics.
What efforts does the Army need to adopt to enhance
resilience and effectiveness in a contested logistics
environment and how can Congress contribute to these efforts?
We talked about this a little bit and I wanted you to be able
to elaborate on that here.
General George. Yes. Thanks, Senator.
We have stood up contested logistics so we share your
concern on this. It is absolutely critical and this would be a
partnership with, really, Army Futures Command as leading it
with Army Materiel Command.
But it is a challenge for us and I think, really, for our
country from the strategic level. We have talked a lot this
morning about an industrial base. But that is strategic
readiness and so making sure that you are protecting that and
ammunition and what we are producing back here, and then the
same thing with ports and getting things and operational
logistics all the way down to what we can do to tactical
logistics.
So it is a very--I think you have--I know you are familiar
with the term that logistics is for professionals. I mean, it
is very challenging, very hard, and I think we are going to
have to really partner. I know the joint force is thinking
about this and, really, it is going to take all of us together
to make sure that we are as ready as we can be.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. Can you drill down a little
bit on your experience as a commander and your multiple
deployments in OIF and OEF dealing with operational logistics,
especially energy, batteries for radios, diesel fuel, but then
also talk a little bit about supply parts and perhaps the need
for having additive metals milling equipment downrange so that
we can produce some of our own repair parts?
General George. Yes. Thanks for this because it had not
come up, Senator. I will give an example. When I was a
brigade--I had a light brigade BCT in eastern Afghanistan--we
lost soldiers because we had to move fuel and parts and do
those kinds of things so in very dangerous territory. Whatever
we can do--I think that reducing fuel consumption makes us more
nimble on the battlefield and will obviously make a difference
in the Pacific but, really, anywhere. So battery, increasing
that.
I also--what I also like about that is that when you have--
a lot of our vehicles have thermal sights, have different
sights. When you are able to have--the engine is not running
and you have silent watch I think that makes you also more
lethal.
So we are focused on those kinds of things. For the
individual soldier I think it is also important because nobody
likes to carry a lot of heavy batteries. So whatever we can do
to also lighten that load and we are working on all of those
things.
Senator Duckworth. The fewer batteries they carry the more
ammo they can carry, right?
General George. That is exactly right. Yes, Senator. Thank
you.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Cotton, please?
Senator Cotton. General George, welcome, and
congratulations on your nomination. Thanks for your lifetime of
service. Mrs. George, thank you as well.
I know that several senators have addressed with you the
recruiting challenge. Well, I call it the recruiting crisis
that the Army faces. I think this is the number-one challenge,
certainly, the most urgent challenge you have to address.
Some things are beyond your control. You cannot control
rising wages in the private sector. You cannot control a
shrinking teenage population or 20 something population in our
country.
But some things will be in your control and I would just
add my voice to all of those other senators about trying to
address those concerns about expanding eligibility pools,
making it easier to push a waiver authority down from the
general officer level to the field or even company grade level,
addressing some of the perceptions of political correctness in
the military and so forth.
This is a tough challenge. I hope you succeed. The Nation
needs you to succeed. But I think it is probably going to be
one of the main things that your tenure is measured by if you
cannot succeed.
Second--we discussed this yesterday. I want to put it on
the record, though. The Caisson Platoon at the Old Guard is a
very special unit. Normally we would not talk about platoons or
even regiments at a hearing like this. But the Old Guard is a
regiment of national importance.
It does not just perform in--at ceremoneys at the White
House and State funerals but it also performs military honors
funerals every single day and because of right now the stand
down of the Caisson Platoon there are not caissons being used
with horses in the Arlington National Cemetery, and every day
that goes by that that is not happening that means a veteran
who earned those honors and a family who is there for the
funeral is not receiving them.
So can I get your commitment on the record that the Army
does not intend to end or eliminate the Caisson Platoon?
General George. Senator, there is no intention to eliminate
that capability.
Senator Cotton. Thank you, and I know the Army has laid
down a path forward. I think it is up to a year or maybe a
little bit less than a year now. Can I get your commitment as
well that you will try to do everything you can to accelerate
that process and get horses back operating with the Caisson
Platoon in Arlington National Cemetery?
General George. Yes, Senator. That is our goal to
accelerate.
Senator Cotton. Okay. Finally, I want to address the
ongoing saga about the Army's combat fitness test and gender
neutral standards. We have talked about this. You have heard me
talk to your predecessor and Secretary Wormuth about it. For
years the Army said they would have general neutral standards
under the combat fitness test.
Last spring at the last minute the Army decided not to do
that. This committee in the NDA directed it to have gender
neutral standards in the combat arms branches. Secretary
Wormuth and her army of lawyers found a way to say that they
did not need to do that.
So here we are this year with Congress being more directed.
The House of Representatives, in language proposed by
Representative Waltz, includes a directive that the Army should
impose, one, gender neutral standards in combat arms branches,
and two, those standards have to be higher than they are for
the Army as a whole because, frankly, the Army standard is kind
of pathetic.
The Army standards require you to run two miles in 22 or 23
minutes, and I say run. I want the record to report that I use
sarcastic air quotes with my fingers when I say run because
moving two miles in 23 minutes is not running. It may be
shuffling but it is not running.
This Committee tried to have the same approach, at least I
did, that Representative Waltz proposed but the Army came back
to us and said they would rather revert to the old Army
physical fitness tests--the old fashioned two-mile run,
pushups, and sit ups and use gender specific standards. So what
I sense is an ideological opposition in the Secretary of the
Army's office to having gender neutral standards for the combat
arms branches. I just want to read you something and see if I
can get your agreement on it.
While it may be difficult for a 120-pound woman to lift or
drag 250 pounds the Army cannot artificially absolve women of
that responsibility. It may still exist on the battlefield.
The entire purpose of creating a gender neutral test was to
acknowledge the reality that each job has objective physical
standards to which all soldiers should be held regardless of
gender. The intent was not to ensure that women and men will
have an equal likelihood of meeting those standards.
General, do you agree with that sentiment?
General George. Yes, Senator, I do.
Senator Cotton. Thank you. It was given by one of your
officers, Captain Kristen Griest. She may be a major by now.
She was one of the Army's very first female infantry officers
and one of the first graduates of the Ranger school so I think
she should know what she is talking about.
So to be clear, I do not want the Army necessarily to
return to the old Army physical fitness test. I am fine if they
keep the combat fitness test. I do expect the Army to have
gender neutral standards for the combat arms branches in which
ground combat roles have irreducible physical demands.
So can I get your commitment that you will work with this
Committee and with the House Armed Services Committee to move
forward in a way that achieves your objectives with the combat
fitness test but also ensures that we have gender neutral and
higher standards for those demanding combat arms branches?
General George. You have my commitment, Senator, and I
would like to--I do like the Army combat fitness test. I think
it is a great test. I think it is changing the fitness culture.
So far we have been doing this through the Active component
for this last year and we are getting ready to do it in compos
two and three so the National Guard and the Army Reserve.
I was thinking back to when I first came on. I think this
is important because this will help us set a good baseline and
decide where the standards are. When I first came in, enlisted
in the Army, I know by the time I was a lieutenant the
standards were a lot different, a lot higher, and that is what
we need and that is what we need to do.
So we would like to take the time to make sure that we are
doing this appropriately and have them set the right way.
Senator Cotton. Good. I am glad to hear that because,
again, it was not my idea to say the Army should revert to the
physical fitness test as opposed to the combat fitness test. It
was the secretary's office and some of my Democratic friends
who had such an ideological opposition to gender neutral
standards that you and I and Captain Griest all think that the
Army should have.
So I am happy to work with you on that. I am happy for the
Army to have gender specific standards in profession--or in
branches and MOSes that do not require those same kind of
demanding physical positions like an intelligence analyst or a
systems network or anything--any other kind of jobs.
But in things like the infantry and artillery and armor I
think we can all agree that there are irreducible physical
demands that we have to ensure male and female soldiers alike
can be on the battlefield.
Thank you.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Cotton.
Senator Peters, please?
Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General George, welcome. Good to see you again and
congratulations on your nomination as well.
General George, as you are well aware, for decades the Army
has prepared soldiers for deployment overseas through the use
of validation exercises conducted either at the JRTC or NTC.
These exercises are, of course, of critical importance to allow
soldiers and their commanders to conduct training that they may
not be able to receive at their home station with--it can be
training with larger formations and supporting units necessary
for success when they deploy overseas.
I believe this is especially true, and I think you would
agree, for Reserve components and for the National Guard. But
as the Army places more emphasis on the need to fight in the
cyber and space domains and in contested and degraded EW
environments I am becoming concerned that this model leaves
National Guardsmen ill prepared for participation in validation
exercises and, more importantly, for deployment downrange.
I think we need to be investing more in National Guard
exercises and installations that can host the type of large-
scale combat operations that include cyber and EW effects to
better prepare our troops.
So my question for you, sir, is what if any changes need to
be made to the current validation exercise training model to
better prepare soldiers, especially National Guardsmen, for the
threats that they are facing in the coming years?
General George. Well, I think a couple of things, Senator.
You are right that we have to evolve here and adapt on how
we are going to train in a multi-domain environment and in some
areas that is going to be difficult regardless of where that
is.
I think I was talking to Senator Kelly earlier about how
much altitude airspace you own, what you are allowed to do with
signals in EW and those kinds of things. So we are looking at
that. I think simulations is going to be a big part of that too
to allow people to train in that environment much like we do
with some of the cyber that can do more remote.
So I think it is going to be a combination of things. I
know this is something that we are talking about a lot on our--
on our training side inside of our G3 to figure out how we are
going to move forward.
The Army is a total army. We all have to come together.
Grayling is one of those spots that we talked about that you
can do a lot of those--that kind of training as well.
I know there is--I think Northern Strike is coming up
soon--
Senator Peters. Right.
General George.--and so those kind of locations, I think,
where you can get after multi-domain training and much like we
are doing with those exercises I think that will also help us.
Senator Peters. Great. Well, and we talked about that
facility. I understand you trained there yourself as a young
lieutenant and I appreciated your offer, if confirmed, to come
up and to see the facility again because it is certainly that
type of facility that can help facilitate that. So I look
forward to working with you, if confirmed.
General, as the Army continues development of autonomous
mobility platforms an enterprise wide solution to data
collection and management is going to be without question vital
to ensure that the relevant program executive offices and their
respective program managers do not add vehicle specific
solutions to the challenge posed by autonomous mobility.
I would argue that that type of error would leave the
department susceptible to vendor lock-in of boutique solutions
and would prevent the efficiencies that can be gained from,
basically, service wide use of data sets to build AI/ML
algorithms.
So my question for you is do you believe that the current
Army approach to autonomous mobility is sufficient to meet the
challenges in an affordable and timely manner and what
structure changes, including potentially the creation of a PEO
focused on ground autonomy, do you think needs to be made to
ensure that the Army is moving on the cutting edge of this
technology in this field?
General George. Senator, I want to go to the--your question
first on the PEO. I think just like we are doing on the cross
functional teams and we have done this, I think ASA (ALT)--Mr.
Bush has done this recently with making some adjustments. You
cannot let your structure get in the way of how you have to
adjust your force and what you are going to need on the
battlefield to win.
So yes, we are going to have to look at that and see how we
are doing that and I think that we are. There has been some
recent changes that we have done. I mentioned added a cross
functional team and taken things that we need to do that.
Autonomous systems is a good example of where we need to
really partner with commercial American ingenuity--I think we
see that up in Detroit as an example--that it is happening out
there and that is--we need to have those kinds of partnerships.
I think what we are looking at is everything that we are
building we need to make sure has open architecture--this gets
to your question--to your issue on vendor lock--to make sure
that we have the ability to--you are not locked into that, that
we have an open architecture, that we can easily adapt these
systems.
I think that that is the way we are going to have to do
this if we are going to continue to evolve.
Senator Peters. Great. Thank you, General. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Peters.
Senator Schmitt, please?
Senator Schmitt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good to see you. Enjoyed our visit in the office, and as I
told you my grandfather was an infantryman in the Army during
World War II and was very proud of his service. We are proud of
his service and thank you for your service.
I guess a couple of questions, and I know I asked you
this--more of a statement but also, I guess, a response. I just
think whatever we can do to depoliticize what is happening
right now in the military, I think, is paramount.
I mean, I think it goes to the recruiting challenges. It
goes to public trust, and based on our conversation it sounds
like that is--you are on the same page of keeping politics no
matter whose it is out of the military and just be the best
war-fighting military in the history of the world. You would
agree with that statement, correct?
General George. I would agree with that, Senator.
Senator Schmitt. Okay, and then as a sort of rubber kind of
meets the road here, as our pacing challenge, biggest threat,
whatever you want to call communist China, they are that and
just curious to hear your--and you may have asked this but this
is the downside of being the last one on the--on the dais here
to ask questions. But your view of how the Army--and in many
ways the Army has done this before but not as recently and how
you think under your command here the Army evolves or does
things differently to face that threat in the INDOPACOM
theater.
General George. Okay. Thanks for that question, Senator.
I think first is just to make sure--you were talking
earlier about perceptions--that it is very much a joint theater
out in the Pacific and I think the Army has a big role. As we
know from history we did back in World War II when there was
actual fighting out there.
So I think for deterrence in everything will have a huge
role as part of the joint team. I could go down several of
the--contested logistics came up. I think Army will have a
significant role in that integrated air and missile defense.
The Army is kind of--will lead the way and have a--will be
very important to the theater in that. Long-range fires, I
think, are critical, very hard. As you have seen, I think it
is--big deterrence as well--it is very hard to dynamically
target things that are on the ground and can hide in that
clutter and so I think our long-range fires. We have--already
have to multi-domain task forces that are out there operating
and exercising out there. So I think that will be critical.
Then the Army is, really, has your close combat force. That
is what I have grown up in those and you are going to need
those to secure things and you are going to need them--we are
always going to need offensive capability and I think on the
land as a land power and I think we will need that.
Senator Schmitt. You mentioned logistics, too, and, as you
know, Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri we train a lot of great
personnel to deal with logistics. As far as--this is the last
question before I yield back--as far as needs go by way of
weapon systems, generally speaking, what is it that you think--
as we turn our attention more intensely toward China and that
theater what is the greatest need there?
General George. Well, I will tell you I have been--I think
what has been great in the Army is we have had a very good plan
and stuck to it for the last several years.
Long-range fires is a good example of that across that
portfolio. Same with integrated air and missile defense. One of
the areas that we are really focusing on now to kind of add
that rolls into that is countering unmanned systems so counter
UAS. It is a different threat and how we are focused on that.
So we are--we have--the Army is now the executive agent for
that and investing more in that and I think that that is going
to be another one of those that we are going to have to rapidly
evolve in, Senator.
Senator Schmitt. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Schmitt.
Senator Sullivan, please?
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General, congratulations on your nomination. I want to
thank you and your family for your exceptional service. I think
you are highly qualified and I am looking forward to strongly
supporting your confirmation. So thank you to your family as
well.
I just got back from the NATO summit last night late and
had the opportunity to visit with the First Cav troops in
Lithuania who are doing an exceptional job. So I know you know
that but I wanted you know that we had a CODEL--a bipartisan
CODEL of senators who spent a couple hours with them and it
looked like they are doing great and morale is high and I think
they understand the importance of their mission.
I do want to just touch on the recruiting issues. Maybe you
have a comment or two on what we can focus on. I was
disappointed, to be honest, and I do not like to get into the
politicization issues but at a roundtable event Secretary
Wormuth just last week talked about one of her concerns on
recruiting was politicians labeling the Army as woke as
damaging recruiting efforts. That was her comment.
I think the secretary--the best way that she can address
this kind of issue is not to blame politicians but just to make
sure that the Army is, indeed, not so-called woke.
Have you have seen that Emma recruiting ad--Army Emma
recruiting ad? Do you know what I am talking about?
General George. I do not think I have seen it but I will.
Senator Sullivan. Yes. This is Exhibit A in a woke Army, in
my view. I have no idea who the Army was trying to get with
that ad. But it was an embarrassment, I thought, and it was
taken down, I believe.
Take a look at it. But the secretary--it was a joke, in my
view. I have no idea. It would be good to know maybe for the
record who approved that and what the goal--who are we trying
to get? I just do not understand that.
But that is on the Army. It is not on politicians. The
secretary--I was disappointed to see the secretary kind of
deflecting blame on an issue like this. What are your thoughts
on the recruiting issues?
General George. Just specific to that point, Senator, I
think, again, people are staying inside of our formations. I
know that we are focused on our mission, as you have seen,
with--out there with the troops and we got to get the word out
about how the Army and the military in general can accelerate
your life and it is a great place to serve and we are working
hard to do that.
Senator Sullivan. Okay. Let me--let me turn to the 11th
Airborne Division. I really want to commend you and General
McConville and the secretary for that decision, and I was back
home last weekend as well and it seems like that unit is doing
exceptionally well.
We still are having these suicide--these high levels of
suicide in Alaska, which, of course, is horrendous,
heartbreaking. Can you give me an update on how you think the
11th Airborne is doing and then can I get a commitment from
you?
I do think our leadership in Alaska and the Army has really
put a lot of effort and focus on these really difficult issues
of mental health and suicide. So I am not criticizing at all
here but I would like your commitment to continue to focus on
that, particularly in my State, particularly some of the MILCON
projects that are coming on board that I think are going to be
positive. But can you comment on 11th Airborne, how you think
they are doing? I know that you had mentioned in a hearing a
couple months ago it is the number-one requested place. They
did a big jump on the anniversary of the patching. So I would
love to hear your views on that and, again, a commitment on
continuing that focus on the challenges of suicide in Alaska.
General George. First of all, absolutely, Chairman, you
have my commitment. Building cohesive teams and taking care of
soldiers and families is our top priority. We are actually
proud of what 11th Airborne is doing up there and I--yes, we
are--it is an enlistment incentive to do assignment of choice.
A lot of people like to go up there to the north country
and serve in that and we have seen that up there. People are
proud to be part of that airborne unit. We are proud of what
they are doing.
Senator Sullivan. It is good to have the 82d have a little
competition, right?
General George. I am sure there is a little bit of
competition. You know how things work.
Senator Sullivan. Yes, I do know how and I am glad they
have a little competition. I think the Chairman was part of the
82d Airborne. All right.
General George. But yes, we are proud--we are proud of what
they are doing. I actually--and I am--I think what they are
doing up with Mission 100--I think you might be familiar with
that. I always give Alaska as the example of to tackle any
problem you have to let a commander--make them responsible,
hold them responsible and accountable but give them the
resources and do things different.
Alaska is different than Fort Liberty or anywhere else and
so they have done some very innovative things up there. I think
changing to 11th Airborne was a big--is a big plus. They are
doing hard training up there in their ethos, which I think
helps with a lot of things as well. So we are really proud of
what 11th Airborne is doing.
Senator Sullivan. I would agree with that, General, and
seeing the morale it seems to be better because of their
mission-oriented focus. They know what they are all about. They
got to--they have a warfighting headquarters, I think, which
made it--makes a difference as well.
Let me ask one final question, Mr. Chairman, if it is okay.
I have been--I know that you are looking at additional multi-
domain task force locations and I want to get your assessment
on how you think that is going but also your commitment--I know
you cannot say yes or no right now--but to work with me and
this Committee on the possibility of a multi-domain task force
in Alaska.
We have the best training in the world. Our strategic
location is unrivaled. The father of the Air Force, Billy
Mitchell, called Alaska the most strategic place on the planet.
A number of services are recognizing that you are 6 hours from
Korea, Japan, the Taiwan Strait.
A lot of flag officers actually do not recognize it. Even
though we are not west of the International Date Line we are
closer to the fight in the Pacific and even in Europe, given
our strategic location.
So can you just give me an assessment on how you guys are
looking at the next location for a multi-domain task force and
commit to me to working with this Committee on the possibility
of having one in Alaska?
General George. We have not made any final decisions. We
are still working through that and absolutely committed to
working with the Committee, Senator.
Senator Sullivan. Is the goal one or two more multi-domain
task forces?
General George. The plan is for two additional multi-domain
task forces.
Senator Sullivan. Okay. Good. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Reed. Thank you, Senator Sullivan.
I want to make, one, an announcement and, two, a few
followup questions. In the discussion today there was the issue
when our Committee is going to be briefed on the legality of
the Secretary of Defense's policy regarding reproductive
rights.
Pursuant to an amendment that we voted on in the NDAA
markup there will be a briefing next Wednesday morning for all
SASC members. So I encourage all of our colleagues to come and
to receive a thorough briefing on the legality of his position.
The other issue that comes up consistently is why do we not
just take a vote on these 251 nominees that are on the floor.
There are more uncommitted and every day or every week this
will grow and grow and grow, and I just want to remind everyone
that Senator Tuberville and others who are insisting on these
votes are also insisting on we follow all the procedures, which
includes cloture--time pre and post cloture.
For the 251 nominations that would take 668 hours. That is
27 days if we work around the clock and we typically do not
work around the clock. It would be 84 days if we worked 8 hours
a day.
That is an impossible goal to achieve and, by the way, that
would prevent us from dealing with issues like the National
Defense Authorization Act, appropriations bills, and other
important legislation. So this notion of just let us take a
vote is, I think, indefensible based on the fact that it is
virtually impossible to do that.
The other aspect here, too, with respect to readiness is
that even if we took a vote on a--to your nomination, General,
and went through all of the procedures, et cetera, you would
not have a Vice Chief of Staff, correct?
General George. That is correct.
Chairman Reed. Who would perform the role of Vice Chief of
Staff?
General George. I mean, we are still working through this
because I think we are a little bit in uncharted territory. But
we would have to look for people across the staff to kind of
pick up some of those duties where they could.
Chairman Reed. Of course, that affects readiness?
General George. Yes. As I mentioned earlier, Chairman, it
is just having the right--if you do not have the right people.
There is a reason we have these positions and have these people
in place, and you always want to field a full team. So you want
your full team on the field.
Chairman Reed. The joint--the Vice Chief of Staff for the
Army is a member of JROC, the Joint Requirements Committee?
General George. Yes, I would--having done this for the last
year the Vice job is very busy.
Chairman Reed. So who would represent the Army on the JROC?
General George. So we would, again, have to look at the G3
or the director of the Army staff or look at those and there
is--that is challenging as well.
Chairman Reed. Of course, those general officers would be
three stars, not four, and all the other Vices would be four.
Is that correct?
General George. That is correct, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. It was interesting because on our debate in
the Committee there was a decision to increase the rank of the
deputy commanding general of the National Guard bureau to four
stars because the logic was without the fourth star he would be
dismissed by superiors. He would not--could weigh in
effectively and it is probably the same case, you might argue,
in the JROC.
The JROC sets all of our requirements, going forward. So
the Army would be represented by somebody but somebody who is
not really the Vice Chief of Staff of the United States Army.
General George. The right leader with the right experience
in the right place is exactly what we want, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. You would not have that--General George. We
would not have that.
Chairman Reed.--even if you were confirmed as the chair?
General George. That is correct, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. That readiness situation would go down the
chain of command. For example, the designated vice chief is the
director of the Joint Staff right now. So his position--
General George. That is correct.
Chairman Reed.--and he could--he would be waiting to move
and also someone else would be waiting to take his place. So we
would be in this sort of perpetual who is on first situation
and that affects readiness.
General George. Yes, it does, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. So even if we decided to confirm you there
would be a significant impact on readiness in the United States
Army?
General George. Yes, I would agree with that, Chairman.
Yes.
Chairman Reed. Yes. That is one issue that I think has to
be understood.
There is a second issue, too. This discussion about the
woke Army, diversity, all of the things we are doing that is
just--on the military strikes me as wrong. America is a diverse
country and we have to have the diverse army. Is that your
position?
General George. Yes, Chairman, that is my position.
Chairman Reed. In fact, as we bring more people into the
service from diverse backgrounds we tend to get much more
quality. Is that correct also?
General George. That is correct.
Chairman Reed. Now, I had the privilege of serving under a
battalion commander in the 82d who was an African American and
he was a tremendous leader, and I think that continues not just
in terms of racial but also ethnicity and other aspects that we
have to look at.
Now, there has been the suggestion, I think, by so many of
my colleagues that this wokeism is what is causing the
recruiting problem. The Army conducted a survey on February
22d, 2023--published a survey, the Army Pulse survey. You are
familiar with that?
General George. I am, Chairman. Yes.
Chairman Reed. The number-one reason that the respondents
gave for why they would not join the Army, I would be putting
the rest of my life on hold. You said that several times. That
is 21 percent.
The second highest response at 13 percent was women and
racial or ethnic minorities are discriminated against in the
Army--against in the Army, which goes back to my question of do
we not need diversity training and such training so that people
do not feel as if they are going to be categorized and
discriminated?
General George. I think we do, Chairman, and as you know we
have been doing that and should--that is part of building a
cohesive team and bringing everybody together. We absolutely
have to do that.
Chairman Reed. When you look for the woke category--and by
the way, those two categories together are 34 percent--when you
look at the woke category and the question was asked the Army
is placing too much emphasis on the wokeness--in other words,
diversity, equity training, marginalizing those with
conservative views, et cetera--that is 5 percent.
Now, that is not something that you can dismiss but that is
not the most significant by a long shot reason are not--people
are not coming on. Is that your conclusion?
General George. I think I agree with you we cannot dismiss
anything and we got to get after perceptions. Just like I was
telling you before, the Army is a great place to serve. I know
that.
I believe that with all of my heart, and we have got to get
that out there. You are going to accelerate your life. You are
going to have a good experience. You are going to have good
leaders out there and we are focused on our mission. So I think
we have to attack them all and keep getting people into our
formation, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. I agree. But this notion that the Army--
people are just turning their backs on the Army en masse in
huge numbers because it is woke is not borne out by the
analysis.
General George. That is not what we found in the survey.
Chairman Reed. Thank you.
Now, the other suggestion or implication about a lot of
these comments is that all the Army does is stand around and
have kind of psychotherapy sessions all day long. You are, I am
sure, familiar with the sergeant major of the Army, Sergeant
Major Grinston.
He was asked, essentially, this question about readiness
and training and maintaining standards and his answer, I think,
is very revealing. He was asked in the House. ``Congressman,
yes, we have maintained our standards and I would say that when
I look at it there is 1 hour of equal opportunity training in
basic training and 92 hours of rifle marksmanship training, and
if you go to OCET there is 165 hours of rifle marksmanship
training and still only 1 hour of equal opportunity training.
So the emphasis in the Army is where it should be--the
skills to fight, to lead, to succeed, and supporting that is a
response to one of the major issues that people see is a
problem in the Army--discrimination against women, against
minorities, et cetera.
So you are going to--you are keeping the Army on target, no
pun intended, and that is why the Army is deploying so
successfully. That is why when you go to places like Lithuania
or the Pacific you see extraordinarily professional forces that
are doing their job every day.
We do have to get the message out and I think your point
too that messages have to be tailored to the audience makes a
great deal of sense. Again, I was--I think this whole situation
of stopping the confirmation of military officers for a
political reason--and this is a political reason--there is no
more political issue in this country than reproductive rights,
et cetera--is wrong and I--last evening I saw on Fox News a
Marine Corps Medal of Honor winner who was very outraged that
the commandant could not be confirmed in a reasonable manner.
Any further comments, sir?
General George. I agree with you. We would like to get our
leaders in the right place and, again, this did not come up but
there--as it impacts family I do worry longer term about what
younger officers are seeing and we do not want that either.
Chairman Reed. I agree.
General George. So I would like to get this resolved.
Chairman Reed. Thank you. Again, thank you for your
service. Thank you for your wife's service, and, again, I will
reiterate back in 1971 PDI, right--oh, PDA, right?
General George. It is PDA.
Chairman Reed. PDA. I am sorry. I am getting old. PDA--
General George. Statute of limitations on that. Sorry.
Chairman Reed. It is and I am sorry about that, sir. But I
do not know how they handle it now but in the old corps we just
walked around.
But thank you for your service. Thank you for your family's
service. I am tempted to say go Army. Go Army. Thank you.
General George. Go Army. Thanks, Chairman.
Chairman Reed. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:47 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
[Prepared questions submitted to General Randy A. George,
USA by Chairman Reed prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties
Question. Section 7033 of title 10, U.S. Code, describes the duties
and functions of the Chief of Staff of the Army and requires that the
officer nominated for appointment to the position have had significant
experience in joint duty assignments, including at least one full tour
of duty in a joint duty assignment as a flag officer.
What is your understanding of the duties and responsibilities of
the Chief of Staff of the Army?
Answer. The Chief of Staff of the Army is the senior military
officer of the Army and serves as the senior military advisor to the
Secretary of the Army. Unless otherwise prescribed by law, the Chief of
Staff of the Army operates under the authority, direction, and control
of the Secretary of the Army. Specifically, the Chief of Staff of the
Army presides over the Army staff; supervises Army commands and
organizations in executing their statutory missions; transmits the
plans and recommendations of the Army Staff to the Secretary and
advises the Secretary regarding those plans and recommendations; and
upon approval, acts as the Secretary's agent in their implementation.
Additionally, the Chief of Staff of the Army performs those duties
prescribed for him as a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under
section 151 of Title 10, U.S. Code. In that role, the Chief of Staff of
the Army serves as a military adviser to the President, the National
Security Council, the Homeland Security Council, and the Secretary of
Defense.
Question. What background and experience, including joint duty
assignments, do you possess that you believe qualify you to perform
these duties?
Answer. I am grateful to have over 35 years of service in our Army,
including command at every level from company to the Commanding General
of I Corps. During my career, I've had the honor to lead soldiers into
combat as a brigade commander in Afghanistan and as a battalion
commander in Iraq. My experience in force management, including service
as the Deputy Director for Regional Operations and Force Management, J-
3 and the Director Force Management, Army G-3/5/7 has imparted an
understanding of the methods for, importance of, adapting organizations
in complex circumstances. Due to my experience as the Senior Military
Assistant to the Secretary of Defense and the Commanding General of I
Corps, I have learned the importance of cooperation across the joint
force in a competitive environment. In my current position as the Vice
Chief of Staff of the Army, I serve as the principal deputy to the
Chief of Staff of the Army, lead the day-to-day administration of the
Army, and perform the duties of the Chief of Staff of the Army in his
absence. If confirmed, my experiences will enable me to lead our Army
to achieve our goals of protecting the American people, promoting
global security, seizing new strategic opportunities, and defending our
democratic values, in the face of increasing aggression from growing
threats to our Nation.
Question. Do you meet the joint duty requirements for this
position?
Answer. Yes, I am designated as a fully qualified joint general
officer (Level IV) due to the significant joint experience accumulated
throughout my military career. My joint assignments include Senior
Military Assistant to the Secretary of Defense from 2021 to 2022,
Deputy Director for Regional Operations and Force Management, J-3,
Joint Staff from 2016 to 2017, Executive Assistant to the Commander,
United States Central Command from 2013 to 2014, Chief Strategic Policy
Division, Pakistan Afghanistan Coordination Cell, Joint Staff from 2011
to 2012, and Commander 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division
during Operation ENDURING FREEDOM from 2009 to 2010. The Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff has certified these assignments.
Question. Do you believe that there are any steps that you need to
take to enhance your ability to perform the duties and responsibilities
of the Chief of Staff of the Army, particularly in regard to serving as
a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and assisting the Secretary of
the Army in performing certain acquisition-related functions?
Answer. I believe that my experience as Vice Chief of Staff of the
Army, operational command experience and previous time serving on the
Joint Staff has prepared me well for the duties required of the Chief
of Staff of the Army. Over the course of the last year, I have grown
immensely and learned a great deal, especially on matters related to
the Army requirements development process and acquisition. I have
developed and enjoyed a close working relationship with the Under
Secretary of the Army and Secretary of the Army. At the same time, I
believe in career-long learning and will continue to pursue personal
and professional development for the remainder of my Army career.
Question. If confirmed, what innovative ideas would you consider
providing to the Secretary of Defense in your role as a member of the
Armed Forces Policy Council?
Answer. If confirmed, I will eagerly serve on the Armed Forces
Policy Council, in coordination with the Secretary of the Army, to
share and receive lessons learned on defense policy. In my time as Vice
Chief of Staff, I have sought opportunities to collaborate with the
other service Vice Chiefs on various challenges and projects and have
found this collaboration valuable. I would seek to share the Army's
perspective on recruiting and retention, and welcome opportunity to
innovate on these issues and force modernization initiatives with the
whole defense enterprise. I would like to continue the Joint
collaboration already initiated on tackling counter-Unmanned Aircraft
System (c-Joint collaboration already initiated on tackling counter-
Unmanned Aircraft System (c----
Question. If confirmed, what innovative ideas would you consider
providing to the Secretary of the Army for enhancing the organization,
training, and equipping of the Army?
Answer. The Army is currently transforming from a Counter-
Insurgency (COIN)-centric organization to one that is able to execute
full spectrum operations across the globe. While both the world and
warfare are evolving in complexity, our Army must transform to become
simpler and more agile. The future battlefield will require our
formations to operate as dispersed, mobile, and low-signature teams. As
Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, I already have been involved in
advising the Chief of Staff and Secretary of the Army on how to
transform our organization effectively, as well as how to develop and
communicate equipment requirements to meet the needs of Warfighters. If
confirmed as Chief of Staff of the Army, I will continue to work
closely with the Secretary to assess the readiness of our Army.
Question. What are your goals, if confirmed, for the transformation
of the Army to meet new and emerging threats?
Answer. The character of war is evolving, and our Army must
intentionally transform to stay ahead of our potential adversaries. If
confirmed, I will ensure that the Army is rapidly incorporating lessons
learned from today's battlefields into our training, doctrine, and
materiel development processes. Additionally, I will continue to lead
change within the Army acquisition enterprise to ensure that our
requirements process is responsive to Warfighter needs and flexible to
advancements in technology. I will start with the processes that
support Command and Control systems but will also look for ways to add
agility into those that support other modernization efforts, like long
range precision fires, soldier lethality, and contested logistics.
Finally, I believe that there are few one-size-fits-all solutions
to the various challenges that our Army faces. Therefore, if confirmed
I will lean heavily on the chain of command, in accordance with the
principles of mission command, to innovate and implement unit,
installation and mission-specific solutions to Army challenges.
the joint chiefs of staff
Question. Section 921 of the Fiscal Year 2017 NDAA made changes to
section 151 of title 10, U.S. Code, concerning the service of members
of the Joint Chiefs (other than the Chairman) as military advisors to
the President, the National Security Council, the Homeland Security
Council, and the Secretary of Defense.
What is your assessment of the authorities of, and process by
which, members of the Joint Chiefs (other than the Chairman) provide
military advice and opinions to the President, National Security
Council, the Homeland Security Council, and civilian leadership of the
Department of Defense?
Answer. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have a responsibility to provide
candid advice to the Chairman, the Secretary of Defense and, when
necessary, the President, National Security Council or Homeland
Security Council. They may do so collectively or individually. As a
member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I may, after first informing the
Secretary of Defense and the Chairman, provide my military advice to
the President, National Security Council, the Homeland Security
Council, or Secretary of Defense on a particular matter.
Question. If confirmed, would you commit to provide your best
military advice to the President, National Security Council, Homeland
Security Council, and civilian leadership of the Department of Defense,
even when your advice and opinions might differ from those of the
Chairman or the other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?
Answer. I understand the importance of the Chief of Staff of the
Army providing the best military advice and the responsibility to do
so. If confirmed, I will dutifully provide my advice to the Chairman
and civilian leaders appointed over me and join in candid discussion
with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to hear and consider their own advice
and opinions. In certain circumstances where my carefully considered
advice differs from the Chairman's, I may request that the Chairman
submit my dissenting recommendations to the President or other civilian
leaders at the same time that he presents his own.
use of military force
Question. In your view, what factors should be considered in making
recommendations to the President on the use of military force?
Answer. When considering and advising on use of force, I believe
recommendations should be based on legal grounds, U.S. national
security interests and objectives, and the interests of our allies and
partners. I would provide my military advice, ensuring that any
proposed use of military force considers domestic law, the President's
constitutional authority, and any applicable international law, as
recognized by the United States.
major challenges and priorities
Question. What is your vision for the Army of today? For the Army
of the future?
Answer. Our Army today is the most lethal and decisive ground force
in the world and remains an integral part of the Joint Team. We deter
conflict by exercising and campaigning across the globe with our allies
and partners, and we remain ready to defeat potential adversaries in
conflict by training for the full spectrum of conflict and by providing
critical support--like logistics, fires, air defense, intelligence, and
command and control--to the Joint Team.
Our Army is also comprised entirely of Americans who, for 50 years,
have freely volunteered to serve. That is what makes us great--we are
the most professional, best trained, and lethal Army in the world
because of the quality and commitment of our soldiers and leaders. They
chose to be on a team of teams.
The Army will remain lethal, decisive, and professional into the
future. By leveraging Army Futures Command, Training and Doctrine
Command, Army Material Command and Forces Command we will modernize our
capabilities and doctrine to stay ahead of our potential adversaries;
recruit, retain and manage capable soldiers and leaders; maintain the
sustainment infrastructure and industrial base support to project the
force, and ensure that our formation remains trained and ready for the
full spectrum of conflict.
Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
challenges you will face if confirmed as the Chief of Staff of the
Army?
Answer. The Army today faces a diverse set of challenges.
First, we face challenges in maintaining our portion of the all-
volunteer force. Due to myriad factors, including economics, public
perceptions and declining mental and physical fitness across society,
the Army is works to recruit the talent it requires to maintain our
desired end strength.
Second, we are in an extremely complex strategic environment, and
our Army faces potential adversaries with the capability and capacity
to challenge us in all domains. If confirmed as Chief of Staff of the
Army, I will have to ensure that the Army maintains its edge, even as
the character of war changes and our potential adversaries continue to
rapidly develop.
Third, our Army will face challenges in maintaining strategic
readiness, especially maintaining the stockpiles and industrial base
required to mobilize for full-scale combat operations.
Finally, our Army continues to work to provide quality of life
required to retain talented soldiers and their families.
Question. What plans do you have for addressing each of these
challenges, if confirmed?
Answer. Our Army must deter war and, when called upon, to
decisively win in combat. That means we must be prepared for a fight
today, but also continue to evolve to be ready for the fight tomorrow.
If confirmed, I will focus first on the recruiting challenge. Our
national environment has changed and continues to change; we must
continue to assess where we need to recruit, how we need to recruit,
and who we need to recruit without lowering standards. We have already
begun this process and found great success implementing innovative
solutions like the Future Soldier Prep Course.
I will also continue to enforce agility and flexibility in our
capabilities' requirements process, so that we can grow leaner, and
more lethal and adapt to the challenges of large-scale Multi-Domain
Operations.
I plan to continue efforts to modernize our organic industrial base
(OIB) and foster transparent, collaborative relationships with private
industry so we can capitalize on American ingenuity and maintain
cutting-edge technology.
Quality-of-life programs are directly linked to recruiting,
retention, and readiness. I plan to review our portfolio of quality-of-
life programs to ensure that they are focused on the needs and
interests of soldiers and their families are adequately resourced to
ensure the array of quality-of-life programs are effective and not
redundant. Our people are our greatest weapons, and the Army must
continue to honor its sacred commitment to soldiers and their families.
I believe that nothing of merit is accomplished in a vacuum. If
confirmed, I plan to work closely with commanders, the Secretary of the
Army, Department of Defense (DoD), Congress, and private industry to
address these challenges.
Question. Given the major challenges you identified above, what
other priorities would you set for your term as Chief of Staff of the
Army, if confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with the Secretary of the
Army on the Army's priorities--readiness, modernization, and people.
All three of these priorities are enduring and fundamental to each of
our Army's imperative missions--to fight and win our Nation's wars,
transform ahead of our potential adversaries, remain a professional
Army of the people, and maintain the infrastructure and industrial base
to project the Force.
In the near term, I will continue to be laser focused on our
recruiting challenge and acquisition requirements process. It is
critical that our Army can bring motivated and capable men and women
into the Army, retain talented soldiers and the right leaders, build
cohesive teams at every echelon, and provide soldiers and families
opportunities to grow, thrive and make an impact. It is also imperative
that we continually transform ahead of our potential adversaries, and
that our requirements process stay attuned to Warfighter needs and the
rapid evolution of technology.
civilian control of the military
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
ensure that your tenure on the Joint Chiefs of Staff epitomizes the
fundamental requirement for civilian control of the Armed Forces
embedded in the U.S. Constitution and other laws?
Answer. As a military officer, I swore an oath to support and
defend the Constitution and to obey the orders of the President of the
United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me.
Civilian control of the military is among those principles of the rule
of law fundamental to the Constitutional framework. Moreover, the
statute is clear the Chief of Staff of the Army is subject to the
authority, direction, and control of the Secretary (10 U.S.C. 7033). I
will foster mutual trust between civilian leaders and the military by
demonstrating the utmost respect for the policies, priorities, and
decisions of the Army's civilian leaders and encouraging open
communication to gain shared understanding. I will provide our civilian
leaders my best advice, grounded in my experience and best judgment,
and seek clarification and guidance where needed.
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
ensure that the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Policy are fully engaged in preparing guidance for and reviewing
contingency plans?
Answer. If confirmed, my statutory role as a member of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff would require that I support the Chairman as he
provides military advice to the Secretary of Defense and other
officials, including the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. I would
ensure that I am fulfilling my statutory duties as a member of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff. Additionally, after first informing the
Chairman, the law authorizes the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide
advice to the Secretary of Defense on matters in their capacity as
military advisors. This authority would authorize direct advice
regarding the preparation and review of contingency plans.
Question. How would you define effective civilian control of the
military? Aside from civilian control of the military via the executive
branch, please describe the extent to which you believe Congress plays
a role in furthering civilian control of our military?
Answer. Effective civilian control of the military is defined by
those duly appointed civilian officials providing authority, direction,
and control over members of the Armed Forces through law, regulation,
policy, and orders. Specific to the Army, Congress' powers include
declaring war and raising and supporting an Army. Congress determines
the authorization for spending and appropriates funds for military
activities. Congress has historically exercised its power to further
civilian control of the military by structuring the chain of command,
allocating responsibilities to specific personnel, and establishing
military units. Finally, Congress furthers civilian control of the
military by conducting oversight of all military activity through
hearings, reporting requirements, and other oversight functions.
I will enable effective civilian control through close
collaboration and transparent communication between policymakers and
uniformed military leaders.
Question. As a military officer, you take an oath to support and
defend the Constitution. How do you balance this obligation with the
responsibility to provide your best military advice to civilian
leadership, even when that advice may differ from civilian political
priorities?
Answer. My oath of office and my responsibility to provide my best
military advice are complementary obligations. I have taken an oath to
support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and to well
and faithfully discharge my duties as an officer. Fulfilling those
responsibilities requires that I provide my best military advice to
civilian leadership that may differ from political considerations or
priorities. If confirmed, my advice will be grounded in the oath I have
taken, informed by my military experience and expertise, and free of
personal or political bias. My duty will be to offer my best advice to
inform the decisionmaking of the military's civilian leaders.
Question. In your view, what is the appropriate role for the
Department when supporting law enforcement in State or national
emergencies?
Answer. The Department has resources, such as specialized
personnel, training, equipment, and facilities that may be useful to
civilian law enforcement responding to State or national emergencies.
The provision of these resources must be consistent with the limits
Congress placed on military support to civilian law enforcement through
the Posse Comitatus Act and other laws governing Defense Support to
Civilian Authorities. Support of civil authorities must also be
appropriately balanced with the need to maintain readiness for other
missions required of the Army in the defense of our Nation.
If confirmed as Chief of Staff of the Army, you will testify
regularly before Congress, and may be asked to comment on partisan
political matters.
Question. What is your view of your responsibility to provide your
best military advice to Congress while also ensuring that you and your
office remain apolitical, recognizing that you serve as a model for
other senior uniformed officers and the entire armed forces?
Answer. If confirmed, I will provide my best military advice
regarding Army matters to Congress, including how law and policy will
affect the Army, the Joint Force, our soldiers, and our family members.
At the same time, I will always uphold the traditional concept,
enshrined in DOD policy, requiring that Active Duty military members
not engage in partisan political activity. Remaining apolitical is
essential, and I will ensure that my military advice and opinions are
grounded in my military experience and expertise, are steadfast between
changes in political appointed leadership, and are focused on ensuring
the Army is equipped, trained, and ready.
2022 national defense strategy
Question. The 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) identified China
as the ``most consequential strategic competitor and the pacing
challenge for the Department'' and stated that Russia poses an ``acute
threat,'' as illustrated by its brutal and unprovoked invasion of
Ukraine. The NDS also identifies ``[m]utually beneficial Alliances and
partnerships'' as ``an enduring strength for the United States.''
In your view, does the 2022 NDS accurately assess the current
strategic environment, including prioritization among the most critical
challenges and enduring threats to the national security of the United
States and its allies? Please explain your answer.
Answer. Yes, in my view the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS)
accurately assesses the current strategic environment, which identifies
China as our pacing challenge, but outlines the acute threat posed by
Russia and persistent threats posed by North Korea, Iran, and violent
extremist organizations.
Question. In your view, does the 2022 NDS correctly specify the
priority missions of the DOD and the capabilities by which DOD can
achieve its objectives in the context of the current strategic
environment? What do you perceive as the areas of greatest risk?
Answer. Yes, in my view the 2022 NDS correctly specifies the
priority missions of the DOD and the capabilities by which the DOD can
achieve its objectives. In terms of our strategic environment, large-
scale multi-domain conflict poses the greatest challenge to our
military. Our Army is ready to meet that challenge. However, our
ability to meet that challenge and maintain our portion of an all-
volunteer force is at risk. We must ensure that we recruit and retain
talent now and, in the future, to mitigate that risk.
Question. Is the Army adequately sized, structured, and resourced
to implement the 2022 NDS and the associated operational plans? Please
explain your answer.
Answer. The Army is currently structured to support the NDS, but
faces challenges. Today's recruiting environment is impacting the
force, and there is considerable risk with maintaining readiness into
the future. We must fix recruiting with innovative, long-lasting
solutions. Additionally, our potential adversaries are evolving at a
rapid pace. To reduce risk in the future and ensure that the Army can
compete and win in multiple theaters simultaneously, we must grow back
end strength and continue to modernize.
Question. If confirmed, how will you address any gaps or shortfalls
in the ability of the Army to meet the demands placed on it by the 2022
NDS and the operational plans that implement the strategy?
Answer. We will address our gaps and shortfalls through the Total
Army Analysis process with a combination of sustained growth,
modifications to current formations, increased development of the
Multi-Domain Operations concept, continuing our modernization efforts
along our six operational imperatives (see and sense farther; mass
dispersed forces with combat fist; win the fires fight; protect forces
from air, missile, and drone threats; communicate and share data
rapidly; and sustain the fight across long distance), and our
partnerships and alliances. Additionally, we will use the Regionally
Aligned Readiness and Modernization Model (ReARMM) to prioritize our
resource allocation efforts. Such prioritization will allow us to start
identifying requirements at the beginning of the Future Year Defense
Program (FYDP).
Question. If confirmed, what changes or adjustments would you
advise the Secretary of the Army to make in the Army's implementation
of the 2022 NDS?
Answer. If confirmed, I will advise the Secretary of the Army to
continue to prioritize the Army's Multi-Domain Operations
transformation, deliver the six modernization priorities (long range
precision fires; next generation combat vehicles; future vertical lift;
network, air, and missile defense; and soldier lethality), and
strategically adapt the way we recruit and retain talent. People,
Readiness, and Modernization remain the Army's top priorities and the
Army is uniquely qualified to strengthen collaboration with our Allies
and partners. I would also advise the Secretary to ensure the Army
continues to identify and recruit the military and civilian talents
needed to organize, train, and equip a force ready for prompt and
sustained ground combat.
Question. Does the Army have the requisite analytic capabilities
and tools to support you, if confirmed as the Chief of Staff of the
Army, in developing and implementing the force structure, sizing, and
shaping plans required to position the Army to execute the operational
plans associated with the 2022 NDS? Please explain your answer.
Answer. Yes, the Army has the appropriate analytic capabilities.
The Army uses the Center for Army Analysis to conduct analyses across
the spectrum of conflict in a Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental,
and Multinational context to inform senior level decisions for current
and future national security issues.
overall readiness of the army
Question. How would you assess the current readiness of the Army--
across the domains of materiel and equipment, personnel, and training--
to execute the 2022 NDS and associated operational plans?
Answer. Our Army is ready today to deter adversaries and respond to
threats while we continue to support current operations from the
Southwest Border to Ukraine. We are well-trained, well-postured, and
managing the pressures posed by recruiting challenges, inflation
effects, and current global demands. The Army requires support with
timely, inflation effects, and current global demands. The Army
requires support with timely, inflation effects, and current global
demands. The Army requires support with timely,
Question. In your view, what are the priority missions for which
current and future Army forces should be trained and ready in the
context of day-to-day activities, as well as for contingencies?
Answer. The global environment is dynamic, and the character of war
is evolving. Our Army must be ready to respond globally to the full
spectrum of operations. This means we must be trained, equipped and
ready for Multi-Domain Operations against a near-peer adversary, while
simultaneously prepared to engage in counterinsurgency and irregular
warfare. In my view, training across competition continuum comes down
to maintaining core Warfighting competencies and applying them in
large-scale combat operation training scenarios that incorporate all-
domain maneuver. If we can maintain these competencies, then our
formation will be ready to adapt to any threat.
Question. In what specific ways has the Army improved or not
improved its State of readiness across the domains of materiel and
equipment, personnel, and training?
Answer. The Army is meeting readiness demands and managing risk
posed by challenges such as the accessions environment, global demand,
and sustained munitions and equipment support for Ukraine. The
implementation of our Regionally Aligned Readiness and Modernization
Model (ReARMM) is providing units with predictable periods for fielding
equipment and training. Additionally, in fiscal year 2023, the Army
programmed 22 Combat Training Center rotations. Finally, DOD and
Service investments in the organic industrial base and supplemental
replenishment funding in response to Presidential drawdown decisions
for Ukraine are critical.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to restore full spectrum
Army readiness, and under what timelines?
Answer. Our formations are already training for full spectrum
operations, and we are working to incorporate lessons learned from
Ukraine into all aspects of Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel,
Leadership, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy (DOTMLPF-P). We are ready
today to win in conflict against any potential adversary.
If confirmed, I will continue to lead the Army's transformation to
ensure that we are keeping pace with evolutions in technology. This
includes working with the Secretary to enforce a Warfighter-centric
acquisition culture that is innovative, responsive, and collaborative
to the needs of commanders.
budget
Question. If confirmed, by what standards would you measure the
adequacy of the Army budget?
Answer. I measure the adequacy of the Army's budget by assessing
the delta between the funds provided and the funding required to enable
the Army to maintain its established readiness and modernization
priorities to deliver the capabilities required to support the NDS. I
am committed to providing the best Army possible with the resources
that Congress appropriates.
Congress's ability to provide timely, adequate, predictable, and
sustained funding year after year will allow the Army to meet its
operational requirements and stay on track to maintain our readiness
goals, meet our modernization priorities, and accomplish our
responsibilities as part of the joint force as provided by the NDS.
Question. Section 222a of title 10, U.S. Code, provides that not
later than 10 days after the President's submission of the annual
defense budget to Congress, each Service Chief must submit to the
congressional defense committees a report that lists, in order of
priority, the unfunded priorities of his or her armed force.
What are your views of this statutory requirement and the utility
of unfunded priorities lists?
Answer. From my experience as a commander and service as the Vice
Chief of Staff of the Army, the unpredictable nature of world events
necessitates flexible funding authorities to successfully address
emergent threats, opportunities, and changing conditions in a volatile
threat environment. The Unfunded Priorities List (UPL) process
identifies Service Chief and Combatant Commander needs to respond to
emerging events that occur post development of the annual budget and
submission to Congress.
Question. If confirmed, do you agree to provide your unfunded
priorities list to Congress in a timely manner?
Answer. Yes, I will submit my unfunded priorities list to Congress
in accordance with Title 10.
audit
Question. Why is it important for the Army to achieve a clean audit
opinion?
Answer. Audit readiness is a tool we use to assist commanders in
optimizing operational readiness for our warfighters. Compliance with
Army regulations, policies, and procedures is critical to effective
stewardship of every Army asset, as well as every dollar Congress
appropriates. A clean audit opinion demonstrates not only the Army's
commitment to being accountable to Congress, and transparent to the
American taxpayer, but also to enhancing mission readiness. The Army
will continue its focus on operational excellence through modernization
of its financial, audit, and business management processes. This will
ensure that the data concerning the location, condition, and quantities
of our equipment, munitions, inventory, and property throughout the
enterprise is valid, accurate, and properly maintained to support the
Army's mission.
Question. What steps has the Army taken to evaluate unit readiness
and commander performance based on audit results?
Answer. The Army is taking a data centric approach to assessing
unit readiness based on audit results. The Army maintains web-based
data analytics that visualize key performance indicators of audit
execution as well as statistics for corrective action plans. This
information is available across the Army enterprise and can be sorted
by Command as well as business process owners to evaluate progress.
Strong governance includes the Army Audit Committee, Business
Mission Area Champion forum, and Command Accountability Execution
Review program, which drives readiness so commanders have a true
enterprise-wide understanding of asset location and condition. This
positions the Army to respond quickly and confidently to world events,
allocating Army capital to the most critical areas of need.
alliances and partnerships
Question. The 2022 NDS stresses the importance of U.S. alliances
and partnerships and considers these relationships a critical strategic
advantage.
If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to strengthen
existing U.S. alliances and partnerships, build new partnerships, and
leverage opportunities for international cooperation to advance U.S.
security interests?
Answer. If confirmed, I will strengthen relationships with allies
and partners and enhance international cooperation to advance the Army
and DOD interests. I will leverage Army resources and relationships to
facilitate stronger bilateral and multilateral relationships in support
of combatant commanders. Our Foreign Area Officers and Army planners
throughout the Army enterprise will employ an array of security
cooperation tools such as International Military Education and
Training, Foreign Military Sales, and Security Assistance Programs to
support alliances and partnerships. I will also ensure our bilateral
and multilateral exercises, senior leader engagements, military
personnel exchanges, foreign student attendance at professional
military education institutions such as the Army War College and
Command and General Staff College, and U.S. attendance at our partners'
professional military schools foster trust, mutual understanding, and
interoperability.
Question. What are the major challenges for strengthening existing
alliances and partnerships or building new ones, including for
improving interoperability and shared operational concepts? What steps
would you recommend, if confirmed, for overcoming these challenges?
Answer. Regarding alliances and partnerships, our biggest
interoperability challenges are our own policies and practices on
information sharing. In line with the NDS's stated task to remove
barriers to cooperation, the Army has been implementing policies and is
working to create a culture of generating information with shareability
in mind from inception. If confirmed, I will oversee the Army's ongoing
work to create a Secret / Releasable network environment, as opposed to
a U.S. only operating environment, and to transition to that by 2028 to
enable greater sharing and compatibility with our allies and partners.
joint operations
Question. How would you characterize your familiarity with other
Services' capabilities, including how they organize, train, and equip
their forces?
Answer. Throughout my entire career, I have commanded,
collaborated, and fought alongside our sister services. Additionally,
my service as deputy director for regional operations and force
management on the Joint Staff and, most recently, as Vice Chief of
Staff of the Army, during which I served as the Army's permanent member
of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC), have given me a
strong familiarity with our sister services' capabilities, including
their organization, training, and equipping processes.
Question. Which other Service doctrines and capabilities offer the
greatest opportunity for synergy with the Army in joint operations?
Answer. The varied skills, capabilities and structures across the
Joint Force make us a more lethal and effective military. We must
continue to work closely with our sister services on the Joint
Warfighting Concept and on joint experimentation efforts like Project
Convergence so that, when called upon, we can leverage all domains--
land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace--to present potential adversaries
with multiple dilemmas
Question. What innovative ideas are you considering increasing
interoperability across services to accomplish missions and tasks in
support of DOD objectives in joint operations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to advocate for reinforcing
the success of the Army's experimentation efforts and major exercises.
Specifically, continued participation by our Sister Services in Project
Convergence, the Army's annual Campaign of Learning, will continue to
be instrumental in the Army's contribution to Joint All-Domain Command
and Control (JADC2) and the development of future ground capabilities
that are interoperable among the Services. Meanwhile, exercises, such
as Super Garuda Shield in the Indo-Pacific, that the Army conducts with
other services and allies and partners increase both joint and
multinational interoperability.
army capabilities
Question. The Army is in the midst of a major modernization effort.
What is your understanding and assessment of the research, development,
and acquisition of the capabilities nest under the following priority
modernization efforts?
Long Range Precision Fires
Next Generation Combat Vehicles
Future Vertical Lift
Network
Air and Missile Defense
Soldier Lethality
Question. If confirmed, are there any other modernization efforts
you would prioritize?
Answer. First, we must continue to develop capabilities that reduce
Army resource requirements. The Contested Logistics Cross Functional
Team (CFT) announced in April 2023 provides us that potential by
focusing on optimizing logistics for future battlefields.
Second, we must continue to improve command and control systems to
ensure that our commanders can maintain battlefield awareness in a
multi-domain fight. Our systems must be mobile, learnable, and rapidly
updatable and low signature.
Finally, we must continue to advance in areas like Deep Sensing and
Human-Machine Integration to reduce the physical and cognitive loads on
our soldiers.
Integral to all of our modernization priorities is ensuring that
non-material transformation efforts are integrated and keep pace with
material ones. As we modernize our equipment, we must also modernize
our doctrine, organization, training, leadership and education,
personnel, facilities, OIB, and policy.
Question. If confirmed, how would you assess the appropriate level
of investment necessary to maintain Army enduring capabilities and
ensure the Army invests to keep these capabilities sufficiently
modernized?
Answer. The Army is transforming to conduct Multi-Domain Operations
as a part of the Joint Force and has significantly invested in six
modernization capabilities. If confirmed, I will advise the Secretary
of the Army to continue investing in the capabilities that maintain the
Army's capacity to win in any conflict against peer or near peer
adversaries. In addition, I will work closely with the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology to
ensure acquisition programs are programmed and executable.
joint acquisition programs
Question. What are your views regarding the merit and feasibility
of joint development and acquisition programs, such as the Joint Light
Tactical Vehicle, Future Vertical Lift, and hypersonic weapons?
Answer. Where requirements and opportunities align, Joint programs
provide efficiencies for all Services. The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
is one example where both the Army and the Marine Corps had similar
requirements, and, through collaboration, developed a shared baseline
vehicle. The Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, part of the Army's
Future Vertical Lift portfolio, has multi-service interest and the
potential to be the premier air assault aircraft beginning in the
2030's. Ongoing cooperation between the Army and Navy led to the
successful development of a hypersonic missile that will benefit both
Services well into the future. Again, when requirements and funding
align, the joint development of an acquisition program is often the
best approach.
Question. What additional programs would you consider to be
candidates for joint development and acquisition?
Answer. Any future requirements of the Services that align are
potential joint development and acquisition programs. Efficiencies are
realized by all Services when the Army can lay out a common baseline
development for a system. Cooperation between the Services is very
important to the Army, and the Army will continue to develop efforts
with the other Services where shared requirements exist.
Question. What are your views on joint, enabling or cross-cutting
capabilities that may not be treated as acquisition programs, such as
JADC2? Do you have sufficient authority to advocate or manage Army
capabilities to ensure there are no seams in planning or execution of
such efforts?
Answer. As demonstrated during Project Convergence and the Army's
campaign of persistent experimentation, JADC2 is indispensable in
integrating Joint Force capabilities and concepts against near peer
competitors and represents how we will fight and win as a Joint Force.
Within the Army. I have sufficient authorities to synchronize our
efforts for both materiel and non-materiel aspects of JADC2 to ensure
we are fully able to support the Joint Force's needs.
Question. If confirmed, how would you facilitate processes for the
Army that empower acquisition professionals and reduce institutional
policy barriers to enable cross service requirements development and
capabilities discussions?
Answer. There is significant cross-Service collaboration and
coordination in the development of joint requirements and capabilities
in several key areas today. If confirmed, I would support our
acquisition professionals continuing and expanding those collaboration
activities in areas such as missile defense, autonomy, artificial
intelligence, and munitions.
acquisition
Question. In recent National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAAs),
Congress expanded and refined the acquisition-related functions of the
Chief of Staff of the Army.
If confirmed, how would you assist the Secretary of the Army in the
performance of certain acquisition-related functions, while ensuring
compatibility with the duties and responsibilities of the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, as
established in title 10, U.S. Code, sections 7014 and 7016?
Answer. If confirmed, I would assist and advise the Secretary of
the Army in the performance of acquisition-related functions as
requested and tasked, but would specifically lead Army efforts to set
requirements and ensure that the requirements process is agile to the
needs of Warfighters. Over the course of the last year, I have
developed a close working relationship with the Assistant Secretary of
the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology and across the Army
acquisition enterprise, and consider the Army leadership team to be
well synchronized in our vision for the future.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to improve all
three aspects of the acquisition process--requirements, acquisition,
and budgeting?
Answer. In terms of the requirements process, I would ensure that
the Army is remaining agile to the needs of Warfighters. As the Army
looks to the future, it is clear that the Army must be more mobile and
more agile--able to operate in dispersed teams using mission command
principals. The Army's equipment must keep pace with evolving
technology and be able to accept rapid updates based on the changing
needs of leaders on the ground. Finally, the Army must be able to
manage electromagnetic signatures, as the battlespace today is
characterized by ubiquitous sensors. As Vice Chief of Staff of the
Army, I have worked closely with the Under Secretary of the Army, the
Chief of Staff and the Secretary of the Army to advance and communicate
these needs and will continue to do so if confirmed as the Chief of
Staff of the Army.
I will continue to advise the Secretary of where we can enhance and
reform the acquisition process and stay intimately involved in the
budgeting process. Finally, I will maintain transparency with Congress
to ensure that we communicate the Army's needs and facilitate a
relationship that enables the on-time, predictable and sustained
funding required for readiness.
Question. What actions would you propose, if any, to ensure that
requirements are realistic, technically achievable, and prioritized?
Answer. Fighting and winning in war is the Army's mandate.
Therefore, the requirements process for new Army equipment must be
responsive to Warfighter needs. We must ensure that we have clearly
assessed the core warfighting challenges and needs, at echelon, for
large-scale multi-domain conflict, that requirements developers are
aligned and nested with Warfighting units, that we are iterating on
prototypes and seeking solutions that truly meet Warfighter needs, and
that we are continuing to incorporate industry best practices into our
development processes to ensure that program outputs meet intent.
Question. What specific measures would you recommend to control
``requirements creep'' in the defense acquisition system?
Answer. Soldiers need mobile, sustainable, and learnable equipment
with manageable electromagnetic spectrum signatures for the future
fight, and they need them to be delivered at the pace of war. To do
this, we have to balance priorities, find best-value solutions, and
ensure that we are incorporating Warfighter touchpoints into our
developments process. Success is measured in readiness to deter, fight
and win.
Question. If confirmed, how would you utilize your authority to
arrest the exponential escalation in cost that, in recent history, has
marked the acquisition life-cycle of service platforms and weapons
systems?
Answer. If confirmed, I would seek to control the costs of
acquisition programs by ensuring that requirements are realistic and
achievable prior to program initiation, and that the appropriate
tradeoffs are being made throughout the program's lifecycle to best
manage cost, schedule, and performance. Customizable, complex systems
are not necessarily what the Army is looking for on the future
battlefield. Instead, the Army needs to be able to deploy and command
and control formations that are mobile, dispersible, and able to manage
electromagnetic signatures and hide in plain sight through camouflage
and deception. The Army must get away from stove-piped, parochial
systems and moved toward open architecture that capitalizes on American
ingenuity and technological advances. If confirmed, I will use my
authority to enforce this mindset and divest of COIN-centered systems
in favor of leaner, more agile, more sustainable systems that will
enhance the Army's lethality in the future fight.
Question. In your view, in whom should accountability for large-
scale acquisition failures or extraordinary cost overruns vest?
Answer. The Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of the
Army bear responsibility for ensuring that the enterprise delivers
timely, lethal, effective systems to soldiers.
Question. In your view, are the roles and responsibilities in the
acquisition process now assigned to the Chief of Staff of the Army and
the other Service Chiefs appropriate? Are there other acquisition-
related roles or responsibilities that should be assigned to the
Service Chiefs?
Answer. I currently view the acquisition-related roles and
responsibilities assigned to the Chief of Staff of the Army to be
appropriate. Should I see a need for change, I will ensure that I
advise the Secretary of the Army or other civilian overseers as
appropriate.
A natural tension exists between the objectives of major defense
acquisition programs to reduce cost and accelerate schedule, and the
need to ensure performance meets requirements and specifications, which
is the objective of the test and evaluation function.
Question. Has the Secretary of the Army assigned to the Chief of
Staff of the Army responsibility for those aspects of the function of
research and development relating to test and evaluation for Army
acquisition programs? If so, how would you exercise this
responsibility, if confirmed?
Answer. Yes. The Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC) serves as
the operational test agency that plans and conducts all operational
tests, reports results, and provides evaluations on the operational
effectiveness, operational suitability and survivability for all Army
acquisition programs. The ATEC Commanding General reports to the Vice
Chief of Staff and ultimately to the Chief of Staff.
Question. What is your assessment of the appropriate balance
between the desire to reduce acquisition cycle times and the need to
perform adequate test and evaluation?
Answer. The Army can reduce the acquisition timelines by conducting
rigorous test and evaluation early in a program's development and
continue throughout programs lifecycle. Early collaboration with
industry enables the Army to observe their testing and use their data
and digital engineering tools thereby reducing the need for unnecessary
duplicate and costly tests. The goal is to gain information on
equipment performance issues and to fix the problem early in the
development cycle. Also, performing continuous and cumulative
evaluation of an acquisition program will keep senior Army leaders
informed on system performance and schedule. Beginning the continuous
and comprehensive evaluation early in a program's lifecycle can
significantly reduce test time and cost by thorough comparative
analysis, data sharing and integrated testing.
Question. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe it
appropriate to procure weapon systems and equipment that have not been
demonstrated through test and evaluation to be operationally effective,
suitable, and survivable?
Answer. When soldiers are deployed on an operational mission and
the warfighter determines there is an urgent requirement for a
particular weapon system or item of equipment it may be appropriate to
accept that risk. Senior leaders must assess whether the weapon system
provides an improved capability over the system soldiers are currently
using or provides a new capability where there currently is none.
Otherwise, I do not believe it would ever be appropriate to field a
weapon system that has not been demonstrated as operationally
effective, operationally suitable or survivable. If the Army, due to
operational imperatives, fields a weapon system that has operational
effectiveness, operational suitability or survivability shortfalls,
Army testers will continue to test those systems until all noted
deficiencies are rectified and the Army will make the upgrades required
to fix all issues. Above all, we will never jeopardize the life,
health, or safety of our Warfighters through the fielding of new
capabilities.
Question. What do you see as the role of the developmental and
operational test and evaluation communities with respect to rapid
acquisition, spiral acquisition, and other evolutionary acquisition
processes?
Answer. The role of test and evaluation in any acquisition pathway
is paramount. The Army Test and Evaluation enterprise is evolving to
execute agile yet robust test events to speed up the acquisition
process. These agile test and evaluation processes will provide senior
leaders the opportunity to gain early system insights, provide
continuous feedback and fix systems early in the acquisition process.
Accelerating the test and evaluation processes does not equate to
cutting corners. Army testers must ensure the weapons we provide
soldiers are operationally effective, operationally suitable,
survivable, and safe. Doing so helps improve soldier confidence in
their weapons.
Question. Are you satisfied with Army test and evaluation
capabilities, including the test and evaluation workforce and
infrastructure?
Answer. I am satisfied with the test and evaluation infrastructure
and workforce today and confident in our plans to make important
improvements in the future. The Army is making capital investments in
workforce and instrumentation to test emerging capabilities and the
modern weapon systems of the future. The Army invests in providing
operationally realistic threats and operationally relevant test
environments. This requires a shift from 20 years of counterinsurgency
warfare to focusing on peer and near peer threats and will require
continued Army focus. I am confident the Army has a solid plan that is
adequately resourced.
Question. In which areas, if any, do you feel the Army should be
developing new test and evaluation capabilities?
Answer. There are several test and evaluation areas that require
attention to meet future needs.
Multi-Domain Operations that combine the effects of air, land,
maritime, space, cyberspace and electromagnetic spectrum warfare will
require the Army to incorporate all those domains to adequately assess
program operational effectiveness, operational suitability and
survivability. The range of weapon systems is increasing significantly.
The Army must have the ability to test those systems at the maximum
range. Directed energy weapons, autonomous systems, and artificial
intelligence-based systems will also require investment to ensure
adequate test and evaluation of those systems. The Army will continue
to focus its test and evaluation investment resources on those areas.
In addition to direct Army funding, the Army is working closely with
the DOD Test Resource Management Center (TRMC) to leverage Central Test
and Evaluation Investment Program (CTEIP) funding which is providing
significant resources to help the Army modernize its test
infrastructure for the future.
Question. If confirmed, how would you accelerate the development of
these new capabilities?
Answer. I believe the Army Test and Evaluation enterprise has
adequately identified the capital investments it requires. If
confirmed, I will closely monitor the delivery of those capabilities
during the annual POM process. The investments the Army is making today
in the Test and Evaluation enterprise are critical to the ``Deliver
Army 2030'' mission. I will ensure the testers get what they need to
meet this important mission.
Question. What are your views on the appropriate roles of Office of
the Secretary of Defense developmental and operational testing
organizations with respect to testing of Army systems?
Answer. By law, the OSD developmental and operational test and
evaluation organizations are responsible for providing oversight of all
major defense acquisition programs, major automated information systems
and other acquisition programs. The OSD test organizations ensure the
Services are conducting adequate testing and asking the right questions
at each level and checking the response. I believe the statutory roles
are appropriate.
Question. Do you think the current operational test and evaluation
system also provides for the flexibility to assess commercial
technologies that might be acquired or fields by the Department of
Defense through means or processes that are not traditional acquisition
programs of record?
Answer. Yes, however, systems should not proceed directly to the
operational test. The ATEC must still conduct thorough developmental
testing first before proceeding to the operational test to confirm
operational effectiveness, operational suitability, and survivability
under realistic conditions. The extent of this testing is driven by the
degree of difference between how a system was designed and used in the
commercial sector compared to how it will be used in the military. The
Army Test and Evaluation Enterprise has significant developmental test
capabilities to test all facets of a system. The Army will also use
soldier Touch Points that obtain user input early to inform development
of technologies and initiatives. These have proven invaluable in
getting early feedback and gaining operational insights during
developmental testing on all types of systems.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the ``process'' of
programs of record do not limit service investment in portfolios of
capabilities or mission threads?
Answer. The adoption of the Adaptive Acquisition Framework (AAF),
which codifies several different pathways besides the standard Major
Defense Acquisition Program route, has created flexibility within the
Acquisition system. The framework enables the Acquisition community to
utilize a multi-pathway approach, if required, to invest in portfolios
of capabilities without overly restrictive processes.
Question. If confirmed, how would you resource enablers, such as
authorities to operate or data or certification, that Program Managers
and Program Executive Officers see as outside of their requirements?
Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure that the Army is working with
organizations across the DOD to address areas where flexible
authorities, improved governance, or resources are needed to enable the
development and fielding of capabilities for warfighters.
equipment repair/reset
Question. Is it your understanding that Army repair depots are
operating at optimal capacity to meet rebuild and repair requirements?
Answer. Army depots are postured to meet current rebuild and repair
requirements for existing fleets, and continued investment will be
required to ensure the OIB is postured to accommodate the range of
modernized weapon systems under development as part of the Army
Modernization Strategy. If confirmed, I will support the Army's OIB
Modernization Implementation Plan to ensure our facilities, tooling and
processes, and our workforce can sustain modernized equipment without
disrupting the OIB's ability to support current operations.
Question. What additional steps, if any, do you believe could be
taken to increase the Army's capacity to fix its equipment and make it
available for operations and training?
Answer. While the Army's OIB is postured to meet current
sustainment requirements, investment in the Army's OIB Modernization
Implementation Plan is necessary to ensure capacity and capability to
sustain the future force. If confirmed, I will support this investment.
I will also support efforts to improve efficiencies that enable more
time to maintain equipment and generate readiness. For example, I will
support efforts to digitalize manual processes; to improve the
diagnostic capabilities within our units; to review policy to ensure
the Army does not spend precious resources on unnecessary tasks; and to
invest in training programs to increase maintainer proficiency.
Recognizing the difficulty associated with maintaining multiple fleet
variations, I will support efforts to reduce fleet variability across
formations (for example, by divesting legacy equipment and seeking
commonality across platforms) and will maintain pace on fielding
modernized combat systems.
Question. In your view, is the level of funding budgeted and
programmed for equipment repair and reset sufficient?
Answer. The Army's fiscal year 2024 budget request and programming
efforts sufficiently fund equipment repair and reset. If confirmed, I
will continue to evaluate our equipment repair and reset funding along
with other readiness and modernization priorities.
Question. What impact is this level of funding likely to have, if
any, on the ability of Army National Guard units to respond to Homeland
Defense and defense support to civil authorities missions?
Answer. Timely adequate, predictable, and sustained funding is
essential to enable the Army National Guard to perform its full set of
mission requirements. As currently resourced, the Army National Guard's
funding is adequate to enable the Guard to respond to Defense Support
of Civil Authorities or Homeland Defense missions.
Special Operations Enabling Capabilities
Question. If confirmed, how would you work with the Commander of
U.S. Special Operations Command to address the enabling requirements of
Army special operations personnel throughout the deployment cycle?
Answer. I will address enabling requirements of the Army special
operations personnel throughout the deployment cycle by working closely
with U.S. Special Operations Command and U.S. Army Special Operations
Command (USASOC). This collaboration will ensure the Army meets service
responsibilities related to Special Operations. Regular engagements
will ensure Army and Special Operations equities are integrated and
adequately addressed.
national guard equipment
Question. What is your understanding and assessment of changes in
the global and domestic roles and missions of the Army National Guard
and the National Guard Bureau in the last decade?
Answer. Over the last decade, the Army National Guard's unique dual
status has enabled its members to support a broad array of domestic and
global requirements, from being the primary response mechanism to
domestic emergencies such as COVID-19 to leading U.S. efforts to assist
Ukrainian forces in countering Russian aggression at the Joint
Multinational Training Group--Ukraine. The changing global operational
environment necessitates continued and increased integration of the
Army National Guard with the Active Army to achieve 2022 NDS objectives
and deter potential adversaries. The Army National Guard is and will
remain a critical enduring advantage that enables the Army to
efficiently deter adversaries while building strategic depth, enhancing
partner and ally relationships, and enabling Combatant Commander
campaigning efforts.
Question. What is your understanding and assessment of the Army's
commitment to fully fund DOD requirements for Army National Guard
equipment?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army continues to equip and
modernize the Total Force in accordance with established priorities and
available funding. I am committed to ensuring that Army units remain
interoperable, deployable, and sustainable across the Total Force, with
targeted modernization during the appropriate phase of the Regionally
Aligned Readiness and Modernization Model.
Question. In your view, do Army processes for planning,
programming, budgeting, and execution sufficiently address requirements
for National Guard equipment modernization?
Answer. Yes, the Army processes for planning, programming,
budgeting, and execution sufficiently address the requirements for
National Guard equipment modernization. The National Guard is included
in every step of the processes and the Army's transparency initiative
closely monitors equipment procurement quantities to ensure they are
delivered to the Reserve components. Reserve component equipment
modernization has improved considerably over the past 10 years.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that these equipment
needs of the Army National Guard are fully considered and resourced
through the Army budget process?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure National Guard and Reserve
equipment needs continue to be fully considered through the Army budget
process and that equipment is resourced based on the needs of the Total
Force, regardless of component.
Question. What is your understanding and assessment of the role and
authorities of the Director of the Army National Guard, and, in your
view, how does this compare with the role and authorities of the Chief
of the Army Reserve?
Answer. The Chief, National Guard Bureau (CNGB) is the principal
adviser to Army senior leaders on matters related to the Army National
Guard (ARNG) and the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS),
which is one of the Army's two Reserve component. The Director of the
Army National Guard does not command the ARNG. Rather, the Director
assists the CNGB in carrying out that organization's functions of the
National Guard Bureau as they relate to the ARNG and ARNGUS, and the
Director performs these functions on behalf of the CNGB by delegation
of authority, to include representing the ARNG in Army corporate
processes.
The Chief of the Army Reserve serves as the principal adviser to
Army senior leaders on matters related to the U.S. Army Reserve, the
other Reserve component. Her position is unique in comparison to the
Director of the Army National Guard because she also serves as the
Commanding General of U.S. Army Reserve Command and therefore commands
the personnel and units assigned to the U.S. Army Reserve Command. In
her capacity as the Chief of the Army Reserve, she has similar
responsibilities as the Director of the Army National Guard to ensure
proper consideration of U.S. Army Reserve issues within the Army.
Both positions are vital for ensuring the overall preparedness and
effectiveness of the Reserve component and their seamless integration
into the Total Force to ensure our Army is ready to fight and win our
Nation's wars.
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
ensure the number of Reserve Component General Officers are sufficient
to fill the highly qualified ``bench'' from which the Director of the
Army National Guard and the senior leaders of the National Guard Bureau
can be selected?
Answer. If confirmed, I will advocate for increased opportunities
for Army National Guard officers to fill Army and Joint positions to be
competitive for the most senior level positions in the Army National
Guard and National Guard Bureau. In coordination with the Chief,
National Guard Bureau, I will solicit recommendations from Governors
across the 54 states and territories to nominate the best-qualified
candidates for those senior level positions. Additionally, I will
review Army policies to identify and address any potential barriers to
growing a diverse bench of senior officers who understand the magnitude
of the states' missions and the strategic role Army National Guard
officers fulfill in support of national defense.
power projection
Question. The ability of U.S. ground forces to hold at risk
adversary ships and aircraft; intercept missiles aimed at our ships,
airfields, ports and other fixed facilities; and provide electronic
warfare and communications support for our air and naval forces could
enable the United States to present adversaries with our own ``anti-
access/area denial'' (A2AD) challenge.
Do you believe the current ground force posture in INDOPACOM is
adequate? If not, what would you recommend to bolster it?
Answer. The current ground force posture is adequate to meet the
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) tasks today. We are continuing
to improve the Army's posture in the Indo-Pacific based on
implementation guidance from the NDS, fielding new capabilities like
Army watercraft, and continued collaboration with USINDOPACOM to set
conditions for possible contingencies in the region.
Question. Do you concur that U.S. defense policy would be better
served were the Army to develop the capabilities and operational
concepts for a ``power projection'' role, for both the European and
Indo-Pacific theaters?
Answer. The development of capabilities and operational concepts
for power projection to the European and Indo-Pacific theaters is
consistent with the Secretary of Defense's NDS.
Question. Do you perceive a need for, and benefit to, enhanced U.S.
security engagement in the Indian Ocean, and if so, in what areas and
with whom?
Answer. Yes. Enhanced security engagement in the Indian Ocean
region--particularly with key partners like India--is essential to our
broader goal of a free and open Indo-Pacific. We increasingly share
security priorities with India that include concerns about Violent
Extremist Organizations and encroachment by the People's Republic of
China. If confirmed, I will explore the need for enhanced security
engagements with other countries in the Indian Ocean region as well.
munitions
Question. Army munitions inventories--particularly for precision
guided munitions and artillery--have declined significantly due to high
operational usage, insufficient procurement, and a requirements system
that does not adequately account for the ongoing need to transfer
munitions to our allies. Due to draw down of certain weapons systems to
support Ukraine, the Department of Defense has begun efforts to
increase production and bolster the industrial base.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the Army has
sufficient inventories of munitions to meet the needs of combatant
commanders?
Answer. The Army has a solid plan to address munitions inventories.
The Army is taking a multi-pronged approach of expanding production in
the U.S. industrial base and leveraging available capacity from foreign
sources to meet immediate demand, replenish our Nation's stocks, and
support the industrial base for sustained long-term demand and surge
capacity. The Army is investing in both organic and commercial
industrial base to address production increases of key systems while
also expanding production at existing suppliers and standing up new
suppliers for certain items.
Question. What changes in budgeting and acquisition processes would
you recommend to facilitate faster Army munitions replenishment rates?
Answer. I want to thank Congress for its current support to Army
munitions production. The temporary authorities provided under Section
1244 of the fiscal year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
provide contracting flexibility and the potential commitment to
multiyear procurement contracts for select munitions beginning in
fiscal year 2023. These authorities enable the Army to accelerate
munitions production, modernize the munitions industrial base, and help
meet replenishment rates. The Army will continue to work with Congress
to assess the need for extending or modifying these authorities as
appropriate. Additionally, Congress's supplemental funding has enabled
the Army to meet many of its munitions-related requirements.
Question. How should the Army adapt to self-imposed DOD
restrictions on area attack and denial munitions, consistent with the
Ottawa Agreements?
Answer. Army is pursuing the Cannon Delivered Area Effects
Munitions (C-DAEM) and XM250 programs to replace these capabilities.
While the U.S. is not an Ottawa Convention signatory, it is the stated
intent under current U.S. policy to develop area denial capabilities to
be compliant with the Convention's restrictions. The XM250 Top Attack
system currently in development will provide an Ottawa-compliant,
soldier-emplaced, anti-vehicle munition system enabling US and friendly
forces to maneuver freely on the battlefield while denying hostile
forces freedom of maneuver in the same battlespace. Future area denial
development efforts will provide the ability to create Ottawa-compliant
complex obstacles at extended ranges, fully replacing the current area
denial capabilities. The C-DAEM program is developing more reliable (1
percent UXO standard) munitions to meet area attack targets and
precision guided munitions to attack both moving and stationary armored
vehicles. Until such time as these munitions are available in
sufficient quantities to meet warfighting needs, the Army will retain
sufficient legacy munitions in the inventory to meet current
requirements within the restrictions laid out in the respective
landmine and cluster munition policies.
conventional prompt strike
Question. The Army and the Navy are conducting a joint program for
conventional prompt strike using long range hypersonic weapons. The
Navy is designing and fabricating the warhead while the Army is
fabricating the missile body for the Army designed Long Range
Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) system. The Army is proposing three batteries
of the weapon system.
What is your assessment of the current testing pace of this
program?
Answer. I am confident that our current flight test campaign pace
supports the delivery of an operational capability for both the Army
and Navy. In addition to flight tests, the Army unit continues to
exercise the hypersonic mission execution chain through garrison and
field events, increasing both the capability and the confidence of the
unit in the equipment. Moving forward, increased ability to test
components and subsystems of the Common Hypersonic Glide Body in
relevant environments will be critical to future upgrades. We work
closely with the test community to schedule and support these
activities.
Question. Do you believe the current testing pace can be
accelerated similar to the commercial space industry?
Answer. The appropriate pace of testing for long-range weapons and
space systems depends on many factors. The Army is balancing the need
for rapid development of a prototype hypersonic weapon with the need to
put a safe and credible system in the hands of warfighters. Increased
investment in hypersonic test infrastructure would indeed increase test
efficiency, and we are working closely with many stakeholders to
leverage all available test resources and investments to date.
Question. What is your assessment of the overall readiness and
principal risks of the entire LRHW system which not only includes the
missile and warhead but the fire control and industrial base to support
its production?
Answer. The industrial base to support hypersonic development is
still immature, as the technology solely existed in government lab
environments for several decades. The DOD has made significant
investments in the industrial base capacity through the Industrial Base
Analysis and Sustainment and other programs to support production of
hypersonic weapons. While we experience the challenges expected in any
new production effort, I am confident that the industrial base can
support the Army's current required production capacity.
Question. Do you believe the current scope and work structure
between the Army and Navy is satisfactory? If not, what suggestions
would you make?
Answer. Yes. The Army and Navy partnership has been crucial in
moving at the speed of relevancy with the development of hypersonic
weapons, and I believe that relationship will be the foundation to our
success in the future.
Question. What is your assessment of the funding and planning for
force structure and training for the three batteries the Army plans to
field over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP)?
Answer. The Army has prioritized the design and development of
three long range Long Range Hypersonic Weapons (LRHW) system batteries
and there are no projected shortfalls in funding for the system or the
required training. The first battery is participating in the joint
program testing, allowing the Army to refine the structure, training,
and procedures that will enable expansion to the full capability over
the FYDP.
Question. What is your assessment of the Army's capability as a
force provider to the combatant commands of the LRHW? Do you anticipate
it will be similar to the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
systems which is a low density system under high demand which cannot be
fully satisfied?
Answer. LRHW will provide the Joint Force commander with
unprecedented long-range capability to neutralize peer competitor Anti-
Access Area Denial as part of the Army's Multi Domain Task Force. For
LRHW, the Army currently plans to resource Combatant Commanders with
three batteries, the first already in operation. This capability will
provide these commanders with options to hold adversaries at risk
across multiple theaters--and from a standoff distance. I anticipate
LRHW, like Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) will be a high
demand capability that will require deliberate decisionmaking to
effectively meet global demands.
integrated air and missile defense
Question. The current validated requirement for THAAD batteries is
nine, yet only seven are both manned and equipped. The Army has
allocated manning for an eighth battery, but has no equipment. The
ninth battery has neither manning nor equipment. THAAD and Patriot
batteries, in the meantime, are some of the highest-demand, lowest-
density assets in the Army, and the soldier who man them are deployed
with great frequency.
Do you believe the Army's current program of record is sufficient
to address theater missile defense requirements?
Answer. The Army Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) is
undergoing its most significant modernization effort in the last 40
years, increasing in both capacity and capability to support the Joint
Force with establishing air superiority. Additionally, the current Army
program of record supports theater missile defense through growth of
new battalions, including addition of a 16th Patriot battalion, new
Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense (M-SHORAD) battalions and Indirect
Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) battalions. The program of record
also meets Joint Force requirements against advanced threats through
development and fielding of Lower Tier Air Defense Sensor (LTAMDS),
Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) missile, and Sentinel A4 radar, all
fused by a common command and control--Integrated Air and Missile
Defense Battle Command System (IBCS).
Question. What has the conflict in Ukraine informed the Army
regarding Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) as a force
presenter to the Combatant Commands now and in the future?
Answer. The Army is reviewing potential insights from the Ukraine
conflict and identifying ways to leverage applicable lessons learned
for U.S. forces. Specifically, the Center for Army Lessons Learned is
standing up a Ukraine-focused group to consolidate and vet these
insights. Ukraine has demonstrated tactics, techniques, and procedures
that may be advantageous to incorporate into U.S. doctrine. Similarly,
Ukraine's use of Air and Missile Defense resources may help inform
future U.S. defense design. After identifying lessons learned, the Army
will build them, as applicable, into Professional Military Education.
Lessons learned may also inform future Air and Missile Defense
utilization for employment within Combatant Command (CCMD) Operational
Plans (OPLANs). Additionally, observations on the Ukraine conflict
improve U.S. understanding of Russian threat capability and combat
power, which will inform CCMDs moving forward.
Question. What is your assessment of the Army's force structure
supporting their current Integrated Air and Missile Defense
requirements from the Combatant Commands?
Answer. Each year, the Army models the requirement for Integrated
Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) in support of NDS requirements and based
on available resources, determines the appropriate force structure
level for IAMD.
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command has a requirement to defend Guam, which
is a central logistics and force projection hub in the Indo-Pacific
theater and necessary to deter China. A central element of that defense
is a robust Integrated Air and Missile System in Guam of which the Army
is now a major contributor, along with the Navy and Air Force.
Question. What are your views, in terms or risk, for the Army to
meet the IAMD requirements of Indo-Pacific Command against what is
currently reflected in the Army's FYDP with respect to time, funding,
and Army personnel to maintain and operate such an IAMD system in Guam?
Answer. The Army appreciates the importance of Guam in the
USINDOPACOM theater and as part of the Homeland. We are working to
establish the Army component for the IAMD of Guam, which together with
the Aegis component being developed by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA)
will address the USINDOPACOM Commander's requirements. We are planning
for fiscal year 2027 delivery and are working personnel requirements in
our Total Army Analysis (TAA) process. Establishing the Army IAMD
component on Guam is a complex undertaking, involving state-of-the-art
prototype capabilities and substantial military construction. I believe
the Army is on track to deliver and operate our portion of the defense
and will coordinate that delivery with MDA, the Navy and USINDOPACOM.
space and electronic warfare
Question. The United States is increasingly dependent on space,
both economically and militarily--from the Global Positioning System
(GPS) on which many industries and military capabilities rely, to the
missile warning systems that underpin U.S. nuclear deterrence as well
as our regional Integrated Air and Missile systems. Likewise, great
power competition has revitalized the need for joint electronic warfare
capabilities that essentially laid dormant over the past 20 years. In
particular, the Ukraine conflict has shown extensive Electronic Warfare
operations by both the Russian and Ukrainian Armed Forces.
What actions is the Army taking to operate in a GPS denied
environment now and in the context of future operations?
Answer. The Army established the Assured Positioning, Navigation
and Timing (APNT) CFT in 2018 to ensure reliable future Global
Positioning System (GPS) or GPS-like capability for the Army. We have
completed initial testing and evaluation of both mounted and dismounted
systems designed and have begun fielding them. Additionally, we are
exploring and experimenting with several alternative navigation systems
untethered to the GPS constellation. All these capabilities are tested
annually in a APNT Assessment Exercise, where actual enemy capabilities
in this space are replicated. If confirmed, I can arrange for the Army
to provide additional information on these capabilities in a classified
setting.
Question. How confident are you that the Army can fight effectively
and achieve its objectives in a GPS denied environment?
Answer. The Army is improving our ability to train in realistic
combat environments, including GPS-denied environments. These
improvements are being incorporated into the modeling and simulation
capabilities such as WARSIM and WARFIGHTER exercises. Our efforts to
mitigate adversary attempts to deny GPS, improve robustness of
positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) through alternative
navigation (ALTNAV) signals, and train in realistic combat environments
will enable the Army to achieve our objectives despite adversary
attempts to deny PNT capabilities.
Question. What actions is the Army taking in terms of training and
material development based on the results of Tier One exercises to
maintain effective command and control of its forces in an electronic
warfare environment based on systems developed by either Russia or
China? Do you feel confident at present in the Army's ability to
operate in such an environment?
Answer. The electromagnetic spectrum permeates each of the
operational domains--operating in this space provides a military force
the ability to deliver effects and create dilemmas for air, land,
maritime, space and cyber forces. It is critical that the Army can
fight and win in this space. To ensure our soldiers can operate in
transparent, congested, degraded and area-denied environments, the Army
is rapidly evolving the exercise capabilities of our combat training
centers (CTC), including our recently established Joint Pacific
Multinational Readiness Center--the Army's Indo-Pacific regional combat
training center. This critical training center provides realistic
training designed to build readiness and enhance interoperability
throughout the Indo-Pacific region. A recent exercise enabled the 25th
Infantry Division, alongside units from Thailand, Indonesia, and the
Philippines to experience all-domain training challenges in conditions
that replicated the operational environments of competition and
conflict. The Army is working to ensure similar upgrades to other
events and exercises, including Balikatan in the Philippines, Yama
Sakura in Japan and Cobra Gold in Thailand. These exercises will
continue to inform updated requirements, materiel development efforts,
testing, and training to ensure that our force has the right mix of
capabilities to enable the Combatant Commander to converge effects at
the desired range and speed necessary to win the operational fight in
forward theaters.
Question. What actions is the Army taking to organize its force
structure, material development, and training for offensive electronic
warfare operations now and in the future?
Answer. The Army pairs a training focus that informs material
development efforts with a deliberately experimental, dynamic, and
agile force structure with our Multi-Domain Task Forces. The
electromagnetic warfare forces of the Army's Multi-Domain Task Forces
are uniquely structured to establish presence in theater with a suite
of offensive and defensive electronic warfare capabilities that provide
depth of range and speed, and benefit from extensive land power
networks with partner nation armed forces. Competitive, calibrated
force posture (CFP) is an explicit requirement for the Joint Force to
be able to transition to crisis or conflict. The Army's Multi-Domain
Operations concept addresses these challenges to ensure success in
competition and conflict.
indo-pacific region
Question. In your view, how should the Army contribute to
competition and deterrence activities in the Indo-Pacific region? In
the event of a contingency in the Indo-Pacific region, how do you
believe the Army would contribute to the joint force?
Answer. The Army contributes to competition and deterrence
activities in the Indo-Pacific region. The Army provides the Joint
Force with the necessary lethal ground forces to provide defense and
control of key terrain, long-range precision fires and air and missile
defense for vital protection support, and the logistics to ensure the
Joint Force is successful. In the event of a contingency, the Army will
provide command and control at scale, intra-theater logistics, key air
and naval bases protection, long-range fires, and maneuver forces
capable of holding and seizing terrain.
Question. If confirmed, how will you ensure that the Army's
posture, basing, force structure, and logistics networks evolve to
support your vision?
Answer. The Army should continue to provide lethal ground forces,
long range precision fires, command and control, Integrated Air and
Missile Defense, engineering, intelligence, space, cyber, sustainment,
and contested logistics in the Indo-Pacific. As we integrate Multi-
Domain Operation capabilities into Army formations, we must continue to
refine our posture to be adequately positioned in terms of forces,
footprint, and authorities throughout the region. This will include
rotations of forces for exercises or specific operations as well as
consideration for forward stationing.
Question. In your assessment, what capability or capacity
shortfalls present the most significant challenge for the Army in
executing contingency plans on the Korean Peninsula?
Answer. Continued teamwork with the Joint Force and Korean partners
will enhance the Army's ability to address challenges in executing
combat operations on the Korean Peninsula. Current capability and
shortfall analysis is critical to executing contingency plans. If
confirmed, I will arrange for a classified briefing.
Question. What are the key areas in which the Army must improve to
provide the necessary capabilities and capacity to the joint force to
prevail in a potential conflict with China?
Answer. Our Army is continually transforming so that we may prevail
in any potential conflict. In this effort we are focused on six
operational imperatives: (1) Sense farther (2) converge forces; (3)
precise, longer-range fires; (4) protect forces; (5) communicate and
share data, and (6) Sustain the fight.
Additionally, the Army must improve recruiting and manage talent to
ensure it attracts and retains soldiers with the skills needed to
maintain overmatch against great power competitors.
Question. What is your understanding of what the Army is doing to
provide cruise missile defense for the joint force in Indo-Pacific to
defend against fixed locations such as bases and other critical
infrastructure? When will this capability be available to the joint
force at scale?
Answer. The Army currently has two batteries of the Iron Dome
Defense System-Army (IDDS-A) assigned to USINDOPACOM as an interim
cruise missile defense solution. The Army is developing the Indirect
Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) as the weapon system to defend assets
and critical infrastructure against cruise missile threats. IFPC
battalions will be assigned to the Corps and Multi-Domain Task Force
(MDTF). Currently, USINDOPACOM has one Corps and one MDTF assigned and
the Army is assessing assignment of additional MDTF's to the Indo-
Pacific theater. This capability will be available beginning in fiscal
year 2026. Additionally, the USINDOPACOM area of responsibility has
forward stationed Patriot battalions that contribute capability to
defend critical infrastructure against supersonic cruise missiles. The
Army is procuring additional Patriot and IFPC capability as part of the
Defense of Guam architecture.
europe
Question. In your view, what are the key areas in which the Army
must improve to provide the necessary capabilities and capacity to the
joint force to support integrated deterrence, and if necessary, prevail
in a potential conflict with Russia?
Answer. To deter and, if necessary, prevail in a potential conflict
with Russia, the Army must continue to focus on providing combat ready
ground forces to the Joint Force. This includes remaining committed to
our six modernization priorities, addressing the recruiting challenge,
and learning lessons from the conflict. The Army must be able to see
and sense more, farther, and more persistently; concentrate combat
forces rapidly from dispersed locations; win the long-range fires
fight; protect our forces from air, missile, and drone attacks; rapidly
and reliably communicate; and sustain the fight across contested
terrain.
Question. In your opinion, what are the key takeaways from the
Ukraine conflicts for U.S. Army investments in Europe, particularly as
it relates to the location, equipment content and readiness levels, and
speed of deployment for Army prepositioned stocks in Europe?
Answer. The deployment of Army forces to the European theater in
2022 demonstrated the value of Army prepositioned stocks as an
accelerator for Joint Force projection. The future of the stocks in
Europe will include a new storage location in Poland which will better
position the Army to support the U.S. European Command Commander.
operational energy
Question. DOD defines operational energy as the energy required for
training, moving, and sustaining military forces and weapons platforms
for military operations, including the energy used by tactical power
systems, generators, and weapons platforms. Longer operating distances,
remote and austere geography, and anti-access/area denial threats are
challenging DOD's ability to assure the delivery of fuel. As the
ability to deliver energy is placed at risk, so too is the Department's
ability to deploy and sustain Army forces around the globe.
What are your ideas for future capabilities that would enable an
expeditionary Army through the assured delivery of energy to the
warfighter?
Answer. Power generation and energy delivery are critical to
warfighting. As the global environment continues to change and we
deliberately transform to address that change, the Army continues to
seek innovative ways to address power and energy challenges. In April
2023, the Army established a Contested Logistics Cross Functional Team
(CFT) to explore novel solutions for conducting sustainment activities
on the future battlefield. Additionally, the Army continues to pursue
energy resiliency efforts to to reduce our reliance on fuel and reduce
base vulnerabilities. Finally, our science and technology organizations
continue to explore cutting-edge technologies which may enable
dispersed formations to do things like create their own fuel from local
water systems, employ vertical landing and takeoff flight capability,
or utilize vehicle-centric micro-gridding to rapidly create and
conserve energy at the point of need. These advancements have the
potential to reduce maintenance burdens and logistics tails, help with
electromagnetic spectrum signature management, and lower operations and
support costs.
Question. What are your ideas for reducing the risks associated
with the Army's dependence on vulnerable supply lines?
Answer. The Army is continually working to review, assess and
mitigate supply chain risks before they become a problem, focusing on
our most sensitive capability development efforts first. Meanwhile, our
newly formed Contested Logistics CFT is working to increase resilience
in our physical and cyber logistics networks and Army Materiel Command
and the Army G-4 are engaged in getting materiel to soldiers quickly
and securely.
cyber
Question. The readiness of the Cyber Mission Forces assigned to
U.S. Cyber Command is substantially below acceptable levels. This
shortfall is due primarily to the lack of sufficient numbers of
personnel in each of the services in three critical work roles that are
especially demanding: tool developers, exploitation analysts, and
interactive on-net operators.
What is your understanding of the causes for the Army's shortfalls
in recruiting, training, and retaining personnel qualified for these
work roles?
Answer. The Army's priority for readiness of its cyber forces is to
fill U.S. Cyber Command and other cyber force structure's most critical
work roles. In this field, competition for top talent with the private
sector will be an enduring challenge. The Army must balance both
quantitative goals, in the number of developers, analysts, and
operators, as well as qualitative goals to ensure these individuals are
highly trained and experienced to conduct challenging defensive and
offensive cyber assignments.
Question. What is your understanding of the Army's plans to correct
this shortfall?
Answer. While an OSD-led force-generation study is ongoing to
recommend cross-DoD opportunities to correct readiness shortfalls
across the Cyber Mission Force, the Army is looking to expand the
application of the Cyber Excepted Service to provide expedited
recruiting and more flexible retention options for civilians. The Army
will also assess the length of tours to ensure the Army realizes the
full return on its investment in those personnel who have been through
the most rigorous training. Finally, the Army will always look to
expand and offer other broadening retention opportunities.
Question. The mission of U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) is offensive
and defense warfighting in the cyber domain. However, so far, General
and Flag Officers selected to serve as Commander of Cyber Command have
been intelligence specialists rather than line officers. If confirmed,
you will be a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and an adviser to
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Secretary of Defense.
Do you think that CYBERCOM as a warfighting command could or should
be led by an officer trained and experienced in commanding joint
operations?
Answer. It could be. If confirmed, I will recommend to the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff with only those officers I consider the
best-qualified to serve as Commander, USCYBERCOM based on the totality
of their skills, knowledge, behaviors, and experience. I would consider
an officer's joint experience as a factor in my recommendation.
science, technology, and innovation
Question. U.S. superiority in key areas of innovation is decreasing
or has disappeared, while our competitors are engaging in aggressive
military modernization and advanced weaponry development. DOD has
identified 14 critical technology areas in which investment to develop
next generation operational capabilities is imperative: hypersonics;
future generation wireless technology; advanced materials; integrated
network systems-of-systems; directed energy; integrated sensing and
cyber; space technology; quantum science; trusted artificial
intelligence (AI) and autonomy; microelectronics; renewable energy
generation and storage; advanced computing and software; human-machine
interfaces; and biotechnology. Much of the innovation in these
technologies that could prove suitable for national defense purposes is
occurring outside of the traditional defense industry.
What do you see as the most significant challenges (e.g.,
technical, organizational, or cultural) to U.S. development of these
key technologies, or gaining access to such technologies from the
commercial marketplace?
Answer. In my view, the Army's most significant challenge is
gaining access to technological innovations outside of the traditional
defense industrial base. The Army needs to be able to tap private
sector innovation from firms that may be reluctant to engage with the
Army's complex acquisition system. The Army also needs the ability to
recruit and retain scientists and engineers in areas such as Artificial
Intelligence/Machine Learning and Biotechnology where competition for
talent from the private sector is fierce.
Question. How well do you think those Department investments in
these technologies are appropriately focused, integrated, and
synchronized across all Military Departments and Agencies?
Answer. The Army, along with the other Services, coordinates and
synchronizes research activities through a number of mechanisms, such
as the DOD Communities of Interest and the Defense Innovation Steering
Group. This helps ensure proper investment in defense priorities while
eliminating duplicative efforts. These working groups and associated
coordination mechanisms also ensure the Army can focus on specific
areas of need, while benefiting from any advances or breakthroughs in
the other Services.
Question. How has the Army prioritized limited R&D funding across
your technology focus areas? Specifically, where is the Army either
increasing or decreasing focus and funding?
Answer. The Army's S&T program funds priority research and
development efforts guided by the Army's Modernization Priorities, and
ultimately the NDS. Budget prioritization focuses on balancing near-and
mid-term efforts in support of the Modernization Priorities.
Conversely, investments in foundational science form the backbone of
capabilities our soldiers will need in the long term. In recent years,
the Army has increased focus and investment in areas such as Artificial
Intelligence/Machine Learning and biotechnology.
Question. In your view, which of these DOD key technologies map
most directly to the Army's own modernization priorities (i.e., long-
range precision fires, next generation combat vehicle, vertical lift,
robust networks, air and missile defense, soldier lethality)?
Answer. In my view, many of the OSD critical technology areas map
directly to the Army's Modernization Priorities. For example,
hypersonics maps to Long Range Precision Fires; autonomy maps to both
next generation combat vehicle and future vertical lift; future
generation wireless technology maps to robust networks; and directed
energy maps to air and missile defense. Overall, I believe all of the
DOD critical technology areas play at least some role in the future
Army.
Question. How is the Army balancing revolutionary capability
advancements as compared to ``quick win'' incremental improvements that
can be rapidly fielded?
Answer. The Army builds its S&T portfolio to ensure near-and mid-
term technology insertion, while also ensuring appropriate investment
for longer-term technology breakthroughs through the Army's Basic
Research program. The S&T strategy pays careful attention to supporting
the modernization priority efforts, while simultaneously supporting
research aimed at fundamental, long-term challenges of the Army 2040
and beyond. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the Army has the proper
balance of S&T investments so that the Army is properly preparing for
the future fight while still delivering those ``quick-win'' incremental
improvements to our soldiers today.
Question. What efforts is the Army making to identify new
technologies developed commercially by the private sector and apply
them to military and national security purposes? In your view, what are
the challenges that you perceive to increasing collaboration between
the private sector and Army?
Answer. The Army has a number of efforts designed specifically to
engage with private sector firms outside the traditional defense
industry, such as the Army Application Lab, the xTech prize competition
and the Small Business Innovative Research program. In my view, the
complexities of the traditional defense acquisition system are the
greatest challenge to increasing collaboration with the most innovative
private sector firms. These Army programs and others help break down
those barriers by bringing new players into the defense innovation
ecosystem and allowing the Army to access the most cutting-edge
commercial technologies.
Question. How can the operational experience of the warfighter
better be integrated into the research and development process? Are
there appropriate places to interject warfighters in the interaction
between the DOD research and engineering community and the private
sector?
Answer. The Army ensures the operational experience of our soldiers
and formations is included in the research and development process
through the concept of soldier-centered design. Soldier-centered design
is at the forefront of all the Army's modernization efforts and
maximizes early, repeated, and continuous iteration of soldier
touchpoints involving all new concepts, technologies, and systems.
Soldier-centered design also ensures the Army consistently challenges
the modernization concepts and solution sets based on the tactical and
operational expertise of the Army, from bottom to top.
Additionally, the Army's materiel development organizations are
comprised of more than civilian employees and include soldiers with a
broad range of operational and tactical experience. The Army's
uniformed personnel serve as a bridge between warfighter capability/
technology needs and cutting-edge solutions from the commercial sector,
engaging early and frequently to ensure soldier insights are included
in design and development.
Question. In confirmed, how will you leverage experimentation and
prototyping opportunities to look at new technologies and concepts that
might be beneficial for the Army, or better support the Army role in
joint operations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will leverage ongoing efforts such as OSD-
led Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve (RDER) and the Army's
Technology Maturation Initiative (TMI) along with experimentation
venues such as Project Convergence, the Army's Campaign of Persistent
Experimentation, and the Experimental Demonstration Gateway Exercise
(EDGE). These efforts provide important pathways to accelerate joint
war fighting capabilities and help bridge the gap from Science and
Technology to acquisition programs, and Project Convergence allows the
Joint community to evaluate potential technologies against future
concepts. If confirmed I will look at ways to enhance or expand these
and similar efforts.
Question. In your view, what steps must DOD take to protect and
strengthen our National Security Innovation Base to ensure that
critical information is protected?
Answer. There is growing concern regarding the national security
threat of ceding technological advantage to China and other near peer
adversaries. The Department must establish a uniform due diligence
approach that balances the protection of critical technological
information with technology risk. The Army has already begun
implementing a risk-based assessment process for our small business and
academic partners. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army scale these
policies, as appropriate, across the National Security Innovation Base.
One of the main objectives of the defense research enterprise is to
develop advanced technologies that will be of benefit to the
warfighter. In this regard, it is critical that advancements quickly
transition from the development phase into testing and evaluation and
ultimately into a program of record for the deployment of capability to
the warfighter.
Question. If confirmed, how will you ensure that a greater
percentage of the technologies being developed by Army labs transition
into programs of record for deployment to the warfighter? How would you
ensure that appropriate technologies are transitioning more quickly
into programs of record?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army continues to use and
refine recently enacted policies and processes designed to increase the
transition of technologies from the labs to Programs of Record.
Successful technology transition ultimately comes down to invested
personnel. I support the Army's efforts within the Labs and Program
Executive Officers to formally identify Project leaders to oversee and
manage Science and Technology progress and transition. These managers
should be held accountable to successfully manage transition within the
labs and product line teams.
Question. How do you see the laboratory facilities in the Army
contributing to your goals for developing technology for the
warfighter? Do you think Army lab facilities are keeping pace with the
needs of the Army? If not, what do you think could be done to improve
the Army's ability to modernize its lab infrastructure?
Answer. The Army is in the middle of a historical transformation
and is making continual progress on its modernization goals. These
efforts are critical to ensuring that we stay ahead of our potential
adversaries. However, additional investments in our research and test
facilities will ensure that we can capitalize on cutting-edge
technology and recruit and retain talented personnel. If confirmed, I
will assess where we need infrastructure investment and work to put
resources toward modernizing and revitalizing our critical laboratories
and test ranges.
Question. If confirmed, what metrics would you use to assess
whether the Army is investing adequately in S&T programs?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work within the Planning, Programming,
Budgeting and Execution process to ensure the Army has the correct mix
of near-, mid-, and far-term investments to support both incremental
solutions and revolutionary technology breakthroughs. Army investments
must be adequately aligned to support the Army modernization priorities
to ensure the Army does not fall behind our competitors in critical
emerging areas.
Question. How would you assess the value and appropriate investment
level for basic research programs?
Answer. The Army's basic research program is critical for
developing the technology foundations for the Army 2040 and beyond. Our
basic research efforts also allow us to engage with the global academic
community, preventing technological surprise. The Army's basic research
budget is roughly 17 percent of its overall S&T budget, which is
slightly larger than it has been in recent years as the Army shifts
more of our effort toward the far future. If confirmed, I will continue
to monitor and assess the S&T budget to ensure the Army has an
appropriate mix of near-, mid-and far-term investments.
technical workforce
Question. A significant challenge facing the Army today is a
shortage of highly skilled data scientists, computer programmers, cyber
and other scientific, technical and engineering talent to work at
Defense laboratories and technical centers.
In your view, what are the pros and cons of having Army Active Duty
military personnel trained and working as scientists, engineers,
software coders, and in other technical positions across the Army's
research, development, and acquisition enterprise?
Answer. No one knows or understands the technologies our soldiers
need on the battlefield better than soldiers themselves. Military
acquisition professionals play a critical role every day in our Army's
focus on modernization. The Army must not only have soldiers as part of
the research, development and testing process, but also need those
soldiers to be experts and experienced in those fields. Soldiers who
have both served in operational units and have the requisite skills,
such as scientists, coders or engineers, bring a unique perspective
that I think is hard to find; they add value to the countless, complex
decisions that need to be made in the evolution of a successful
program. The challenge is providing these soldiers ample time in
operational units, while also dedicating time for necessary military
schooling, civilian education and professional military education in
order to remain competitive. If confirmed, I will work to ensure the
Army has the requisite military talent in the right acquisition
positions to support the Army of 2040 and beyond.
Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to provide
the directors of defense labs under the purview of the Army with the
civilian workforce management tools they need to shape their science,
technology, and engineering workforces?
Answer. Our Army laboratories continue to play an ever-increasing
role in appropriately shaping the Army of 2040. As the expectations of
the workforce continue to evolve, so too must our approaches to
recruiting, hiring, and retaining talent. The Army has been able to
empower the directors of defense labs under the purview of the Army,
thanks to the many authorities Congress provided us in the previous
NDAAs. Our Army mission is a no-fail mission; the Army must have the
right people working, in our labs, and we must leverage all resources
available to recruit and retain talent. An important way the Army has
been able to do that is through flexible personnel systems on the
civilian side such as the direct hire authority. If confirmed, I would
look forward to working across the Department, and with Congress, to
identify additional flexibilities and authorities that may be available
to us. If at any time I feel additional authorities would help our
laboratories' success, I will seek congressional support in bringing
those to fruition.
Question. How do you propose to leverage other initiatives in the
Army or in DOD to help with these challenges, such as the Defense
Civilian Training Corps?
Answer. The Army recently streamlined its career fields and stood
up the Army Civilian Career Management Activity (ACCMA). Our
acquisition career management team is working closely with ACCMA in
support of streamlined recruitment and retention initiatives. The Army
leverages the DOD's College Acquisition Internship Program to hire
eligible college students for summer internships. The Army Civilian
Acquisition Student Loan Repayment program, which is funded through the
Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Account, also serves as a key
incentive for us to recruit, hire and retain civilian acquisition
employees with critical acquisition skills. The Army also leverages
other DOD programs, such as the Public-Private Talent Exchange and the
Defense Civilian Emerging Leader program, as well as established Army
programs, such as the Acquisition Leadership Challenge Program to not
only further develop our workforce members but also to retain them.
Regarding the Defense Civilian Training Corps (DCTC), the Army will
coordinate with the DOD as they work to implement the program to ensure
the Army has equal access to recruit and hire its fair share of the
talent developed via this program. The DCTC pilot should allow us to
learn many lessons regarding talent acquisition in the coming years,
and it is my intent to closely understand the elements of DCTC that are
producing results.
end strength
Question. The Army's Active end strength has been reduced from
approximately 490,000 in fiscal year 2015 to a projected 452,000 in
fiscal year 2023, with additional cuts expected in fiscal year 2024.
Do you believe Army end strength should continue to fall?
Answer. Based on the Army's retention rates and efforts directed
toward improving recruiting, it should not. However, continued
reductions to Army end strength pose significant risk to readiness. To
mitigate this risk, it is critical that we continue to put our full
effort toward reversing the recruiting challenges and maintaining the
positive retention trends. This will be a multiyear effort.
Question. Is the Army's current end strength sufficient to
implement the 2022 NDS and execute the associated operational plans? If
not, what end strength do you believe is necessary to meet the demands
placed on the Army by the 2022 NDS and associated operational plans?
Answer. General McConville has testified that the Army is ready to
meet NDS requirements, and we face significant risk due to resourcing
and manning constraints. To reduce this risk, the Army requires
adequate, predictable and sustained funding. We must also tackle our
current recruiting challenges so that we can maintain our portion of
the all-volunteer force and avoid further cuts to end strength.
Question. In your view, is the balance between the Army's
institutional support base and deployable combat units correct? If not,
what balance do you believe is necessary to meet the demands placed on
the Army by the 2022 NDS and the associated operational plans?
Answer. Yes, at approximately 23 percent of the Total Force, the
Army's institutional support base is sized to support the full range of
institutional missions in support of generating readiness and deploying
combat units. The institutional support base will adjust in size as the
Army recruiting and training mission changes over the FYDP.
Question. If recruiting continues to be a challenge, how will you
ensure the Army has sufficient personnel to support the 2022 NDS?
Answer. The Army is currently structured and resources to meet 2022
NDS requirements, but we are facing recruiting challenges which must be
mitigated to maintain readiness. The Army has already implemented
innovative solutions, like the Future Soldier Prep Course, in order to
improve recruiting. If confirmed as the Chief of Staff, I will continue
to make recruiting and retention a priority and explore adjustments so
that we maintain readiness for NDS requirements.
Question. What additional force shaping authorities and tools does
the Army need, in your view?
Answer. The Army currently has the necessary authorities and tools
to shape the force.
army reserve components
Question. In your view, what is the appropriate relationship
between the Active Army, the Army Reserve, and the Army National Guard?
Answer. The Total Army is a team with a shared mandate, across all
components, to fight and win our Nation's wars when called upon. The
Army Reserve component and Army National Guard serve as an operational
Reserve and provides strategic depth to the Total Force. As such, they
must be adequately manned, trained and resourced to support the Joint
Team.
As Vice Chief of Staff, I have maintained a close relationship with
leaders within the Army National Guard Bureau and the Army Reserve and
will continue to foster those relationships if confirmed as Chief of
Staff. Close, transparent cooperation between all three components will
be critical to ensuring that the Army can meet demands during this and
future periods of constrained resources.
Question. What is your vision for the roles and missions of the
Army Reserve components? If confirmed, what new objectives would you
seek to achieve with respect to the Army Reserve's organization, force
structure, and end strength? With regard to the Army National Guard's
organization, force structure, and end strength?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to work closely with Army
Reserve component leaders to ensure that our Total Army is organized,
trained and equipped to meet NDS requirements. The Army Reserve, just
like the Regular Army, is transforming from a Counter Insurgency-
centric component to one capable of providing strategic depth in a
large-scale multi-domain fight. This will likely require that the Army
makes adjustments, streamline resources and incorporate innovative
solutions across the DOTMLPF-P* spectrum.
*Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel,
Facilities and Policy.
Question. Are you concerned that continued reliance on the Reserve
components of the Army to execute operational missions--both at home
and around the globe--is adversely affecting their ability to meet
their recruiting and retention missions? Why or why not?
Answer. I do not believe that continued reliance on Reserve
components is affecting U.S. Army Reserve recruiting and retention. The
Army is a great team, and it provides young men and women the
opportunity to grow, develop and make an impact on the world. I will
continue to make every attempt to provide the Reserve component the
maximum predictability they require to support Army requirements. I
believe that our Army Reserve soldiers, along with the rest of the
force, are driven by the Warrior ethos, dedicated to the mission, and
committed to the team.
Question. In your view, do the Army Reserve components serve as an
operational Reserve, a strategic Reserve, or both? In light of your
answer, should the Army Reserve and the Army National Guard be
supported by improved equipment, increased training, and higher levels
of overall resourcing for readiness going forward?
Answer. We operate as a Total Army. Army Reserve serves as both an
operational and strategic Reserve, and helps ensure that the Army can
fulfill its mandate to the American people when called upon. Army
Reserve formations require effective training, equipment and resourcing
in order to fulfill this role, and it is important that Army leaders
consider those requirements and effectively weight them against the
many demands on Army resources.
Question. Do you expect to meet prior service accession goals for
the Army Reserve and Army National Guard this fiscal year? Why or why
not?
Answer. The Prior Service accession mission has always been an
integral part the Total Army recruiting strategy. A soldier who returns
to Army service in any of our three components is an already proven
performer who will only improve the readiness of the units they serve
with. The Army National Guard (ARNG) projects that it will exceed 90
percent (2,186 of 2,429) of its prior service mission and the Army
Reserves projects to achieve 47 percent (465/1,000) of its fiscal year
2023 prior service mission. The inaugural class of the ARNG Prior
Service--Army Integration Course Pilot executes in August 2023. While
this first course provides a minimal lift to prior service accessions
in fiscal year 2023, the ARNG anticipates a greater lift in fiscal year
2024. The ARNG projects that it will achieve 95 percent (26,459 of
28,451) of its non-prior service mission in fiscal year 2023.
Question. What is your understanding and view of the Office of the
Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness proposal for comprehensive
Reserve Component Duty Status Reform?
Answer. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness proposal for Reserve Component Duty Status Reform would
streamline and organize 27 current duty status authorities into four
categories to better align pay and benefits for members of the National
Guard and Reserve component. This redesign would simplify existing duty
status constructs, maximize assignment opportunities for Reserve
component personnel, and ensure similar pay and benefits for similar
work within the Reserve component. If confirmed, I will continue to
partner with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness, the other Service Chiefs, the Chief, National Guard
Bureau, and the Chief of the Army Reserve to ensure the proposal, if
enacted, provides consistency and continuity for Army National Guard
and Army Reserve soldiers and their Families.
Question. In your view, does the Army have the personnel and pay
information technology systems required to implement effectively this
Reserve Component Duty Status Reform proposal, if enacted in law?
Answer. Yes, Release 3 of the Integrated Personnel and Pay System-
Army deployed in December 2022 and, if enacted in law, the Army can
effectively implement Reserve Component Duty Status Reform.
recruiting and retention
Question. The National Defense Strategy Commission asserted
unequivocally that the most critical resource required to produce a
highly capable military is highly capable people, in the quantity
required, willing to serve. Yet, DOD studies indicate that only about
23 percent of today's youth population is eligible for military
service, a decrease of 6 percentage points in the last 5 years.
Further, only a fraction of those who meet military accession standards
are interested in serving.
As rates of physical inactivity among American youth continue to
rise, what in your view, if anything, could the Army do to prepare
potential recruits for military service, and specifically service in
the Army?
Answer. Research shows the disruptions caused by the COVID-19
pandemic significantly reduced physical fitness levels nationwide. In
response, the Army established the Future Soldier Prep Course (FSPC).
Soldiers who are below accession standard for body fat are enrolled in
the fitness track of the FSPC. In that program, the Army provides
soldiers nutritional awareness and coaching, as well as safe and
effective weight-loss measures. The Army will continue to explore
additional opportunities to advance physical fitness of young
Americans.
Question. What do you consider to be the key to your future
success, if confirmed, in recruiting the highest caliber American youth
for service in the Army?
Answer. Our Army is a great place to serve--it is a tremendous team
and there are ample opportunities to learn, develop and make an impact.
That has certainly been my experience since I enlisted out of high
school. I believe that the key to recruiting high caliber American
youth is getting that message out to the right populations--not only
young Americans, but also the teachers, coaches and mentors that
provide them guidance. Recruitment is not enough; the Army must also
retain talent. Retaining the best soldiers and leaders in our ranks
comes down to strengthening the Army Professional ethic within our
formations, and building cohesive teams at echelon that foster respect,
camaraderie, the Warrior Ethos, and a sense of purpose.
The Army should use our current recruiting challenges as an
opportunity for self-reflection and assess whether the Army is
effectively building warfighter culture and effectively messaging that
culture and its value to the American people.
Question. What do you consider to be key to your future success, if
confirmed, in retaining the best qualified personnel for continued
service in positions of greater responsibility and leadership in the
Army?
Answer. Our soldiers are the best trained and most professional in
the world--they are what make the American Army great. To maintain our
portion of the all-volunteer force and retain the best qualified
personnel, the Army must ensure that our soldiers continue to receive
excellent training, that they are provided up-to-date, effective and
well-maintained equipment, and that they and their Families are
provided safe, adequate housing and childcare and an excellent quality
of life with the opportunity to grow, thrive and make an impact.
Question. In your view, do current accessions standards--
particularly DOD-wide criteria for tier-one recruits--accurately
predict recruit attrition or future success in the Army?
Answer. Current accessions standards effectively predict recruit
attrition and future success in the Army. Research shows that the Armed
Forces Qualification Test (AFQT), a composite of math and verbal tests
on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery; educational
attainment; and the Occupational Physical Assessment Test accurately
predict enlisted cognitive and physical performance in the Army. These
screening tools are benchmarked on the accession screening tiers. The
Army supplements cognitive assessments by using the Tailored Adaptive
Personality Assessment System (TAPAS), a non-cognitive tool that
predicts motivational performance and attrition. If confirmed, I will
ensure the Army will continue to engage experts to ensure the Army is
utilizing the latest performance assessment tools to build the Army of
2030.
Question. Given the historically low numbers for eligibility to
serve, do you believe a reassessment of accessions standards is in
order? If so, what accessions standards in your view are outdated or
worthy of review?
Answer. It is critical that the Army continues to recruit and
retain fit and highly qualified soldiers on the Army team. I do not
support lowering accession standards to meet recruiting objectives. The
Army is helping motivated young Americans to meet existing Army
standards with the Future Soldier Prep Course, and I support continuing
and potentially expanding that program.
Question. In your view, does the Army have the necessary
authorities to recruit and retain personnel with critical skills,
including cyber?
Answer. Yes. The Army selects specific Military Occupational
Specialties (e.g., Air Defense, Special Forces, Field Artillery, Crypto
Linguists, and Infantry) for critical skill incentives based on
accession and readiness priorities. Through a combination of focused
marketing, competitive accessions and retention incentives, the Army
can attract and retain these critical skills. The Army offers accession
bonuses up $50K, Student Loan Repayment up to $65K, and Retention
bonuses up to $81K. Regarding cyber-related skills, the Army utilizes
several specialized authorities to recruit and retain uniformed
servicemembers and civilians for cybersecurity and cyber operations.
One example is the Cyber Excepted Service (CES), which allows for
expedited recruiting and flexibility for retaining civilians.
Question. What monetary and non-monetary incentives are the Army
employing in an effort to retain Army aviators? Which incentives or
combinations thereof have proven most effective?
Answer. The Army utilizes monetary and non-monetary benefits to
retain aviators. For monetary benefits, the Army offers Aviation
Incentive Pay, which provides Aviators a monthly pay based on years of
aviation service, ranging from $150-$1000. The Army also offers an
Aviation Bonus to retain Aviators that are otherwise without an Active
Duty service obligation or are retirement eligible. The bonus offers
are between $90,000 and $105,000 in a lump sum for a 4-year service
obligation.
The Army also offers non-monetary benefits through First Tour
Stabilization. The Army stabilizes Aviators on their first utilization
tour for 5 years. Families are stabilized for a longer period and
Aviators are provided time to progress to Pilot-In-Command and develop
in their career track. The Army provides Assignment Predictability
through the Army Talent Alignment Process and the Assignment
Interactive Module Marketplace, allowing officers to see all available
positions and market their talents to the gaining organizations thus
providing individual control over Permanent Change of Station duty
locations and positions.
The most effective combination is the Aviation Bonus and assignment
predictability since Aviators have more control over where they go, and
the bonus ensures their continuity in service.
Because the ``all-Volunteer'' military depends on a constant flow
of volunteers each year, as the number of eligible and service-
propensed American youth declines, it will become increasingly
difficult to meet military needs.
Question. Do you agree with the premise that the shortage in the
number of American youth eligible and interested in serving in the
Armed Forces poses a threat to national security?
Answer. We require qualified and motivated young men and women to
serve. Current recruiting challenges pose significant risk to our
ability to maintain our portion of the all-volunteer force and
simultaneously maintain readiness to meet the NDS requirements.
Question. What is the role of ``influencers''--parents,
grandparents, teachers, coaches, and clergy to whom a young person
turns for advice--in a young person's decision to join, or not to join
the Army?
Answer. It is advisable for young men and women to seek the advice
of trusted mentors when making decisions about how to direct the course
of their lives. When I was in high school, I sought mentorship from a
variety of influencers, including my parents, grandparents, and other
men and women I looked up to. I was persuaded by a local Korean War
veteran to look into the Army. He had not served long, but he told me
stories about the Army team that inspired me. These types of
interactions are critically important in a young person's life and are
likely to have enormous impact on whether a young person chooses to
join or not join the Army.
Question. In your view, has the integrated DOD recruiting campaign,
Their Success Tomorrow Begins With Your Support Today, been successful
in increasing the willingness of youth or their influencers to consider
service in the Army?
Answer. The Army and our sister services benefit from the research
and insight provided by DOD's Joint Advertising Market Research and
Studies (JAMRS) group. The campaign, ``Their Success Tomorrow Begins
With Your Support Today,'' originally launched in fall of 2018, and has
been updated periodically based on continued market research by JAMRS.
Messaging is grounded in nearly 20 years of market research, including
polling and focus groups involving youth, parents, and other
influencers. Our Army Enterprise Marketing Office (AEMO) recently
overhauled the Army's branding and overall messaging to better connect
to America's youth. Our research discovered that America's youth value
purpose, passion, community, and connection. Our newest campaign
material addresses these core values in various ways. The Army messages
to youth and their influencers our value proposition, that the Army is
an employer of possibilities by informing their understanding of the
Army and changing their perceptions of the Army in a positive way.
Question. If confirmed, what role will you play in the ensuing the
effective administration, management, and oversight of the Army
marketing and research missions?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that Army marketing
effectively and efficiently encourages Army service. In March 2023, the
Army launched the new ``Be All You Can Be'' campaign and re-introduced
the Army's brand to America. The Army updated the logo and our overall
message positioning of ``possibilities'' for the newest generation.
AEMO implemented regulations, processes, and systems per previous
marketing audit recommendations. The modernization of Army marketing
systems improves accountability, increases efficiency, and identifies
ineffective portions of our marketing.
u.s. military academy
Question. In your view, what is the unique value provided by the
U.S. Military Academy (USMA) when compared with the other Army
commissioning sources?
Answer. As a direct reporting unit to the Secretary of the Army and
the Army Chief of Staff, the United States Military Academy (USMA)
remains the only commissioning source where the Army has control of all
aspects of Cadet development. Correspondingly, USMA provides the Army
with a unique ability to shape the development of future officers as
they educate, train, and inspire the Corps of Cadets so that each
graduate is a commissioned leader of character. USMA's contribution is
invaluable as it provides approximately 22 percent of all Active Duty
Army officer accessions yet provides nearly 40 percent of the officers
with undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM) degrees into the force. USMA's continued emphasis on character
development throughout its leader development system affords the Army
an opportunity to develop the Core of the Army's Officer Corps. The
USMA team works tirelessly to pursue their mission and ensure they
provide the Army and the Nation with leaders that are prepared to lead,
fight, and win in the 21st century.
Question. If confirmed, what changes to the organization,
curriculum, or operations of USMA do you envision recommending?
Answer. Commensurate with the expectations of higher education, the
USMA seeks continuous improvement in its developmental system to
include its character, academic, military, and physical programs. This
continuous improvement ensures that the Academy stays on the cutting
edge of leader requirements for the current and future battlefields.
USMA's faculty blend of excellence ensures they not only have relevant
experience directly from the operational force, but also leaders within
all academic disciplines. The Army has committed well over $1.4 billion
to modernize the infrastructure to ensure the Academy operates well
into the second half of this century. USMA also continues down its
implementation pathway of the DOD directed integrated primary
prevention of harmful behaviors. The Superintendent began a
comprehensive review of the USMA strategy and developmental programs
upon taking command in 2022. If confirmed, I look forward to working
closely with the Superintendent, as they finalize and begin to
implement the updated strategic plan for the Academy.
Question. The National Defense Authorization Act re-emphasized for
the third time in the last 5 years that service academy graduates are
expected to serve for at least 2-years on Active Duty prior to pursuing
employment as a professional athlete.
Do you support this requirement?
Answer. The Department of the Army will follow the law related to
Military Service Academy graduates pursing an opportunity to play
professional sports. There are potential benefits of affording Academy
cadets an opportunity to pursue professional sports, as it encourages
the recruitment of top talent for the Army and there are potential
public relations opportunities while the athletes are playing their
respective sports. The professional sports program gives the Army a
platform to garner large national media exposure to generate interest
across America to serve in the Armed Forces. Among other requirements
to qualify for the program, each cadet athlete must articulate how they
will enhance recruiting and marketing efforts of the Army at the
national level. The small number of USMA graduates requesting to
participate in the professional sports program since 2020 has not had
an appreciable negative impact on our officer recruiting or accessions
efforts.
military compensation
Question. The Department of Defense has traditionally assessed the
competitiveness of military pay by comparing Regular Military
Compensation against salaries earned by a comparable civilian
demographic.
Do you agree that the primary purpose of a competitive military pay
and benefits package is to recruit and retain a military of sufficient
size and quality to meet the objectives of the 2022 NDS?
Answer. I agree.
Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy of the current
military pay package in achieving this goal--particularly given the
ever-tightening recruiting market?
Answer. The Army participates in the Quadrennial Review of Military
Compensation to assess the adequacy of pay to ensure it remains
competitive in today's recruiting environment.
Question. Do you believe the largely ``one-size-fits-all'' model
for military pay adequately rewards individuals for their specialized
skills and provides an appropriate incentive to scientists, engineers,
and members of other high-value professions to access into the
military?
Answer. The current compensation program provides for targeted
incentive pays to recruit and retain high-value professionals. These
incentives provide flexibility and are generally effective. However,
the Army continues to review the application of these incentives to
ensure individuals with specialized skills are adequately compensated.
Question. What changes, if any, would you recommend to the current
military pay and benefits package?
Answer. The Army participates in the Quadrennial Review of Military
Compensation to assess the adequacy of pay to ensure it remains
competitive in today's recruiting environment. After this review, I
will work with OSD and Congress if changes are required.
Question. What specific recommendations do you have for controlling
the rising cost of military personnel?
Answer. The Army's goal is to attract the best and brightest to
serve our country by the most cost-effective means possible.
Compensation is an important factor in attracting and retaining quality
people.
service of transgender persons
Question. Each of the Service Chiefs has testified before this
Committee that in their experience, the service of transgender
individuals in their preferred gender has had no negative impact on
unit or overall military readiness.
In your experience, has the service of transgender individuals in
their preferred gender had any negative impact on unit or overall
military readiness?
Answer. In my experience, the service of transgender individuals in
their preferred gender has minimal impact on overall military
readiness. Any soldier who meets the physical, mental, conduct, and
security standards, and is worldwide deployable, ought to be able to
serve in the U.S. Army.
Question. In your view, what would be the impact on readiness of
requiring the separation of all transgender soldiers currently serving
in the military? Please support any assertions with non-anecdotal data.
Answer. In my view, requiring the separation of all transgender
soldiers currently serving in the military would impact unit readiness.
Any soldier who meets the physical, mental, conduct, and security
standards, and is worldwide deployable, should be provided the
opportunity to serve honorably in the U.S. Army.
military quality of life
Question. The Committee remains concerned about the sustainment of
key quality of life programs for military families, such as family
advocacy and parenting skills programs; child care; spouse education
and employment support; health care; and morale, welfare and recreation
(MWR) services, including Commissary and Military Exchange stores.
If confirmed, what quality of life and MWR programs would you
consider a priority?
Answer. If confirmed, I plan to provide senior commanders with the
authorities and resources to develop valuable quality of life programs.
I appreciate the support of Congress to improve housing, healthcare,
childcare, spouse career, and employment opportunities, and permanent
change of station moves. Quality of life directly impacts recruiting,
retention, and readiness. I will also prioritize childcare for our Army
Families--including innovative, installation-specific options that
allow servicemembers flexibility and dependable access to care.
Question. How would you work across the Army and with Military
Service Organizations and Congress, to sustain and enrich high-value
quality of life and MWR programs for soldiers and their families?
Answer. Morale, Welfare, and Recreation programs are directly
linked to recruiting, retention, and readiness and contribute greatly
to soldier and family member physical, mental, social, and emotional
well-being. I plan to remain responsive to the needs of senior mission
commanders, who are in the best position to assess and recommend
enhancements to quality of life and Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
(MWR) programs for soldiers and families on their installation. I also
plan to maintain collaborative and transparent relationships with
Military Service Organizations and Congress to ensure that I am
receiving feedback and seeking solutions to ensure that our soldiers
and families have quality of life.
military housing
Question. What is your current assessment of privatized housing
inside the Army?
Answer. The Army has made progress in addressing the housing
problems that have been identified in the past several years. The
publication of the Tenant Bill of Rights and the changes implemented to
our oversight of privatized housing improve the quality of housing and
is restoring trust in the program. With the assistance of Congress, we
have a renewed focus on monitoring the housing companies and holding
them accountable for poor performance. In addition to the Tenant Bill
of Rights, we are implementing the privatized housing reforms as
directed by the current and prior years' NDAAs. We continue to ensure
improvements in safety, quality, and habitability of privatized
housing, while improving oversight of privatized housing programs and
projects. We expect to receive our most recent tenant survey in the
next few weeks and will use that to inform our next suite of actions.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress to continue
improving this important program for the Army.
Question. As it pertains to unaccompanied barracks, do you believe
the Army should utilize waivers to waive habitability and living
standards?
Answer. The Army's goal is to ensure all soldiers have quality
housing. We should not waive habitability or other living standards
except in those very limited circumstances where there are no other
options, and the waivers will be temporary. Currently, commanders are
empowered to exercise assignment flexibility based on specific
circumstances. For example, waiving living standards by assigning two
soldiers to a single room occurs only when and where necessary. Our
standard is to provide each soldier a separate sleeping room. If
confirmed, I will make every effort to honor our commitment by
providing quality barracks to our soldiers. Waivers of habitability
would only be allowed if accompanied by acceptable mitigation measures
to address the deficiencies.
family readiness and support
Question. What do you consider to be the most important family
readiness issues for soldiers and their families?
Answer. There is not a single most important issue because they are
often interconnected and related. Economic well-being and financial
readiness are related to a spouse's career and employment, which is
contingent on quality, affordable childcare. If confirmed, I will work
to ensure that soldiers and families are supported with a viable and
effective system of support that enables mission readiness with a focus
on innovative, installation-specific efforts that meet local needs. I
will also ensure that leaders are engaged at every level to make
soldiers and families aware of available resources.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the family
readiness issues you identified are properly addressed and adequately
resourced?
Answer. If confirmed, I plan to work closely with the chain of
command to ensure that Family readiness issues are effectively and
efficiently addressed in a way that befits the specific installation,
unit or mission. Additionally, I plan to enforce that the Army Staff is
collaborating closely with leaders across the Army--listening to
concerns, developing solutions, and responsibly resourcing programs--
rather than pushing top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions on the Force.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that support related
to mobilization, deployment, and family readiness is provided to Army
Reserve and National Guard families, as well as to Active Duty families
who do not reside near a military installation?
Answer. The Army has continuously asked its soldiers to be apart
from their Families during long deployments and operations, and to cope
with the challenges of a high operational tempo. These separations are
often some of the most stressful for our soldiers and families. If
confirmed, I will work to ensure that soldiers and families, regardless
of component, are supported with a viable and effective system of
support that enables mission readiness with a focus on innovative,
component and installation-specific efforts that meet the needs of
their soldiers and families.
Question. The Committee often hears that Active Duty families have
difficulty obtaining child care on base and that there are thousands of
military families on waitlists to receive infant care.
If confirmed, what specifically would you do to provide Army
families with accessible, high-quality childcare, at an appropriate
cost?
Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize childcare for our Army
Families. The Army needs to look at infrastructure, how the Army
recruits and retains quality staff, and new initiatives and
partnerships. Specifically, this includes innovative, installation-
specific options that allow servicemembers flexibility and dependable
access to care.
support for military families with special needs
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that a soldier with a
special needs family member is relocated only to a new duty station at
which the medical and educational services required by that family
member are available?
Answer. Soldiers with exceptional Family members need a choice of
two Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP)-approved assignment
locations. This flexibility allows Families to research future
assignment locations before deciding which best supports their needs.
If confirmed, I will also support increased transparency and
information so soldiers and families can make the best decision for
their family when it comes to care and support.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure effective
administration of the exceptional family member program (EFMP),
balancing the needs of the Army, the needs of exceptional family
members, and the desires of both soldiers and their dependents to have
a rewarding experience in the Army?
Answer. Our Families with special needs often face unique and
complex challenges and stressors that require close coordination and
communication between Families and service providers. If confirmed, I
will continue to stand up the centralized Exceptional Family Member
Program office to ensure all our medical, human resources, and Family
support are working closely to support these Families.
Question. If confirmed, what new initiatives might you suggest for
improving the ability of soldiers with a special needs family member to
obtain the medical services and support their family member requires?
Answer. If confirmed, I will collaborate with Defense Health
Agency, the other Services, and Army Medical Command to identify gaps
and improve partnerships in the delivery of medical services to
soldiers with special needs Families.
sexual assault and harassment prevention and response
Despite significant efforts by the Military Services over the past
decade to enhance their prevention of, and response to sexual assaults,
including measures to care for victims and hold assailants accountable,
the current data continues to show increasing prevalence of sexual
assault and unwanted sexual conduct, primarily for female
servicemembers aged 17 to 24. These findings echo reports this year of
increases in the prevalence of sexual harassment and assault at the
Military Service Academies.
Question. Do you believe the policies, programs, and resources that
the Department of the Army have put in place to prevent and respond to
sexual assault, and to protect soldiers who report sexual assault from
retaliation, are working? If not, what else must be done?
Answer. Although the Army has made progress in preventing and
responding to sexual assault, and sexual harassment, more work needs to
be done to prevent these harmful behaviors from occurring. If
confirmed, I will continue to support implementation of the
recommendations from the Independent Review Commission on Sexual
Assault in the Military, as approved by the Secretary of Defense.
The most recent report on the prevalence of sexual assault and
harassment at the Military Service Academies revealed disturbing levels
of sexual harassment in particular, placing the Service Academies among
the poorest performing military units in incidents of harassment,
suggesting an environment conducive to sexual assault and other
misconduct.
Question. What is your reaction to this report, and what actions
would you propose to reduce the prevalence of sexual harassment at the
Service Academies?
Answer. The report was disheartening but insightful. To reduce risk
and increase protective factors, the United States Military Academy is
adopting an Integrated Primary Prevention (IPP) approach. IPP requires
finding shared solutions to the problems of sexual harassment, assault,
and retaliation, among other harmful behaviors. While this range of
harmful behaviors has diverse and unique prevention needs, they also
share many risk and protective factors. This strategy will synergize
existing prevention activities by strengthening efforts that address
these shared factors. I believe this approach has great promise. It
will align competing priorities, increase program effectiveness, ensure
efficient use of resources, and help leaders cultivate a safe and
healthy climate across the West Point community.
Question. If confirmed, what specific role would you establish for
yourself in preventing sexual harassment in the Army, including within
the civilian workforce?
Answer. If confirmed, I will entrust and empower the chain of
command to build cohesive teams and implement innovative and effective
methods for preventing sexual harassment and assault. There is no place
for these behaviors in our Army, and it is imperative that commanders
work to prevent sexual harassment and assault in their formations. I
will use my role as the senior commander to emphasize the importance of
these programs to subordinate commanders. I will also continue to
support the execution of the restructured Sexual Harassment/Assault
Response Program, leader development initiatives and command assessment
programs, and work with the Secretary of the Army to ensure these
programs are appropriately resourced.
Question. Do you perceive that you need additional authorities from
Congress to improve the Army programs to prevent sexual harassment and
sexual assault?
Answer. I believe we have sufficient authorities to implement the
remaining IRC recommendations. I will always support continually
evaluating our efforts to prevent sexual harassment and assault, while
working with partners in Congress on these issues
military health system reform
Section 702 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2017, as modified by
Sections 711 and 712 of the NDAA for fiscal year 2019, transferred the
administration and management of military hospitals and clinics from
the Military Services to the Defense Health Agency (DHA). Yet, DOD's
implementation of this transfer has been delayed significantly.
Question. Do you support the purpose and implementation of section
702 of the fiscal year 2017 NDAA, as clarified by sections 711 and 712
of the fiscal year 2019 NDAA?
Answer. Yes. Defense Health Agency (DHA) assumed authority,
direction and control of the medical treatment facilities (MTFs)'s.
These facilities are essential readiness platforms to facilitate the
training of the Ready Medical Force and to provide healthcare to our
soldiers and families.
With respect to section 711 and 712 of the fiscal year 2019 NDAA,
the Army Secretary and Surgeon General must maintain the responsibility
to execute their Title 10 authorities and responsibilities. If
confirmed, I stand committed to work with the DOD to ensure the Army
remains ready and responsive as the Nation's premier land fighting
force.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to ensure that the Army
and DHA take all appropriate actions to sustain the medical readiness
of the military force, as well as the readiness of the military medical
force?
Answer. If confirmed, I would advocate for continued partnership
with the Defense Health Agency (DHA). I would develop systems to
enhance Army medical readiness in the Military Treatment Facilities in
collaboration with DHA to ensure sustainment of Army Readiness in
accordance with Title 10, United States Code. As the Chief of Staff of
the Army, I would lead the Headquarters, Department of the Army staff
to monitor and report Army medical readiness and total force readiness
with directives and through policy development.
Question. In your view, is the Army medical force properly sized to
meet the joint medical requirements set forth in operational plans
implementing the 2022 NDS?
Answer. The Under Secretary of the Army and I, in my role as the
Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, validated the Army's military medical
requirement to execute the NDS. The validation was based on a thorough
review of medical requirements at all echelons from ``point of injury''
to care in military medical treatment facilities (MTFs). The review
included the requirements to generate the medical force, a bottom-up
review by Forces Command and an assessment by Training and Doctrine
Command. Additionally, the Army has complied with the 2023 NDAA
requirements to delay reductions to certain military medical end
strength authorizations for 5 years. Any future modifications to Army
military medical end strength will be based on those assessments
required by fiscal year 2023 NDAA.
Question. In your view, do Army medical providers possess today the
critical wartime medical readiness skills and core competencies
required to provide effective and timely health care to soldiers
engaged in combat or contingency operations?
Answer. Yes, the Army's professional clinical and leadership skills
to save lives on the battlefield allows the Army to maintain a
competitive edge against our potential adversaries. The Army's medical
force is responsive, competent, and capable of meeting the demands of
emerging and unpredictable conflict environments. Our trauma-related
and critical wartime medical specialties are perishable skills that
require years of training and education to develop and continued
commitment to sustain. If confirmed, I will maintain and improve
efforts within Army Medicine to continuously improve how we train and
sustain our medical readiness skills.
suicide prevention
On May 17, 2022, Secretary Austin established the Suicide
Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee (SPRIRC) to
conduct a comprehensive review of clinical and non-clinical suicide
prevention and response programs across the force.
Question. If confirmed, what specific role and tasks would you
establish for the Army in implementing the SPRIRC's recommendations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Army works closely
with the OSD to provide feedback on any Department-wide Suicide
Prevention regulations or policies. I will ensure that the Army
complies with the Department's guidance, and that any subsequent Army
policies and practices are both nested with OSD guidance and focused on
effectively reducing suicides by appropriately resourcing commanders.
Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
that sufficient suicide prevention and mental health resources are
available to deployed soldiers, as well as to soldiers and their
families at home station?
Answer. Suicides in our formation are a tragedy, and we must do
everything possible to prevent them from occurring. If confirmed, I
will work with the chain of command to ensure that soldiers and
families have consistent and adequate access to a variety of resources
that can help them manage life's stressors, including life skill
development programs, financial resources, physical fitness resources,
relationship counseling, and mental health care.
Question. After the SPIRC report recommendations were released, the
Army delayed implementation of a pending regulation that would
standardize practices and procedures for suicide prevention. If
confirmed, do you commit to implementing standardized processes for
suicide prevention that are consistent with the recommendations of the
SPIRC as soon as practicable?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue to champion policies and
processes consistent with SPRIRC recommendations and continue to
resource and empower the chain of command to implement unit, mission
and installation-specific solutions for preventing suicide.
Additionally, the Army will publish Army Regulation 600-92, Army
Suicide Prevention Regulation, which nests with the Suicide Prevention
and Response Independent Review Committee (SPRIRC) recommendations and
incorporates requirements and guidance from DODI 6400.09 ``DoD Policy
on Integrated Primary Prevention of Self-Directed Harm and Prohibited
Abuse or Harm.''
mental and behavioral health care
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure that
sufficient mental and behavioral health resources are available to
deployed and forward-based soldiers, as well as to soldiers and
families at home station locations?
Answer. Behavioral health care is an important factor in sustaining
the Readiness of the Army.
In support of the deployed formations, behavioral health resources
are available. Army social workers and psychologists support brigade
combat teams and other operational units. Army psychiatrists work at
the division level, and theater behavioral health assets provide area
support. All work in concert with unit surgeons and organic medical
assets to provide triage, treat far forward, and coordinate transitions
of care. If confirmed, I will ensure the Army can effectively man,
organize, train, and equip this critical behavioral health capability.
In support of readiness at home station, innovative programs such
as Embedded Behavioral Health, Behavioral Health integrated in primary
care, Holistic Health and Fitness, Family Advocacy Program, and School
Behavioral Health reach soldiers and families where they live and work
to improve access, reduce stigma, and improve family well-being.
Moreover, I will continue to work collaboratively with the Office of
the Secretary of Defense to support their work to provide soldiers and
families with non-medical counseling services through the Military and
Family Life Counseling program. If confirmed, I will support the
efforts that enhance access to behavioral health care and sustain
efforts that have transformed the Army behavioral health system of
care.
Question. If confirmed, what specifically would you do to ensure
that sufficient mental and behavioral health resources are available to
Reserve component soldiers and their families who do not reside near a
military base?
Answer. The Army remains committed to providing world-class
behavioral health care in support of Total Force readiness. In support
of the Reserve component, ongoing collaboration with Active component
and Reserve component medical leadership, subject matter experts, and
Defense Health Agency partners inform best practices to support
readiness within the Title 10 and Title 32 statutory requirements. If
confirmed, I will ensure this collaboration continues in order to
ensure ready access to behavioral health resources for the entire
force.
As one team, Active component and Reserve component medical
leadership and subject matter experts continue to explore opportunities
to increase access and/or decrease financial barriers to behavioral
health care in accordance with DOD Instruction. Reserve component
behavioral health leaders support their units, build community
partners, and maintain resource directories. Of note, as of October
2018, the Reserve component partnered with the Veterans Health
Administration to utilize Veterans Affairs (VA) Mobile Vet Centers to
provide additional access to behavioral health services for Reserve
component soldiers.
Question. The Army has made progress in reducing the stigma
associated with help-seeking behaviors, but some soldiers, remain
concerned that their military careers will be adversely affected should
their chains of command become aware that they are seeking mental or
behavioral health care. At the same time, the Army chain of command has
a legitimate need to be aware of physical and mental health conditions
that may affect the readiness of the soldiers under their command.
In your view, does the Army effectively bridge the gap between a
servicemember's desire for confidentiality and the chain of command's
legitimate need to know about matters that may affect individual
servicemember and the unit readiness?
Answer. Seeking help and engaging in care early enhances readiness.
As the Army promotes help-seeking behavior, soldiers must trust that
the majority of their health information remains protected. This trust
must be balanced with access to protected health information that
impacts readiness.
To this end, the Army supports the chain of command's need for
readiness related health information about their soldiers that is
necessary to ensure proper mission execution consistent with the HIPAA
and implementing regulations. Disclosure of protected health
information is limited to the minimum necessary to accomplish the
authorized purpose.
Ultimately, leaders at all levels bear responsibility for promoting
and safeguarding the overall health and welfare of their soldiers.
Engaged leadership builds trust between the leader and who they lead
and can enhance soldiers' willingness to make their leaders aware of
issues that affect their physical and mental well-being. By remaining
engaged with soldiers on their health, leaders foster a climate of
cohesion and enhance readiness.
Question. In your view, do non-medical counseling services provided
by DOD Military Family Life Counselors have a role in promoting the
readiness of soldiers and their families?
Answer. Military and Family Life Counselors (MFLCs) play a very
important role in promoting the readiness of soldiers and their
families. As Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, I co-chair a Building
Cohesive Teams Forum with the Under Secretary of the Army. In that
meeting, the Army resources commander-initiated ideas for preventing
harmful behaviors, and have consistently received requests from
commanders for more MFLCs. The DOD MFLC program is a ``Help-
Multiplier'' and connector to other Army behavioral health resources.
officer personnel management system reforms
Question. The John S. McCain NDAA for fiscal year 2019 contained
several provisions to modernize the officer personnel management
system. These reforms were designed to align officer career management
with the priorities outlined in the 2018 NDS.
How is the Army implementing these authorities today and to what
effect?
Answer. The Army has initiated implementation of eight of the nine
authorities granted to the services under the fiscal year 2019 NDAA.
The Army continues to explore the potential of the alternate promotion
authorities under 10 U.S.C. Section 649. The Army is defining the
language and metrics to ensure the Army is able to leverage deeper
talent data across the Army.
Question. If confirmed, how would you lead the Army in further
leveraging these new authorities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will promote the appropriate use of
existing legislative authorities to shape and evolve a 21st Century
Talent Management System for officers, making use of talent data to
optimize selection and assignment of commissioned leaders for our Army.
The Army continues to leverage ongoing initiatives to improve talent
management for Warrant Officer, Enlisted and Civilian cohorts as well.
Question. Are there other authorities that the Army needs in order
to modernize the management of its officer personnel?
Answer. The Army established a Talent Management Task Force (TMTF)
to study how the Army should best modernize management of Officer
personnel. Based on the TMTF's results, the Army staff is conducting
analysis to determine an enduring solution for innovating and
integrating talent management initiatives. If confirmed, I will
continue to work with Congress for authorities necessary to implement
innovation, for example, authority to increase permeability across the
Total Army to employ and retain talent.
joint officer management
Question. The NDAA for fiscal year 2017 modified the Joint
Qualified Officer (JQO) system established by the Goldwater-Nichols Act
in two significant ways. First, it broadened the statutory definition
of ``joint matters'' to expand the types of positions for which an
officer can receive joint duty credit. Further, it reduced from 3 years
to two the minimum tour length required for joint duty credit.
What is your assessment of the effectiveness of the fiscal year
2017 modifications to the JQO system?
Answer. The fiscal year 2017 modifications to the Joint Qualified
Officer system are adequate and allow the Joint Force more flexibility
when managing joint assignments at the appropriate level. Expanding the
definitions of joint matters (adding other essential joint functions,
including command and control, intelligence, fires, movement and
maneuver, and protection or sustainment of operations under unified
command) afford more officers the ability to self-nominate. Also, the
reduction of joint qualification points from 36 to 24 allows officers
to move from joint assignments to command or other professional
development opportunities without losing fully joint qualified time.
Question. In your view, are the requirements associated with
becoming a JQO, and the link between attaining joint qualification and
eligibility for promotion to General Officer rank, consistent with the
operational and professional demands of Army officers?
Answer. The requirements associated with becoming a Joint Qualified
Officer, and the link between attaining joint qualification and
eligibility for promotion to the rank of General Officer (GO) are
consistent with the operational and professional demands of Army
officers. It ensures that GOs have both the experience (systematic,
progressive, career-long development) and education needed to
remarkably operate in joint environments particularly when called upon
to lead/command joint forces.
Question. In your view, what additional modifications, if any, to
JQO prerequisites are necessary to ensure that Army officers are able
to attain both meaningful joint and Army-specific leadership experience
and adequate professional development?
Answer. The current Joint Qualified Officer (JQO) prerequisites are
adequate to ensure that Army officers can attain both meaningful joint
and Army-specific leadership experience and adequate professional
development. The current JQO prerequisites support joint competencies
and assist in the development of comprehensive leadership and critical
thinking skills that are value-added to Joint Service leadership and
Service-specific leadership.
professional military education
Question. The 2022 NDS asserts that Professional Military Education
(PME) curricula should be refocused to foster critical thinking and
analytical skills, fluency in critical languages, and integration of
insights from the social and behavioral sciences.
If confirmed, what actions would you take to update the Army's PME
system to ensure that it fosters the skills highlighted in the NDS to
develop a cadre of strategic thinkers and planners with both the
intellectual and military leadership acumen to merit promotion to
General Officer?
Answer. Army Professional Military Education (PME) must produce
officers who can apply intellectual rigor and adaptive problem solving
to multi-domain, joint warfighting and enterprise level challenges.
These officers must be skilled in strategic thinking and developing
creative strategies to deal with traditional and non-traditional
threats--while providing sound, nuanced, and thoughtful military
advice. This requires a PME system that is rigorous, agile, and able to
maximize the potential of each individual student.
Mid-grade and senior levels of Army officer PME are transitioning
to an outcomes-based approach to education where the focus is on what a
student learns, versus what is taught. The Army should hasten this
transition. I also intend to expand efforts to introduce assessment-
informed, tailorable education programs as a means to align Army
education with recent talent management initiatives.
The Army should also maximize opportunities for officers to learn
alongside our partners and allies. These engagements build important
professional networks and help develop an understanding of the
strategic environment. I believe the Army can achieve this through
robust international participation in our educational programs where
there is a constant sharing of perspectives and ideas.
Question. In your view, are there opportunities in Army PME to
improve STEM cognizance and cyber fluency across the joint force to
ensure that leaders understand and can effectively employ technologies
to fight and win our Nation's wars?
Answer. Yes, but we are always looking for ways to expand PME
opportunities that improve STEM cognizance and cyber fluency. The Army
recently changed its operational concept from ``unified land
operations'' to ``multi-domain operations.'' If confirmed, I will
continue to reinforce the integration of all the domains--including
cyber--into our professional military education to ensure that leaders
stay ahead of emerging technology like AI and big data.
Question. In your view, is there a role for Army PME in developing
basic product management skills across the joint force to ensure that
military leaders are proficient in the employment of software and
automation in warfighting?
Answer. Yes. A critical warfighting function is command and
control; this includes the use of mission command as a philosophy, as
well as the integration of software and automation capabilities in
command and control systems. PME provides an excellent opportunity to
enhance these capabilities through wargaming and exercises as part of
curricula. PME also affords the opportunities to verify proficiency in
these systems and their use with intelligence integration and
information management.
the dod and army civilian personnel workforce
Question. DOD is the Federal Government's largest employer of
civilian personnel. The vast majority of DOD civilian personnel
policies comport with requirements set forth in title 5 of the U.S.
Code, and corresponding regulations under the purview of the Office of
Personnel Management. Over many years, the annual defense bill has
included numerous extraordinary hiring and management authorities
applicable to specific segments of the DOD civilian workforces.
In your judgment, what is the biggest challenge facing the
Department of the Army in effectively and efficiently managing its
civilian workforce?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to support the Army's
initiative to develop and implement a cohesive human capital strategy
for the civilian workforce as outlined in the Army Civilian
Implementation Plan. The Army's Civilian Implementation Plan outlines a
talent management process that will more effectively and efficiently
manage its Civilian workforce to meet the demands of the future Army.
Question. In your view, do Army supervisors have adequate
authorities to divest of a civilian employee whose performance of duty
fails to meet standards or who engages in misconduct? If so, are Army
civilian and military supervisors adequately trained to exercise of
such authorities? If not, what additional authorities or training do
Army supervisors require?
Answer. Yes, Army supervisors do have the appropriate authorities
to divest of civilian employees who fail to meet standards or who
engage in misconduct, though they must be trained and proficient in
proper procedures. If confirmed, I will review our supervisor training
programs so that I can ensure we are effectively coaching, mentoring
and managing our civilian workforce and that supervisors are exercising
their authorities to divest of poor performers.
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 Jack Reed
army capabilities
1. Senator Reed. General George, the Army is amid a major
modernization effort. What is your understanding and assessment of the
research, development, and acquisition pathway of the capabilities
nested under the following priority modernization efforts?
Long Range Precision Fires
Next Generation Combat Vehicles
Future Vertical Lift
Network
Air and Missile Defense
Soldier Lethality
General George. I am confident that the Army has nested much of our
research, development, and acquisition (RDA) activities on the
modernization portfolios we established in 2018 and has been focused on
since. I believe filling the capability gaps that these areas represent
are necessary to deliver the modernized force envisioned for the Army
of 2030. I will outline the RDA activities in each of the modernization
areas listed above:
Long Range Precision Fires. The Army will soon field a mid-range
capability battery with SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles in the Indo-Pacific
theater. In addition, once testing is complete, the Army will field its
first battery of long-range hypersonic weapon missiles. Taken together,
these two programs dramatically increase the range of Army fires
capability. Additionally, the Army will take delivery of its first
Precision Strike Missiles, which are roughly double the range of
existing Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missiles and are fired
from our High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) launch systems.
The Army is also closing in on getting an extend range version of the
Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) rocket into production
that will double the range of that system. The Army is also making
rapid progress on additional variants of Precision Strike Missile
(PrSM) that will provide anti-ship and even longer-range capabilities
by 2030. Although we had a set back with the Extended Range Cannon's
performance this fiscal year, the capability continues to show
improvement compared to legacy systems. We will continue to develop and
test extended range artillery, using Soldier feedback (Touch Points) to
inform requirement development.
Next Generation Combat Vehicles. The Army remains committed to
providing Soldiers in armored and mechanized formations with vehicles
and firepower that will enable them to continue to dominate on future
battlefields. We are in the process of fielding the Armored Multi-
purpose vehicle to 1st Brigade, 3d Infantry Division, with the vehicle
poised to enter full-rate production before the end of fiscal year
2023. The M10 Booker Combat Vehicle will begin low-rate initial
production (LRIP) later this year. The Optionally Manned Fighting
Vehicle (OMFV), recently designated the XM-30 Mechanized Infantry
Combat Vehicle, remains the centerpiece of this priority effort.
General Dynamics and American Rheinmetall are the prototype developers.
The Army expects to award multiple contracts for its Robotic Combat
Vehicle Demonstrator in fiscal year 2024, and we are also continuing
research and development of hybrid electric, electric, and hydrogen as
potential fuel solutions. Science and Technology (S&T) continues to
advance ground capabilities and enable programs of record through Human
Machine Interfaces and Teaming, ground systems Active defense, combat
vehicle robotics, platform electrification, and mobility.
Future Vertical Lift. The Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft
(FARA) and the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) will provide
the Army and Joint Force with transformational battlefield reach,
lethality, and survivability, including Medical Evacuation, critical to
operating in an expanded battlespace. The Future Tactical Unmanned
Aerial System is leveraging competitive, rapid prototyping--using a
``Buy-Try-Inform'' RDA approach, informed by a year-long Soldier Touch
Point effort, to replace the RQ-7 Shadow in the Brigade Combat Teams
with a runway-independent, CH-47F-transportable, weather-hardened
system with reduced acoustics signature. We also continue development
of Air Launched Effects (ALE), a low-cost aerial capability launched
from crewed and uncrewed platforms to extend the tactical and
operational reach, lethality, and protection. ALE will consist of
loitering munitions, additional sensors, and a vast array of small and
large payloads focused on specific mission requirements. Science and
technology continue to advance aviation capabilities that enable
programs of record through advanced teaming for tactical aviation
operations, air launched effects, holistic situational awareness and
decisionmaking, and air vehicle integrated and alternative
technologies.
Network. The Army is leveraging Project Convergence and regionally
aligned operational exercises and experimentation to adjust the network
to ensure that units can communicate across tactical formations, call
for fire, and display a common operating picture. We have fielded more
modernized network technologies that include enhanced fires
applications, mobile mission command upgrades, resilient satellite
communications equipment, and modernized cryptographic systems. The
Army also made great strides in overcoming identified Global
Positioning System vulnerabilities that threaten positioning,
navigation, and timing. Initial capabilities are already in the hands
of select mounted and dismounted formations in multiple theaters of
operation. The Army is continuing its efforts to identify and develop
requirements that will define our next network.
Air and Missile Defense. The Army continues to be concerned about
possible overmatch by potential adversaries in air and missile defense.
This includes the ability to defend against both manned and unmanned
systems. To ensure Joint Force integration, the Army is fielding an
initial operating capability for the Integrated Air and Missile Defense
Battle Command System this quarter. This capability will link Army and
Joint sensors/shooters. Six Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor
(LTAMDS) prototypes are in developmental testing in anticipation of an
initial operating capability to be delivered in the 1st Quarter of
fiscal year 2024. We are re-establishing Maneuver Short Range Air
Defense (M-SHORAD). The Army fielded one M-SHORAD battalion last
quarter and a second battalion will come online next quarter. We have
executed successful live fire tests with a 50-kilowatt directed energy
laser mounted on a Stryker, the Directed Energy Maneuver Short Range
Air Defense (DE M-SHORAD), that will also enhance short-range defense
capability. The Army accepted delivery of two batteries of Iron Dome
Defense System-Army from Israel that we are experimenting with in
exercises. We are also advancing directed energy efforts for Indirect
Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) by pairing high-energy lasers (HEL)
with high-power microwaves (HPM) for a layered defense of fixed and
semi-fixed sites against an array of threats.
Soldier Lethality. The Soldier remains the key to victory and the
most important part of Army modernization. We made great strides in
increasing Soldier Lethality including fielding Enhanced Night Vision
Goggle Binoculars. This effort also includes the initial production of
the Next Generation Squad Weapon with an improved fire control
capability, and 6.8mm ammunition. Taken together, these capabilities
will greatly increase the range and lethality of our infantry soldiers.
The Army remains committed to the Integrated Visual Augmentation System
(IVAS), and incorporating Soldier feedback. IVAS 1.2, the full rate
production goggle, is scheduled to be provided to the Close Combat
Force as early as 4th Quarter fiscal year 2025. S&T efforts focused on
the Soldier include advanced human performance technology designed to
enhance mobility, lethality, visual augmentation, concealment, and
resupply.
I can provide additional information concerning this or any other
projects and programs the Army is executing in a separate session or in
writing as desired.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand
suicide prevention
2. Senator Gillibrand. General George, the first quarter of 2023
saw the highest number of soldier suicides since the Army started
tracking. Brigades with Holistic Health and Fitness (H2F) programs saw
a nearly 37 percent reduction in suicides, compared to a directly
inverse 37 percent rise in suicide cases in brigades without H2F teams.
Current plans don't have H2F teams in each brigade until 2030, though.
Separately, the 11th Airborne Division has mandated regular behavioral
health check-ups for all soldiers and has seen a drop in suicide cases.
As Chief of Staff, how will you accelerate the widespread adoption of
preventative measures to stop these tragic deaths?
General George. The Army is implementing an integrated primary
``upstream'' prevention model designed to enhance leader engagement;
strengthen individual, unit, and community resilience and
connectedness; and mitigate stressors that may lead someone to suicide.
In addition, we are emphasizing and investing in efforts like quality-
of-life improvements, sponsorship for new Soldiers coming into a new
unit, and financial readiness to enable Soldiers and Families to better
weather unexpected life events and anticipated milestones. The Army
will publish a new suicide prevention regulation that codifies a public
health approach that was initiated starting in calendar year 2021. This
approach is based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's
suicide prevention guidance and is nested with both the White House
Suicide Prevention strategy and the Suicide Prevention and Response
Independent Review Committee Report.
Ensuring command and leader involvement in suicide prevention is
critical. The Army utilizes a flexible governance model that empowers
commanders to develop and execute initiatives based on the unique
strengths and opportunities of their location and the unit. Commanders
looking through the lens of primary prevention have a wealth of
services targeted to prevent the development of harmful behaviors such
as financial readiness training, child and youth services, marriage
services, counseling services, and other Morale, Welfare, and
Recreation (MWR) programs). This flexibility enables adaptation while
still executing the fundamentals. I host a senior leader-led Building
Cohesive Teams Forum, which identifies ways to overcome obstacles and
help Commanders adopt localized approaches tailored to the specific
needs of their personnel.
cyber service obligations
3. Senator Gillibrand. General George, in December, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) released a report on military cyber
personnel. It noted that the Army did not clearly define Active Duty
service obligations and could not calculate service obligations for
Interactive On-Net Operators. The report also stated that although
Cyber Command tracks staffing data by work roles, the Army does not--
making it harder to identify and address staffing challenges at Cyber
Command. When will the Army implement GAOs recommendation to clearly
define service obligations and better track work roles?
General George. The Army is currently revising its officer and
enlisted personnel regulations to ensure there are clear and consistent
service obligations for completion of advanced cyber training,
including cyber operators. As a stop-gap measure while the policy
updates are in staffing, the Army G-1 issued a temporary policy
revision earlier this year for enlisted operators, the largest segment
of the operator population. I will ensure the permanent policy updates
for enlisted personnel are prioritized accordingly, as well as a
permanent policy governing officers, which is currently pending
publication. The Army is also currently updating its personnel systems
with specific codes to track personnel assigned to the Cyber Mission
Force (CMF) by work role and skill proficiency, allowing better
transparency and accuracy in measuring readiness for cyber personnel
supporting U.S. Cyber Command.
women in combat arms
4. Senator Gillibrand. General George, in 2022, only 4.2 percent of
combat arms roles were filled by women, even though these jobs were
opened to women in 2016. Service in combat arms has traditionally led
to higher levels of leadership within the Army, and the fewer women we
see in these branches, the fewer women we expect to later see in senior
leader roles. What are the most significant factors limiting the
numbers of women in these branches?
General George. There are no polices that prevent women from going
into combat arms branches. Acknowledging that the Army is an all-
volunteer force, since the opening of combat arms to women in 2016, the
Army has not seen a significant spike in the desire to join the combat
arms branches by women. Aviation and Field Artillery have among the
highest density of women, closely followed by Air Defense, Armor and
Infantry. In fiscal year 2022 we enlisted 7,182 women into the Army,
921 or 13 percent were for combat MOSs. Over time, the Army believes
that the numbers will increase as more females ascend to higher ranks
and serve as role models for junior officers and enlisted soldiers.
5. Senator Gillibrand. General George, if structural issues within
the Army limit women's accession into the infantry, armor, special
forces, or other combat fields, how do you intend to address those
issues?
General George. No MOSs are closed to women and the Army has
eliminated structural issues that would have limited women's accession
into combat arms branches, special forces, or other combat fields. For
the past 6 years, the Army has ensured removal of structural issues by
fully implementing the Gender Integration Plan and codifying it in Army
policy.
Each year since the full integration of women into combat roles,
the Army has seen the percentage of woman choosing to pursue these
roles increase, while maintaining the physical challenges associated
with their branches. In order to preserve our competitive edge over our
potential adversaries, the Army is committed to recruiting and
retaining the highest quality, physically fit, and mentally tough
Soldiers who can deploy, fight, and win decisively on any future
battlefield.
basic allowance for subsistence
6. Senator Gillibrand. General George, reporting last week
indicated that the Army is conducting an audit to ensure that soldiers'
basic allowance for subsistence is being docked for every day they
spend in the field. With servicemembers already facing high levels of
food insecurity, taking additional money out of their budgets only
heightens their financial instability. How do you intend to ensure that
this audit does not lead to significant recoupment efforts?
General George. The Army's audit objective is to validate
compliance with the law regarding subsistence. If the Army does not
recoup Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS) when field rations are
issued, the Army is paying twice for the same meal. Ensuring BAS is
recouped under these circumstances is a deficiency the Army that must
correct. Without verification of collection, the Army's military pay
appropriation will not pass audit. I intend to review the results of
the audit before I make a recommendation to the Secretary.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
hawaii land-lease renegotiations
7. Senator Hirono. General George, if confirmed, how will you
ensure the Army listens and engages with the communities of Hawaii in a
respectful and constructive way during the upcoming Hawaii State land
renegotiations?
General George. The Army is working with local communities in the
State of Hawaii while working land renegotiations. One example is the
Ohana Partner Network. Through this initiative, brigade-level
commanders are liaisons for nine neighborhood boards near Army
installations. Army liaisons participate in monthly meetings to
communicate and share information relevant to the community.
Additionally, through the relationships that develop, the Army
participates in local community service projects. For the land
negotiations, the communities are an integral and key part of the
process. Community input and concerns are sought during the
environmental evaluation process. A multitude of public comments were
submitted by the community on the draft environmental impact statement
(DEIS) for the Pohakuloa Training Area. Because of the breath and
volume of comments submitted by the community, the Army has undertaken
a second DEIS to reflect the community's input. The Army has committed
to holding community meetings throughout the process. The Army will
continue to work closely with the local communities in a respectful and
constructive manner throughout the land negotiations.
ship, submarine, and infrastructure maintenance
8. Senator Hirono. General George, what is the importance of the
Pacific Pathways program, and how would you, if confirmed as the Army
Chief of Staff, prioritize multi-lateral training in the Pacific
theatre?
General George. Pacific Pathways is the Army's premier campaigning
effort in the Indo-Pacific theater. This program supports the United
States Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) Commander's efforts to
establish integrated deterrence. Pacific Pathways enables forward
presence, without permanent posture, to deter aggression by potential
adversaries now. It also builds interior lines necessary to enable
operations across the Pacific. Pacific Pathways signals commitment to
our Allies and Partners by illustrating why we are the partner of
choice to ensure stability and prosperity in the region. Should
deterrence fail, Pacific Pathways ensures we are in position to rapidly
react as required.
A priority for me, if confirmed, will be to provide the USINDOPACOM
Commander ready and capable Army Forces to fulfill warfighting
requirements. The Army will provide necessary capabilities to meet the
USINDOPACOM Commander's campaign requirements, and this includes
multilateral training.
To these ends, the Army has already applied $115 million out of its
own Combat Training Center (CTC) program to build the Joint Pacific
Multi-National Readiness Center (JPMRC). JPMRC will execute three
regional CTC exercises (Hawaii, Alaska, and West of the International
Date Line) to build readiness in Theater and provide campaign-quality,
joint integrated land power to the USINDOPACOM Commander.
recruiting challenges
9. Senator Hirono. General George, though I recognize the Army is
facing a very challenging recruiting environment, I am nonetheless
troubled by reports that the Army's recruitment of women is down 31
percent. Why do you think recruitment of women is down so
significantly--even below the broader drop in recruiting--and what can
the Army do about it?
General George. Female enlisted accessions steadily grew from
fiscal year 2017 to fiscal year 2019, but substantially dropped in
fiscal year 2021 and fiscal year 2022, most notably in the White, non-
Hispanic, and Black, non-Hispanic subgroups. In fiscal year 2021 and
fiscal year 2022, the Army saw a decline in enlistments across all
genders and demographic groups attributed to several factors ranging
from the effects of the COVID-19 environment to the continued
challenges of applicant ability to meet enlistment qualification
standards, and the ongoing competition for talent inherent within the
currently strong U.S. economy.
The Army does not have gender recruiting missions, but our
recruiting noncommissioned officers receive training, on a quarterly
basis, on all current initiatives and benefits of Army service.
Additionally, we utilize our community partners, sponsors, and outreach
opportunities to connect with influencers and potential recruits about
careers in the Army. These efforts highlight our female Soldiers
serving in uniform, while promoting the Army's diversity and cultural
awareness. All Army jobs are open to women. Of note, U.S. Army
Recruiting Command's Diversity Outreach and Inclusion Team continues to
engage potential recruits and help educate them on careers in the Army.
They highlight female Soldiers' accomplishments, their journeys, and
the benefits of Army service.
We believe these efforts are making a difference. In fiscal year
2022 we enlisted 7,182 women into the Army, 921 or 13 percent were for
combat MOSs. For fiscal year 2023 year-to-date (YTD), we have enlisted
7,109 females into the Army; 871 or 12.3 percent are for combat MOSs
and we are projecting to exceed our fiscal year 2022 female Active Duty
enlisted accessions.
army suicides prevention efforts
10. Senator Hirono. General George, what is the Army doing to
change cultural factors, like alcohol abuse, access to firearms, and
loneliness, that contribute to soldier suicide?
General George. The Army is focusing on upstream approaches, such
as bolstering a whole of person and whole of unit approach and
cultivating protective environments. Command involvement is critical to
preventing suicide. We are implementing an integrated prevention
workforce called the ``Integrated Prevention Advisory Group'' (I-PAG)
that will support Commanders with the selection and assessment of
evidence-based initiatives using data driven techniques. I-PAGs, in
concert with commanders and program managers, will proactively address
risk factors such as substance misuse and other factors that contribute
to Soldier suicide. We continue to emphasize the importance of
``connecting to protect'' Soldiers, Army Civilians and Family members
from the stressors that may contribute to suicide and to enable
successful service through meaningful missions. Through training and
awareness initiatives, we emphasize the importance of engaging and
intervening when a teammate may be at risk. We are also conducting
foundational research on how to enhance and strengthen culture and
climate.
It is important to consider cultural factors when developing
prevention programs for harmful behaviors. By understanding how culture
influences these behaviors, our commanders can develop programs and
initiatives that are more effective and culturally appropriate. We do
that by understanding the norms and values that shape how people view
and respond to suicide, by using Army values to build cohesive teams
that understand warning signs and how to courageously intervene--as
early as possible--to prevent a suicide. We actively communicate our
available resources through multiple channels (including the chain of
command, enterprise awareness materials, social media, and installation
digital platforms) to Commanders/Leaders, Soldiers, Army Civilians and
Family members. These resources include suicide prevention guidance and
training, resilience training, behavioral health counseling, military
and family life counselors, spiritual readiness, leader visibility
tools (including the Commanders Risk Reduction Toolkit, Azimuth Check,
and Behavioral Health Pulse), financial counselors/training and spouse
employment resources, and more.
The Army is also in the process of executing an initiative that
requires 100 percent wellness checks within units. This commander-led
initiative consists of 30-to 60-minute one-on-one sessions with
Soldiers to identify and address Soldiers' concerns and link them to
helping resources. In addition to facilitating connection and support
between leader and led, the wellness checks will destigmatize help
seeking behavior, increase Soldier resilience, and reduce harmful
behaviors.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Tim Kaine
caisson horses
11. Senator Kaine. General George, we've received a considerable
amount of constituent outreach in light of the Army's legislative
proposal to convey 52 acres of land at the Bureau of Land Management's
Meadowood Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) to the Army as a
way of remedying the serious mismanagement of the Arlington National
Cemetery (ANC) caisson horses. Can you tell me more about why the focus
is on Meadowood as opposed to an expansion of the current facility on
Fort Belvoir?
General George. The Army's initial focus on Meadowood as the
location to support the caisson horses of Arlington National Cemetery
was the result of our analysis of potential solutions that objectively
met the necessary requirements that could be implemented relatively
quickly given immediate concerns for the horses' well-being. Distance
(defined as approximately 30-miles or less than a 1-hour drive radius),
cost, and development time were other significant considerations. The
Meadowood location provided an expedient and effective long-term
solution. Due to Congress's generous support and in line with the
community and your request, the Army is conducting a thorough review of
all options to ensure that we select the correct long-term solution for
the Caisson Horses' well-being and readiness.
12. Senator Kaine. General George, if Meadowood is further pursued,
how the Army plans to work with the community to properly vet their
concerns?
General George. The Army, in coordination with the Bureau of Land
Management, is committed to continued outreach to the community. The
next round of engagements is scheduled for late July 2023.
radford army ammunition plant
13. Senator Kaine. General George, my team and I recently traveled
to Radford Army Ammunition Plant and heard about the challenges they
face competing for contracts. Radford is a strategic capability and a
critical component of our Nation's ability to produce munitions--more
important given the war in Ukraine. Although cost is an important
consideration, we also need to preserve the viability of our organic
industrial base. How do you view the balance between choosing vendors
with lowest cost bids, while maintaining the ability to deliver
readiness from out organic industrial base during times of urgent need?
General George. It is essential to maintain our Army Ammunition
Plants (AAPs) that provide critical capability and capacities for the
warfighter, and I agree that Radford AAP is a strategic capability. The
Army places significant value in ensuring critical ammunition
production capabilities and capacities are maintained rather than
pursuing purely lowest costs bids. The balance is promoting competition
to generate innovation and best value for the taxpayer while ensuring
industrial base readiness.
14. Senator Kaine. General George, if we don't keep our organic
industrial base healthy with a consistent workload, we won't have the
capacity in the future when we need it. Can you give me your
perspective on addressing this issue?
General George. I agree that Organic Industrial Base (OIB)
readiness is a critical component of Army and Joint Force readiness.
Funding the right amount of workload to keep our OIB viable and
responsive, while balancing those needs with competing priorities, is a
careful exercise as we prepare our budget requests and long-range
priorities. Right now, the Army's biggest priority for OIB readiness is
our 15-year OIB Modernization Implementation Plan, which posture us for
the future. If confirmed, I will commit to ensuring OIB readiness
remains a priority for our Army.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Angus S. King, Jr.
person-to-person handoff pilot program
15. Senator King. General George, earlier this year, I had a great
conversation with General James McConville regarding a 2-year pilot to
establish a person-to-person handoff to the Maine Bureau of Veterans
Services (BVS) for the purposes of improving warm-handoff and
establishing a transition mentor/buddy program. He offered to start a
pilot program. We agreed this is a good way to start this at a `small
scale' before expanding to other States, that way, it is appropriately
resourced. What is the status of this pilot program?
General George. The Army is coordinating with our Transition
Assistance Program (TAP) partners at the Veteran Affairs (VA) to
implement this pilot program. The Army and VA are coordinating to pilot
this program in 2024. The Transition Service Division will review the
results of the pilot to determine the best way ahead.
mental health and transition assistance program resources
16. Senator King. General George, what will you do in this position
to ensure the Transition Assistance Program (TAP) is being leveraged
and we are returning our soldiers into society happy, healthy, and
ready to contribute to society?
General George. I will continue to support of the Department of
Defense (DoD), VA, Department of Labor (DOL), and Small Business
Administration (SBA) by offering quality standardized training at all
transitioning centers to support Soldier's post transition goals.
Commanders are required to send Soldiers to the Transition Assistance
Program (TAP) no later than 12 months prior to their transition date in
accordance with the congressional tenants of fiscal year 2019 National
Defense Authorization Act. If confirmed as the Chief of Staff of the
Army, I will ask Army commanders to provide regular updates on Soldiers
attendance and timelines rates.
Annually, the Army supports about 100,000 Soldiers as they
transition out of the Army. In support of that mission, we have over
600 counselors worldwide to facilitate Soldiers in their transition
from Active Duty. The Army also has a 24/7 virtual TAP center for
Soldiers who are geographically dispersed or require late night help
with any of the TAP requirements. TAP includes individual counseling
provided by a trained career counselor to determine the level of
support Soldiers need to meet their post transition goals; provide
information on resources and services available to each Soldier and how
to access them; and provides classes for Soldiers to include how to
prepare and find employment, financial planning, build a network of
support, introduction to the various VA, DOL, SBA specific services,
and identify ways to use their skills to improve the communities they
return to. Finally, each Soldier gets a final ``capstone'' counseling
event with their TAP counselor and their commander. At that event, they
discuss the Soldier's transition readiness. Once the Soldier completes
their ``Capstone'' counseling event, the TAP counselor does a warm
handover to the VA, DOL, or other supporting agencies for
servicemembers identified as requiring additional transition related
support. Both VA and DOL are partners in TAP and provide great support
to all Soldiers well prior to capstone.
While not part of TAP, each Soldier gets a final medical
examination prior to their transition. There, both the Soldier and the
Army can identify any physical or mental health issues to work on.
17. Senator King. General George, the Army has a request of $230
million toward suicide prevention, and reading the latest Suicide
Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee (SPRIRC) report,
what is the Army doing to address the recommendations (building healthy
climates and cultures, addressing stigma as a barrier to help-seeking,
and promoting a culture of lethal means safety)?
General George. The Suicide Prevention and Response Independent
Review Committee (SPRIRC) report contains recommendations designed to
improve well-being, address risk factors, and equip commanders and
leaders with the tools to improve climate and culture. The Army is
actively involved in the DOD SPRIRC Working Group that is determining
which recommendations to implement Department-wide. As DOD provides
implementation guidance, the Army will ensure it complies and that
subsequent policies and practices are nested with Office of the
Secretary Defense (OSD)-approved recommendations. The Army is already
implementing the Secretary of Defense immediate action directive that
requires Commanders to implement policies to improve sleep for
Soldiers; sleep deprivation is a significant suicide risk factor.
In addition, the Army is in early stages of developing a Lethal
Means Safety Toolkit, and we are supporting an initiative at Fort
Cavazos that focuses on having difficult conversations around suicide
and secure storage of lethal means such as firearms and prescription
medications. Recently, the Army re-established Ask, Care, Escort (ACE)
as the prescribed Suicide Prevention training for the force with an
updated approach that is leader-led and interactive. Our commanders
will be able to choose from modules making the training experience
specific to their unit's needs.
We also continue to invest in foundational prevention research, so
we have a better understanding of the factors that contribute to
healthy culture and climate as well as the risk and protective factors
associated with suicide.
department of defense security policy
18. Senator King. General George, after reading Secretary Lloyd
Austin's most recent update on the Department of Defense's (DOD)
security policy, I noticed a focus on vetting and personnel practices.
However, there was no mention of efforts to integrate upgraded
technology to detect potential data exfiltration attempts. My belief is
that such technology is the surest way to prevent incidents like last
winter's. Are any steps being taken in this direction in the Army?
General George. To address unauthorized disclosures, the Army is
accelerating Zero Trust data security and data protection efforts,
which prioritizes the integration of technology, policies, and
governance. In fiscal year 2024, the Army will continue to improve on
user activity monitoring on the Secure Internet Protocol Router (SIPR)
and Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communication System (JWICS) networks,
pilot new cyber and workforce behavioral analytics platforms, and add
data protection and security technology to address fine-grain access
controls. These efforts support the principles of least privilege and
need-to-know. These efforts also aim to ensure data loss prevention
through continuous monitoring and the analysis of data to identify
potential violations of security policies and unauthorized disclosures.
19. Senator King. General George, there appears to be a notion
shared among top military officials that security clearances and access
are an administrative problem. The last two incidents have shown that
that is not the case. Do you see security clearances and access as an
administrative problem?
General George. I do not believe security clearances and access are
an administrative problem. I believe they are an ongoing responsibility
of leadership and individual Soldiers. It is true that responsibilities
for determining security clearance eligibility and access lie with
different organizations. Before a commander grants access, we in the
Army rely on the work of the Defense counterintelligence and Security
Agency to conduct investigations and adjudications for the Army's 1.2M
cleared personnel to determine eligibility. We also rely heavily on
their Continuous Vetting (CV) program, allowing near-real time
identification of risk. That said, recent cases show that all of us
with access to classified information must be vigilant to risk
indicators and must report them.
countering transnational criminal organizations
20. Senator King. General George, DOD is the lead agency for
monitoring and detecting illicit drug operations. What have you done as
the Vice Chief to improve the Department's effort?
General George. As the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, I am
focused on ensuring that the Army is prepared to accomplish all
missions as described in the National Defense Strategy. Readiness has
been one of my top priorities as I work with the other service Vice
Chiefs and Combatant Commanders to maximize our service
interoperability, understanding that DOD is in support of and
responsive to Department of Homeland Security and other interagency
partners.
21. Senator King. General George, what plans do you have as Chief
of Staff to improve the Department's effort?
General George. If confirmed, as a member of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, I will support the executive branch's interagency counterdrug
efforts with ready forces to accomplish requests for support.
art of war
22. Senator King. General George, initiatives led by institutions
such as Compotech, a defense technology company out of Maine, and the
University of Maine (UMaine) have driven innovation within the national
security field in recent years. Compotech has expeditionary shelters in
the Arctic and Africa that U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) and U.S.
Africa Command (AFRICOM) have purchased. Additionally, UMaine has the
largest 3D printer in the world and leads composites work. With
innovative technology becoming more accessible and useful, how is the
Army ensuring they are fighting the next war?
General George. The Army has a responsibility for both current and
future readiness. We established Army Futures Command (AFC) to help
transform the Army as we transition away from counterinsurgency. Your
question specifically addresses some of the very important innovation
going on in the State of Maine and will directly impact our stand-up of
the 11th Airborne Division in Alaska. In addition, AFC, through its
Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) and the DEVCOM labs
and center, has a magnitude of Active arrangements (funded and non-
funded) for collaborative efforts with colleges, universities, and
institutes of higher learning. These arrangements include Cooperative
Agreements, Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs),
and Grants. In fiscal year 2022, the DEVCOM Army Research Laboratory
(ARL) awarded over $300M in mission funds to 286 unique colleges,
universities, and institutes of higher learning. Additionally, in
fiscal year 2022 DEVCOM ARL awarded over $180M in congressional funds
to 50 of those same institutions. The Army is also engaged with
hundreds of defense companies, is expanding opportunities for non-
traditional businesses with great ideas, and is able to leverage the
citizen-Soldiers already working for America's top companies by
leveraging talent embedded in the Army's Reserve's 75th Innovation
Command, which supports AFC. I believe the Army is well postured to be
able to take advantage of the innovative spirit of the Nation to get
the myriad of technology that will be necessary to enable our Soldiers
in the future.
23. Senator King. General George, during testimony this year, the
Department testified shortfalls in manning, training, and equipping
forces for competition and conflict in the Arctic. What steps do you
plan to take as Chief of Staff to close those gaps while balancing
risk?
General George. The Army continues to take steps to improve our
Arctic capability in support of the Army's Arctic Strategy, the
National Strategy for the Arctic Region, and other relevant posture
guidance. We are investing in the Arctic with a long-term effort to
address quality of life issues for our Alaska formations. We have also
begun the procurement and fielding process for additional cold weather
organizational clothing and individual equipment (OCIE) and the Cold
Weather All-Terrain Vehicle (CATV) for the Army's newest Division, the
11th Airborne Division ``Arctic Angels'' and other Alaska units. This
will enhance their ability to train for and conduct Arctic operations.
As we conduct additional Arctic exercises and wargames, we will further
refine our understanding of the capabilities required to inform future
investments and programming.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Gary Peters
next generation engine
24. Senator Peters. General George, the Army's Next General Combat
Vehicle modernization program includes a number of new platforms: The
M-10 Booker Combat Vehicle, now in low-rate initial production; the
future XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle (MICV); the future
Decisive Lethality Platform (DLP); and, the future unmanned Robotic
Combat Vehicle (RCV), in light, medium, and heavy configurations. It is
anticipated these vehicles will include a mix of conventional, hybrid,
and possibly all-electric power plants. As you consider the U.S.
defense industrial base, would it be your assessment that the Army's
prime contractors and their supplier base are sufficiently robust to
build these new fleets of vehicles?
General George. Yes. The combat vehicle industry has demonstrated
that it responds well when we provide consistent and stable demands for
capability, and we expect this to be the case for our new modernized
systems. The U.S. propulsion industrial base has been developing
advanced capabilities for some time, while our enduring platforms have
continued to rely on proven but legacy technology, which is farther and
farther from modern power train systems. Our newest and most modern
vehicles, the XM30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle and the Robotic
Combat Vehicle, are both being competitively procured and require
advanced hybrid powertrains. This process ensures that not only the
best systems are selected through rigorous competition, but we receive
the most capable and modern technology U.S. industry can offer.
25. Senator Peters. General George, additionally, will the Army's
plans for the future combat vehicles ensure there is adequate and
diverse competition for their main components and combat systems? If
not, can you identify any perceived gaps in our defense industrial
base?
General George. As the Army's recently concluded XM30 Mechanized
Infantry Combat Vehicle competition demonstrates, there is robust and
diverse competition for capabilities supporting Army combat vehicles.
Five competitors in the concept phase of XM30 built partnerships from a
range of companies with a variety of approaches. Our industry is fully
capable of responding with diverse and innovative solutions and to
maintain its strength requires commitment to consistent and steady
demand for its products. Our modernization programs structured to
encourage innovative competition and maintain steady delivery once
transitioned to production.
electric vehicles
26. Senator Peters. General George, the DOD fiscal year 2024 budget
request included critical funding to modernize next-generation combat
vehicles--including the Electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle (eLRV)
and HMMWV [High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle] Hybrid--with
proven electric vehicle (EV) technology that would strengthen
capabilities to help achieve mission success. These advantages include
Silent Watch and Silent Extraction with low acoustic and thermal
signature; improved off-road performance on complex terrain, stored and
exportable power generation for integrated mission packages; and
electric drives that are easier to maintain due to the reduced number
of parts in the overall system. Can you speak to the importance of
funding these next-generation combat vehicles--specifically the eLRV
and HMMWV Hybrid programs--to supplement the existing fleet of combat
vehicles and the advantages they would yield from a lethality and
logistical perspective?
General George. Funding both the electric Light Reconnaissance
Vehicle (eLRV) and the Hybrid High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled
Vehicle (HMMWV) are important as the Army continues to modernize in
support of contested logistics in Multi-domain Operations. The eLRV
will provide a new, dedicated reconnaissance platform that will give
commanders silent mobility with reduced acoustic and thermal signatures
that support enhanced survivability and lethality. With a reduced need
for fuel and likely enhanced reliability, the eLRV will assist in
reducing overall logistical support where it is in use. The HMMWV
Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) propulsion introduces fuel demand
reduction capability to narrow the Large-Scale Combat Operations Gap.
This system provides increased capabilities that will provide
commanders operational advantages to enhance maneuver operations such
as onboard power, export power, silent watch, and potentially silent
mobility. HMMWV HEV will drive fuel consumption down while increasing
the range of the platform.
27. Senator Peters. General George, what are the timelines for
these efforts to become programs of record?
General George. The Army is planning to initiate the electric Light
Reconnaissance Vehicle (eLRV) prototyping program in late fiscal year
2023 with industry delivering the first prototypes in fiscal year 2024.
The prototyping phase will continue from fiscal year 2024 to fiscal
year 2026, which will inform the Army's decision on whether to
transition to a major capability acquisition program.
The Army is also planning to initiate the HMMWV HEV program in
fiscal year 2024 utilizing the integration of existing commercial
technology and leveraging information from ongoing prototype testing
from the Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO).
Production cut-in and retrofits are anticipated to begin in fiscal year
2028.
28. Senator Peters. General George, does the President's budget
request provide sufficient resources to meet the Army's 2035
initiatives?
General George. The Army is working to meet its fleet transition
goals by 2035. The President's budget request will be adequate to meet
the vehicle targets if medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles are
available to meet the mission requirements. If this vehicle inventory
is obtainable, the Army will then leverage the appropriated budget to
the greatest degree possible.
modernization/current production balance
29. Senator Peters. General George, testimony from defense
officials before this Committee has demonstrated how deferred
investment in our industrial base has diminished our capacity to meet
the threats posed by peer and near-peer adversaries on the battlefield.
Is the Army looking at both organic resources and the commercial
industrial base for capacity to be able to handle the increased demand
in short-term re-supply and long-term planning for a fight with an
adversary that exceeds the demands in Ukraine? For example, balancing
modernization efforts including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and
combat vehicles like Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV) and Mobile
Protected Firepower (MPF) vehicle with enduring capabilities like
artillery and munitions production programs.
General George. The Army is looking at both the organic and
commercial industrial bases to bring down the risk in our industrial
supply chain while strengthening our resilience. The Army's 15-year OIB
modernization program is instrumental in achieving the correct level of
capacity and modern processes to be able to sustain systems through the
maintenance depots and to produce the required munitions to sustain any
prolonged conflict. Working with our OSD partners, the Army also has
been leveraging Defense Production Act Title 3 and other programs to
strengthen the commercial industrial base. The Army's efforts to
balance capabilities with risk across a wide spectrum of requirements--
including manpower, modernization, sustainment and installations--
depend on sufficient, predictable and stable funding.
army restructuring
30. Senator Peters. General George, the Army went through a major
restructure previously to create Army Futures Command and the eight
Cross Functional Teams. We have heard testimony from the Secretary of
the Army about standing up a 9th Cross Functional Teams for Contested
Logistics and potentially a realignment of the others. Additionally,
the Secretary has recently been quoted about holding a human resource
``night court'' to determine potential force structure adjustments to
both tactical units and support organizations due to the Army's
recruiting challenges. Additionally, your predecessor and the Secretary
have also testified about positioning the Army for an U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command (INDOPACOM) threat vs U.S. European Command (EUCOM) or U.S.
Central Command (CENTCOM). Is the Army looking at another restructuring
of its operational forces and/or its acquisition/Future Commands
organizations?
General George. The Army is currently undergoing a historic
transformation. As the Army divests legacy counterterrorism/
counterinsurgency (CT/COIN) capabilities, it is simultaneously
investing in new capabilities.
The Army began investing in these capabilities soon after the
creation of Army Futures Command and will continue to invest through
2029. The Army will restructure to meet its six imperatives: See,
Sense, and Understand Persistently; Mass Highly Lethal, Low Signature
Forces; Win the Fires Fight; Protect the Force from Air, Missile, and
Drone Threats; Communicate and Share Data Rapidly; and Sustain the
Fight Across Long Distances.
To ensure all formations are optimized, the Army is modernizing
equipment and continually reevaluating force structure to meet multi-
domain operations requirements.
31. Senator Peters. General George, what INDPACOM priorities do you
see as a driving force for the Army in any potential restructure and
what impacts would this focus have on your stated modernization
priorities?
General George. The Army is developing new capabilities and
modernizing our formations in ways that support USINDOPACOM priorities.
The Army's multidomain operations concept and modernization priorities
are driven by our studies, experiments, exercises, and support of
operations in the Pacific. The Army's six operational priorities (See,
Sense, and Understand Persistently; Mass Highly Lethal, Low Signature
Forces; Win the Fires Fight; Protect the Force from Air, Missile, and
Drone Threats; Communicate and Share Data Rapidly; and Sustain the
Fight Across Long Distances) deliver the capabilities required by
USINDOPACOM for campaigning, integrated deterrence, and, if required,
transition to conflict. Employing these capabilities in the Indo-
Pacific theater will provide the Joint Force with the necessary agility
to rapidly deploy into the Western Pacific, operate in a contested
environment, and maintain a decisive edge against potential adversaries
32. Senator Peters. General George, how would such a restructure
impact the Army modernization priorities, especially for the 24 systems
designated to be delivered to soldiers in fiscal year 2023 and the
remaining 11 systems like Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS),
Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA), Optionally Manned Fighting
Vehicle (OMFV), and Extended Range Cannon Artillery (ERCA) not being
delivered this year?
General George. These systems are critical capabilities that are
being developed to enable the Army's various formations. The Army
fights in formations, using concepts and technology/ capabilities. Our
analysis points the continued necessity of the 11 systems mentioned in
this question, and we are moving forward to deliver these capabilities
to our Soldiers in our formations as soon as they are ready. While we
do not anticipate a major restructure soon, the Army continues to
review and evolve its modernization priorities based on evolution of
the threat, changes in the operational environment and guidance from
Congress and the Department of Defense. Our process of reviewing,
assessing, and evolving is what helps enable us to focus on future wars
and provide the Nation what we need to fight and win.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Joni K. Ernst
special operations force in great power competition
33. Senator Ernst. General George, have you reviewed the
congressionally mandated report as required per section 1713 of the
Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)?
General George. Yes.
34. Senator Ernst. General George, if you have reviewed this
report, how has this informed consideration of Army Special Operations
Forces (SOF) force structure reductions?
General George. Currently there are no approved structure changes
for Army Special Operations Forces. When making any structure changes,
the Army coordinates with U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC)
and U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to make strategy informed
decisions. The Department of Defense retains the approval authority for
force structure changes to Special Operations Forces.
35. Senator Ernst. General George, if you have not reviewed this
report, will you commit to reviewing it within 30 days of confirmation
and providing a written response about how it informs consideration of
Army SOF force structure reductions?
General George. I have reviewed the report.
army reform process
36. Senator Ernst. General George, what was the process, to include
analytic methods, senior leader consultation, and decision authority,
of the review the Secretary of the Army describes in a recent interview
as the ``reform process'' for evaluating Army SOF force structure?
General George. Army Special Operations Forces are part of the
Army's end strength. The Army uses Total Army Analysis and modeling to
evaluate all capabilities, including Special Operations Forces (SOF),
against the National Defense Strategy. Once that analysis is complete,
the Army drafts a memorandum of agreement with U.S. Special Operations
Command (SOCOM) on Army SOF force structure changes. If SOCOM agrees
with the changes, they are implemented in the next POM cycle. If SOCOM
disagrees, the request is adjudicated by the Department of Defense.
Final approval rests with the Department of Defense.
37. Senator Ernst. General George, did the Army seek and receive
the professional military opinions of U.S. Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) and United States Army Special Operations Command (USASOC)
during this review?
General George. The Army is in continuous coordination with both
SOCOM and USASOC on potential Army Special Operations Forces structure
changes.
38. Senator Ernst. General George, if the Army did seek and receive
the professional military opinion of SOCOM and USASOC during this
review, what opinion did they provide?
General George. Yes. USASOC provided risk assessments of potential
Army SOF reductions which are being considered as apart of TAA.
39. Senator Ernst. General George, if the Army did not seek or
receive the professional military opinion of SOCOM and USASOC during
this review, please explain why not?
General George. The Army sought and received professional military
opinions from USASOC and SOCOM regarding potential force structure
changes to Army Special Operations Forces, which are informing the
Army's recommendation as a part of Total Army Analysis (TAA).
army enablers
40. Senator Ernst. General George, what is the preliminary estimate
of cost savings of reducing SOF ``enablers'' that were described as
under consideration for reduction in the recent interview by the
Secretary of the Army?
General George. Current estimates for fiscal impacts remain under
consideration as part of Total Army Analysis. No decisions have been
made at this time.
41. Senator Ernst. General George, what enablers specifically are
under consideration for reduction, and to what extent?
General George. When discussing enablers, the Total Army Analysis
(TAA) process is referring to those not Special Operations qualified.
Truck drivers are one example of enablers. However, the Army is not the
decision authority for structure changes to Special Operations Forces.
Any force structure changes that USASOC makes are internally
coordinated throughout USASOC and SOCOM for mission impacts. The
Department of Defense retains the approval authority for force
structure changes to Special Operations Forces.
reporting requirements
42. Senator Ernst. General George, why has the Army not provided
the notification required per section 1044 of the Fiscal Year 2022
NDAA, which requires the Army to notify Congress prior to
``implementing or announcing'' significant force structure changes?
General George. The Army has not made decisions regarding force
structure changes since Total Army Analysis 24-28. The Army will adhere
to all congressional requirements and timelines for notification.
43. Senator Ernst. General George, why has the Army not provided
the briefing required per section 1044 of the Fiscal Year 2022 NDAA,
which requires the Army to brief Congress prior to issuing the Army
Structure Memorandum?
General George. The Army has not made decisions regarding force
structure changes since Total Army Analysis 24-28. The Army will adhere
to all statutory requirements and timelines for notification prior to
publishing the Army Structure Memorandum.
44. Senator Ernst. General George, will you commit to fulfilling
the statutory requirement to notify Congress prior to ``implementing or
announcing'' significant force structure changes within 30 days of
confirmation?
General George. The Army will adhere to all congressional
requirements and timelines for notification.
45. Senator Ernst. General George, will you commit to fulfilling
the statutory requirement of a congressional briefing prior to issuing
the Army Structure Memorandum within 30 days of confirmation?
General George. The Army will adhere to all congressional
requirements and timelines for notification prior to publishing the
Army Structure Memorandum.
army vantage program
46. Senator Ernst. General George, what impact would reduced
resources for the operation of the Army Vantage Program have on Army
readiness, specially monitoring of health, training, manning, and
equipping of units?
General George. Modern data platform capabilities enable the Army
to gain and maintain information advantages in today and tomorrow's
operating and institutional environments. The Army has spent the last 4
years establishing its Army Data and Analytics Platform-Vantage, to
enable senior leader decisionmaking by joining and enriching millions
of data points enabling a data centric Army through data analytics.
Army Vantage improves and accelerates decisions on everything from
readiness to financial return on investment. Today, there are more than
40 thousand operators across the Army--including senior leaders,
Soldiers, staff and analytic communities using Army Vantage to improve
the efficiency and accuracy of their work. Reducing resources for
modern data platform capabilities would adversely impact the Army's
ability to build and support enduring operational advantages for the
Joint Force and would have a detrimental impact on Army readiness by
limiting the Army's ability to leverage the power of data to collect,
analyze, and disseminate crucial data for timely decisionmaking.
Monitoring of Health: The Army Vantage Program plays a crucial role
in monitoring the health and well-being of soldiers. It collects and
analyzes data on various health metrics, tracks medical readiness, and
supports preventive care. With reduced resources, there could be a
decline in the program's capabilities to gather and process health-
related data, impacting the Army's ability to identify potential health
issues, track trends, and ensure the overall readiness of personnel.
Training: The Army Vantage Program assists in tracking and
assessing training readiness and proficiency levels of units and
individuals. It provides insights into training needs, identifies skill
gaps, and helps in resource allocation for training programs. If
resources are reduced, there could be limitations on the program's
ability to collect and analyze training data, resulting in a decreased
ability to effectively plan, monitor, and evaluate training exercises.
This may lead to decreased overall readiness and the potential for
skill deficiencies within units.
Manning: The Army Vantage Program aids in monitoring and managing
personnel slotting/strength, tracking manpower availability, and
assessing unit readiness from a manpower perspective. With reduced
resources, the program might face challenges in effectively tracking
and analyzing personnel data, potentially leading to difficulties in
optimizing manpower allocation, ensuring appropriate unit manning
levels, and making informed personnel decisions. This could impact the
overall readiness and operational capability of units.
Equipping of Units: The Army Vantage Program contributes to the
tracking and management of equipment and supplies within the Army. It
assists in identifying equipment deficiencies, tracking maintenance
needs, and facilitating logistical support. If resources are reduced,
the program's ability to effectively monitor equipment status, track
maintenance requirements, and optimize logistical support could be
compromised. This may result in decreased readiness due to equipment
shortages, increased maintenance issues, and difficulties in ensuring
timely resupply of critical items.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Kevin Cramer
project pele
47. Senator Cramer. General George, in the event of a fight in the
Pacific, sustainment challenges for the Army would be substantial. The
prospect of Project Pele to develop a mobile nuclear reactor could
significantly cut down on these challenges. Is forming an individual
office for the development and establishment of Project Pele a
priority?
General George. Energy sustainability and resilience are critical
to our operations in the Pacific and around the world for our
facilities and operational forces.
As the Army looks to solve sustainment challenges in the Pacific,
nuclear energy will be evaluated in the mix of alternatives considered
to reduce the vulnerability of our fuel supply lines. We look forward
to reviewing the results of OSD's Strategic Capability Office's testing
and validation of Project Pele at Idaho National Labs in the next few
years. This will provide the Army the information necessary to
understand how a Pele-like reactor could support future operations.
The Army currently has in place a team of professionals with a
dedicated focus on nuclear issues. The Army Reactor Program is managed
by the Army Reactor Office within the United States Army Nuclear and
Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Agency (USANCA). USANCA is a
field operating agency within the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for
Operations, G-3/5/7. The Army Reactor Office manages the Army's current
reactors, which include the test reactor at White Sands Test Site, and
the dismantlement of the Army's remaining power reactors at Fort
Belvoir, VA, and Fort Greely, AK that date from the 1950's and 1960's.
The Army has in the past designed, acquired, and operated nuclear
power reactors, although this authority has not been exercised in many
decades. Therefore, the Army is evaluating oversight responsibilities
for nuclear reactors, whether licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission or by the Army, and developing updated policies and
regulations to provide a comprehensive framework within which to
license, manage, and safely operate future nuclear power capabilities.
Besides studying the potential of nuclear power to support military
operations, the Army is studying the potential of the technology to
provide reliable, carbon-free electricity to critical missions on Army
installations. The Army is collaborating internally as well as with the
Department of Energy, utility companies, and industry to identify
opportunities to assess the feasibility of hosting a Small Modular
Reactor on an Army installation.
48. Senator Cramer. General George, when could we expect the office
to be up and running?
General George. We look forward to OSD's testing and validating
Project Pele at Idaho National Labs in the next few years. This will
provide the Army the technical information necessary to understand how
a Pele-like reactor could support future operations and Army
installations. The findings of this effort will determine the timeline
for any establishment of a Project Pele-specific office.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Ted Budd
special operations force structure
49. Senator Budd. General George, as Vice Chief of Staff of the
Army, former Director of Force Management, Army G-3/5/7, and former
Deputy Director for Regional Operations and Force Management in the J-
3, you are intimately familiar with the force management process to
ensure the Army is efficiently and effectively organized, manned,
equipped, trained, and sustained. An important part of that process is
ensuring the Army provides trained and ready forces to combatant
commands (COCOM), requiring an intimate understanding of COCOM
requirements, both long-term and emergent. What is your understanding
of the demand signal for Army special operations forces (ARSOF) across
the combatant commands?
General George. There is a strong demand signal across combatant
commanders for Army capabilities, including but not limited to ARSOF.
Other examples include MDTFs, aviation, and fires. That demand signal
is only increasing. In a resource constrained environment and as part
of the Joint Force, we must provide the best Army to meet NDS
requirements with a balanced force. The Army must look wholistically
within its end strength and force structure and cannot evaluate ARSOF
as a standalone requirement.
50. Senator Budd. General George, the Joint Concept for Competing
states that ``[t]he Joint Force will conduct irregular warfare
operations and activities proactively to subvert, create dilemmas for
adversaries, and impose costs on an adversary's strategic interests.''
What force structure and capabilities does the Army have to conduct the
irregular warfare operations and activities called for by the Joint
Concept for Competing? Please be specific.
General George. The Army is invested in Irregular Warfare
capability and force structure across all three components to address
the needs of the Combatant Commands. Specifically, the Army remains
focused on modernizing formations to support multi-domain operations
and facilitate Active campaigning, integrating ARSOF (Special Forces,
Psychological Operations, Civil Affairs); the Cyber, Space, and
Information domains; and Security Force Assistance Brigades.
51. Senator Budd. General George, what is the current operational
and personnel tempo for ARSOF compared to conventional Army forces?
Please be as specific as possible and note whether ARSOF is below, at,
or above former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper's guidance to SOCOM and
directive to move to a 1:2 deploy-to-dwell (D2D) model, with a long-
term goal of 1:3 D2D.
General George. The Army has a handful of Active component (AC)
force elements that are under acute deploy-to-dwell (D2D) pressures. AC
Air Defense formations present a specific example. The preponderance of
AC conventional and ARSOF elements do meet the 1:2 D2D red line.
However, in fiscal year 2024, several AC conventional force elements,
to include Division headquarters and ABCTs, will not meet the 1:3 D2D
goals, along with multiple AC ARSOF elements.
52. Senator Budd. General George, have you reviewed the summary of
Independent Assessment of Special Operations Force Structure, an
independent assessment conducted by the Center for Naval Analysis as
mandated by the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act and if not, why
not?
General George. Yes.
53. Senator Budd. General George, if you have not read the
Independent Assessment will you commit to doing so within 90 days of
confirmation, if confirmed?
General George. Not applicable.
54. Senator Budd. General George, the Independent Assessment of
Special Operations Force Structure found that ``[t]he demand for SOF
capabilities will continue to increase. SOF's ability to generate
access, position forward, sense the environment, and quickly identify
and respond to deleterious changes in it--all while maintaining a small
and politically acceptable footprint--will continue to be in high
demand going forward. We observed this in the [geographic combatant
commands'] future demand signals, which generally called for more SOF
information-related capabilities, ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance], and [sensitive activities or ``SA'']. We observed it
in the services' future operating concepts, which call for increased
SF, PSYOP [psychological operations] and other SOF information-related
capabilities, civil affairs, intelligence and SA, low-signature surface
and subsurface maritime assets, special reconnaissance (SR) teams,
combat swimmers, and SOF liaisons in conventional force staffs and
operations centers. We observed it in the results of our force
structure analysis, which illustrated required growth in all 10 of the
future force projections, especially for PSYOP, SF, civil affairs, SR,
and operational preparation of the environment (OPE) activities--along
with likely implied growth in supporting elements of the SOF
enterprise.'' Do you agree or disagree with this finding? Please
explain.
General George. The Army must balance its requirements to deliver
an appropriate conventional force structure to Combatant Commanders in
addition to the special operations force structure shared with SOCOM.
ARSOF and its associated enablers grew exponentially in support of COIN
operations. As the Army transforms to meet near-peer requirements
directed in the NDS, the Army must optimize efficiencies and provide a
balanced force capable of deterring the pacing challenge. The Army
faces a recruiting challenge and must provide the best combat-credible
ground forces and enablers the Army can with the resources it has. The
Army is committed to deliver special operations forces in conjunction
with SOCOM, and to deliver the necessary conventional and enabling
forces. Together, they will provide a collective capability for Army
Forces to meet the Combatant Commanders' requirements.
55. Senator Budd. General George, the Independent Assessment of
Special Operations Force Structure further states that ``[t]he services
have articulated future concepts in which the required SOF activities
or capabilities differ from those being conducted by most of the SOF
enterprise today (i.e., the services are requesting a SOF portfolio
that is notably divergent from the GCC [geographic combatant command]
demand signal).'' If confirmed, how will you manage and align ARSOF
force structure with new operational concepts?
General George. ARSOF is one element of the Army force provided to
combatant commanders while the Army transforms to meet the requirements
laid out in the NDS. The Army will continue to work with OSD, sister
services, and USASOC and SOCOM in support of the Joint Force. DOD
maintains the approval authority for change to SOF force structure.
56. Senator Budd. General George, SOF enablers require additional
training and require extensive experience operating with SOF,
particularly in the sensitive operating environments that will be
critical to strategic competition with China and Russia. These enabling
capabilities are not as interchangeable as some may portray, and the
Army's reported plans to reduce ARSOF force structure may decrease
operational effectiveness of our most important competition force. Do
you agree or disagree with this statement? Please explain.
General George. Combatant commands rely on total Army capabilities
and the proficiency of Joint Force integration to execute their
campaign plans.
57. Senator Budd. General George, if confirmed, and in the event
the Army determines to make reductions to ARSOF force structure, do you
commit to providing your best military advice to the congressional
defense committees on the risk incurred by such reductions as well
alternative options and the necessary resources required by each
alternative?
General George. Yes. I commit to providing my best military advice
to the congressional defense committees regarding ARSOF force
structure.
______
[The nomination reference of General Randy A. George, USA
follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of General Randy A. George, USA,
which was transmitted to the Committee at the time the
nomination was referred, follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The Committee on Armed Services requires certain senior
military officers nominated 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 General Randy
A. George, USA in connection with his nomination follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nominee responded to Parts B-E 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-E
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of General Randy A. George, USA was
reported to the Senate by Chairman Reed on July 20, 2023, with
the recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The
nomination was confirmed by the Senate on September 21, 2023.]
[all]